MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Alamy.com => Topic started by: NikonScott on August 11, 2008, 13:32
-
A friend just sent me these to links. I do not look at Ken Rockwell very often, but these looked interesting:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/unsharp.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/unsharp.htm)
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/lens-sharpness.htm (http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/lens-sharpness.htm)
Scott
-
That´s the first thing I thought about when submitting to Alamy. Why upsizing? Let the buyers do that, if they want to...
-
Yep -- multiple resizings, and multiple re-JPGing is the fastest way to ruin a good image. I don't understand it either.
-
They want you to go shoot in a format that can get those sizes naturally. I believe that some high end DSRLs, 4x5 film and maybe medium format film can all produce images of the requires size.
-
Got 2 questions after reading that stuff.
Does this make the Sigma SD14 a much better buy considering the seperate RGB CCDs?
If you had a good scanner, for Alamy printing a good pic and then scanning it at the larger size would be better?
-
has anyone tried this?
http://www.alienskin.com/blowup/index.aspx (http://www.alienskin.com/blowup/index.aspx)
-
Got 2 questions after reading that stuff.
Does this make the Sigma SD14 a much better buy considering the seperate RGB CCDs?
If you had a good scanner, for Alamy printing a good pic and then scanning it at the larger size would be better?
Sigma SD14 - not very good at dealing with noise
printing and scanning the print - no, you would loss detail and possibly add noise printing and again at scanning, better to process in a lossless format eg tiff
-
If you scan a 35 mm slide with a 4000 dpi film scanner like the Nikon coolscan 4000 or 5000 you will get about a 52 mb file. Probably, 50% of my alamy pics are done that way.
It is interesting that others have gotten a different bent on the articles than i did. Maybe, I should reread them.
Scott