MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => General Stock Discussion => Topic started by: bizair on April 17, 2012, 14:19
-
I've just started doing isolations on some of my images (photographs not vector images and mainly inanimate objects.
Does anybody find it advantageous to include the path with the .jpg?
Also, most isolations are with white backgrounds but around 25% have black (on DT at least). I know it doesn't make any difference with designers as they can replace an isolated background with whatever they like. But it may impact on buyer views. Any comment on background colors for isolations, mainly inanimate objects.
-
I use either black or white depending on which makes the image stand out more prominently in a thumbnail. Some light colored images look better against a black background. Not sure I can tell if that impacts sales or not.
If I have extracted with a pen tool and have a path, I save it as a JPEG from Photoshop - I'm pretty sure that you then save the path in the JPEG and I include "path" in the keywords.
Steve
-
Easy question:
Ask a designer if he prefers to license a photo of an isolated rooster with clipping path or another one without a clipping path.
Which one do you think is more likely to be licensed (assuming both images are of equal quality!)?
-
Clipping paths are highly desirable. Speaking as a seller and a buyer.
-
I use a pen tool too, and try to keep a path in jpg since it is there.
however, i got rejected with sharp or pixels edge. I would like to learn from all experts here..what kind of setting to use after a pen tool path? like feather setting or others?
after feather setting, will the clipping path lose the accurate profile?
-
Here's my workflow, and it gets accepted at iStock:
After completing your path, make it a selection, then Layer>New>Layer Via Copy. Now make a new Action and record: Select>Load Selection>Select>Modify-Contract 1 pixel>Select>Inverse>Click on the Quick Mask Tool>Filter>Blur>Blur>Click on the Quick Mask Tool (to exit)>Edit>Clear. Stop recording.
If you find that the edge is feathered too much, go back to your Action and check off one of the Blur actions. You'll find that the path will still be accurate either way.
You basically have taken 1 edge pixel and blurred it twice. (or once if you choose)
-
As far as I can remember trying out paths, when a buyer selects the path it is a rough outline again so he has to feather the selection again (know what he is doing)
The saved path is never as smooth as what you used for isolation.
Or am I wrong here? does it matter to the buyer or are they already happy having a path to work with?
Thx Danny
-
There are graphic designers and "graphic designers". Many of them do not know how to blur the edges. On the other hand - if buyers download image to create some sticker etc. path saves their time when they have to create die cut outline.
-
As far as I can remember trying out paths, when a buyer selects the path it is a rough outline again so he has to feather the selection again (know what he is doing)
The saved path is never as smooth as what you used for isolation.
Or am I wrong here? does it matter to the buyer or are they already happy having a path to work with?
Thx Danny
My clipping paths are precise outlines of the isolation. It is what I use to create the isolation. There is nothing "rough" about it. The only reason you might want to feather, or blur the edge, is because no edges in photography are as precise as those created from a clipping path. Therefore, iStock requests that you feather the edge a bit to give it a more natural look.
-
Thank you for the tips, I am using the 'refine edge' option, it seems there are a few settings to work with, like feather option and others. I am not sure is it good enough, but will try your method.
Here's my workflow, and it gets accepted at iStock:
After completing your path, make it a selection, then Layer>New>Layer Via Copy. Now make a new Action and record: Select>Load Selection>Select>Modify-Contract 1 pixel>Select>Inverse>Click on the Quick Mask Tool>Filter>Blur>Blur>Click on the Quick Mask Tool (to exit)>Edit>Clear. Stop recording.
If you find that the edge is feathered too much, go back to your Action and check off one of the Blur actions. You'll find that the path will still be accurate either way.
You basically have taken 1 edge pixel and blurred it twice. (or once if you choose)
-
As far as I can remember trying out paths, when a buyer selects the path it is a rough outline again so he has to feather the selection again (know what he is doing)
The saved path is never as smooth as what you used for isolation.
Or am I wrong here? does it matter to the buyer or are they already happy having a path to work with?
Thx Danny
My clipping paths are precise outlines of the isolation. It is what I use to create the isolation. There is nothing "rough" about it. The only reason you might want to feather, or blur the edge, is because no edges in photography are as precise as those created from a clipping path. Therefore, iStock requests that you feather the edge a bit to give it a more natural look.
With rough I ment Aliased Danny, sorry.
I will try again but I dont think the selection is feathered (anti-aliased) when you (the buyer) select the path. I could be wrong though.
Later
-
I think we agree. When you convert the path to a selection it is not feathered. The buyer would have to do that. But, for submission purposes, the image must have a slight soft edge, even though using the supplied clipping path will bring it back to a hard edge. Kind of silly they make you go though all that.
-
Yeah I always feather my selections for isolations.
So the buyer is ok with that? they can manage to feather the selection themselves?
They still prefer paths?
If so I will start to include them again.
Thanks
-
Thanks Guys.
That's a really good suite of advice. I'll incorporate slight feathering on selection leave the path in the jpg.
Regards
Ken
-
shall one feather the selection first before saving it to a path? or save the path first then apply the feather option to make the outline looks more natural?
-
hi all just new here in site.. this is Errol Watson from USA ..
nice to meet ya all, good day!
-
shall one feather the selection first before saving it to a path? or save the path first then apply the feather option to make the outline looks more natural?
Do not attempt to convert your selection to a path. The path will be so inaccurate that it will be worthless.
-
shall one feather the selection first before saving it to a path? or save the path first then apply the feather option to make the outline looks more natural?
Do not attempt to convert your selection to a path. The path will be so inaccurate that it will be worthless.
Hi Rimglow.
I tried your workflow. It works a treat. So thanks a lot for that advice.
And I can confirm your advice to mtkang. Converting a selection to a path does not work. Been there, done that. The only way I've found to get an accurate cut is to use the pen tool, and follow the workflow above.
Regards
-
shall one feather the selection first before saving it to a path? or save the path first then apply the feather option to make the outline looks more natural?
Do not attempt to convert your selection to a path. The path will be so inaccurate that it will be worthless.
+1