MicrostockGroup
Agency Based Discussion => Adobe Stock => Topic started by: kiratsinhjadeja on December 01, 2011, 07:28
-
Hello,
This file was rejected twice for technical problems.I tried my best, and re-edited the file from scratch.Today again it was declined for the technical problems.I just can't figure it out what is it about this image that the inspectors are not liking.It is already online on the other 2 of the big 4.IS and DT.It got through at the 1st go at both the sites.Fotolia is not allowing to make it 3 of the big 4!
Can you exactly tell me what is technically wrong in this image?I know thumbnails are difficult and that is why I am putting up a link to the full-sized jpeg so that you can view at 100% and tell me.I would really like to get it online.Maybe I am missing something which more experienced contributors can tell me about.If you can tell me how to fix it, even more helpful it would be.The focus point was dot on its eyes.If it was the cutting of its chin, then it would have been an aesthetic problem rejection.I considered it as a problem, but rejection thrice as a technical problem does say that there is an issue with this image.
Settings were:
Manual mode
SS - 1/500
Aperture - 5.6
ISO - 400
Clicked in RAW
Here:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/42878955/FT.jpg (http://dl.dropbox.com/u/42878955/FT.jpg)
Thank you so much for your time. :)
-
<tough love>
The file has multiple problems, for example:
-It's not sharp. The focus may have been on the animal's eye, but it's still not sharp. Maybe it's a kit lens with largest aperture and/or too much noise filtering.
-White balance, the top of the head / forehead is yellow, the rest of the animal looks "cool". Was there a halogen spot or something?
-Flat lighting.
-Over exposure, there are patches of hair that are completely white.
-Cropping is just too tight, why is the jaw of the animal cropped?
-Property issues: If this is a zoo animal, the rules of the zoo may prohibit selling images of their animals as stock.
My advice: Don't try to fix this image, just shoot/submit something else.
</tough love>
-
poor composition....snapshot
Patrick.
-
Yeah, what they said.
I'd reconsider your settings. A smaller aperture would have given you a lot more of the image in focus, and if the subject is stationary you don't need such a fast shutter. You don't give lens information, but I'm guessing it was a long lens. That means shallow depth of field, which is why so little is in focus. Where were you focused?
Technical and property issues aside, it's not a particularly good stock shot. Do you really expect a bunch of clients to find commercial value in it? If not, why spend so much time trying to rescue this one image when you can take a bunch of technically better and more salable images?
-
I can't see the photo but why do you keep ISO so high? I never shoot a photo over 100 (Mostly 80), you could set your ISO to 100 and choose slower shutter speed. 1/500 is not necessary if you don't shoot something moving, or your hands aren't shaking...
-
The link is broken when I click on it. Doesn't work.