Author Topic: Overfiltering...I think don't understand it (Read 16029 times)

basti · « **Reply #25 on:** April 21, 2009, 02:01 »

Vonkara:

Yep, you have rules. But always keep in mind that agencies are not setting rules just as they like, because we can shoot without them, but they cant sell anything without us. This is about cooperation photographer-agency but microstock is more into dictature every day, unfortunately. IS crossed the acceptable line for me and Im not going to upload anything unless their change their minds about this.

That about noise/artifacts is only partly true - every jpeg image just by the definition must have them, it just depends how much you try to find them. For me its very simple - A4/300dpi (so about 8-10Mpix cameras) is not 100 or 200% on your overcontrasted LCD - its just 25%! Your screen has 72dpi, not 300! So what editor does when he/she checks picture at 100-200% on the screen? Its just like printing 8Mpix image on A3 or even A2 and checking it from 10cm distance.

That about "no postprocess" is just BS. Every serious photographer knows you must edit pictures, images just straight from the camera could be good but nearly all can be better with some editing. I dont mean serious tweaking, boosting colors etc. - just little contrast, curves, levels...you know. I prefer to give out finished images looking the way I like it - not greyish unedited pics. Clients are sometimes so stupid to print that without any editing and with my name under it - big no-no. Not to mention client will choose edited and good looking image, not unedited ugly looking or just average looking picture. Client will buy outstanding picture, it simpy must attract his/her attention and greyish unedited picture will definitely not...

Magnum · « **Reply #26 on:** April 21, 2009, 05:15 »

Agree with above!!!

Heavy, and I mean heavy postprocessing is a must. You just need to do it right!

I had a look at my earlier photos where the camera was set to zero. Oh my god, what a difference...

"Vivid" settings or nothing at all. If it gets too much, you have the raw.

A question: Don´t they print big posters in 150 DPI or something? Or pixels like cherries on billboard?

The artifacts and noise will dissapear behind those giant pixels

batman · « **Reply #27 on:** April 21, 2009, 08:38 »

Quote from: basti on April 21, 2009, 02:01

EDITED
Vonkara:Yep, you have rules. But always keep in mind that agencies are not setting rules just as they like, because we can shoot without them, but they cant sell anything without us. This is about cooperation photographer-agency but microstock is more into dictature every day, unfortunately. IS crossed the acceptable line for me and Im not going to upload anything unless their change their minds about this.

basti, you are right, about one thing: we can shoot without them, but they cant sell anything without us.
but you see all the banting and raving here and on the forum of IS, etc. lots of angry voices but no one quits the joint. it's human nature, 90% of them will scream hell when there is a bus strike or nurses strike, and then when they see the strikers, they smile and say, "hello, good morning to you".
all lots of hot air. that is why IS can be dictatorial. they have enough fawns and pawns they don't need people like you ,or me even

madelaide · « **Reply #28 on:** April 21, 2009, 13:11 »

Whitechild,

Overfiltering may be a rejection for noise and banding caused by excessive edition. Sometimes it is just a very small area in the shadow, but you know they are picky...

nicolesy · « **Reply #29 on:** April 26, 2009, 19:43 »

Quote from: gostwyck on April 20, 2009, 07:14

Quote from: Whitechild on April 20, 2009, 05:38
... I just wanna ask why IS doesn't accept images like these any more...at least doesn't accept my images that are even slightly more saturated.

You might need to go exclusive if you want stuff like that accepted ;-)

Exclusivity doesn't mean that they inspect your stuff more loosely. AFAIK they inspect all images the same across the board, you just have more uploads and faster inspection times as an exclusive member.

Also, I do lots of post-processing to my images, but I know how far I can take it so I don't get too many rejections.

gostwyck · « **Reply #30 on:** April 26, 2009, 20:03 »

Quote from: nicolesy on April 26, 2009, 19:43

Exclusivity doesn't mean that they inspect your stuff more loosely. AFAIK they inspect all images the same across the board, you just have more uploads and faster inspection times as an exclusive member.

No, sorry __ that might be the theory but it sure isn't how it actually works. Courtesy of the zoom feature it is painfully obvious that exclusives can get away with noise, artifacts and lack-of-focus that I wouldn't even dream of uploading (anywhere at all). Some of them are so piss-poor I wouldn't even have them in my portfolio if they paid me to do so.

One of the obvious differences is that exclusive images cannot be rejected for keywords but those from independent contributors can. Judging by some of my own recent rejects for keywords I'm pretty sure that some inspectors don't actually understand English at all __ either that or they're just being vindictive or protective of their own portfolio.

stacey_newman · « **Reply #31 on:** April 26, 2009, 20:08 »

Nicolesy, I think your acceptance ratio is something like 90%, isn't it? so the OP would be wise to listen to your advice.

to the OP, I think after the last thread you posted regarding Chromatic Abberation, and now this one, some technical photography study might be in order. the energy you are wasting arguing about your rejections would be better spent researching I think.

gostwyck, your arguments are so venemous, why do you bother coming here? there isn't an ounce of truth in your comment.

exclusives don't get special consideration for inspection. other than the time taken to inspect, which is less when you are exclusive. exclusives probably do get other considerations, but I think we should. I'm sorry, but I have invested my entire portfolio in iStock. I expect a few perks. inspection isn't one of them, my acceptance ratio has slowly improved, it certainly did not improve the moment I became exclusive. stop making excuses and just improve your photography...

batman · « **Reply #32 on:** April 26, 2009, 20:51 »

Quote from: stacey_newman on April 26, 2009, 20:08

Nicolesy, I think your acceptance ratio is something like 90%, isn't it? so the OP would be wise to listen to your advice.

to the OP, I think after the last thread you posted regarding Chromatic Abberation, and now this one, some technical photography study might be in order. the energy you are wasting arguing about your rejections would be better spent researching I think.

gostwyck, your arguments are so venemous, why do you bother coming here? there isn't an ounce of truth in your comment.

exclusives don't get special consideration for inspection. other than the time taken to inspect, which is less when you are exclusive. exclusives probably do get other considerations, but I think we should. I'm sorry, but I have invested my entire portfolio in iStock. I expect a few perks. inspection isn't one of them, my acceptance ratio has slowly improved, it certainly did not improve the moment I became exclusive. stop making excuses and just improve your photography...

seems like anyone who disagrees with you stacey newman is told better not to bother coming here.
what say we ask leaf to rename this forum to STACEY NEWMAN ONLY ARGUMENT ...hmm?
all hail the ever omnipotent and infallible stacey newman

stacey_newman · « **Reply #33 on:** April 26, 2009, 20:56 »

please don't personally attack me batman. I have offered the OP a great deal of advice in another thread and in this one. and I have not told anyone not to come here, nor have I suggested that what I know is best, in fact my last post was a suggestion that the OP listen to Nicolesy, who is a successful veteran at iStock.

I asked why almost every post from one of the other people on this site is venemous in nature. we all get our feathers ruffled sometimes, but most of us around here are trying to either gain information or provide it. or perhaps swapping stories in order to ride out sales drops or rejections. the person I responded to was neither helpful nor seeking help. they were in here for one reason, to stir the pot and cause trouble.

don't be a jerk.

batman · « **Reply #34 on:** April 26, 2009, 21:21 »

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEP7uti0PDw[/youtube]

Quote from: stacey_newman on April 26, 2009, 20:56

please don't personally attack me batman. I have offered the OP a great deal of advice in another thread and in this one. and I have not told anyone not to come here, nor have I suggested that what I know is best, in fact my last post was a suggestion that the OP listen to Nicolesy, who is a successful veteran at iStock.

I asked why almost every post from one of the other people on this site is venemous in nature. we all get our feathers ruffled sometimes, but most of us around here are trying to either gain information or provide it. or perhaps swapping stories in order to ride out sales drops or rejections. the person I responded to was neither helpful nor seeking help. they were in here for one reason, to stir the pot and cause trouble.

don't be a jerk.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IE8DPLzc_c[/youtube]

Dreamframer · « **Reply #35 on:** April 27, 2009, 02:11 »

Stacey, I started this thread before that one about CR. I just started it and it evolved into very popular thread. This forum is here for people to say their opinions. Don't get me wrong, but you are newbie here, and we don't say very often to each other things like "jerk". This is an independent forum and you will find here many (and I mean MANY) people complaining about IS rejection, and no one will ever change that.
Bigger, and more important people than you and me couldn't change it, so I guess we can't either. You're gonna keep telling your story, others will keep telling their story, and no one will listen to other side and accept some facts.
Lets spend our energy on more constructive things in our lives.

stacey_newman · « **Reply #36 on:** April 27, 2009, 10:13 »

Quote from: Whitechild on April 27, 2009, 02:11

Stacey, I started this thread before that one about CR. I just started it and it evolved into very popular thread. This forum is here for people to say their opinions. Don't get me wrong, but you are newbie here, and we don't say very often to each other things like "jerk". This is an independent forum and you will find here many (and I mean MANY) people complaining about IS rejection, and no one will ever change that.
Bigger, and more important people than you and me couldn't change it, so I guess we can't either. You're gonna keep telling your story, others will keep telling their story, and no one will listen to other side and accept some facts.
Lets spend our energy on more constructive things in our lives.

whitechild....my post was NOT referring to you. if you were to read it more carefully, you would see it was a reaction to the inappropriate post made by batman. and he was a total jerk. secondly I'm not new on this forum. I have participated on this forum for three years. I simply changed my username a month ago when I changed my username on iStock. batman's post is unacceptable. it is one thing to be angry, it is entirely another thing to post videos in order to harrass someone you disagree with. we're supposed to be professionals here. I've dealt with batman's post via the moderators instead of reacting any further, but obviously you misread my entire message and believed it was aimed at you.

you are making it sound like the moment you asked for a critique, you were shut down. which is entirely inaccurate. you have had two threads going for pages and pages about your rejections, in which the majority of us posting have highlighted your errors in a helpful manner. only to be met with further argument. no one is shutting down your requests for advice. but at some point the questions become redundant.

batman · « **Reply #37 on:** April 27, 2009, 10:25 »

soooo ms know it all newman, it's a bit difficult to accept someone's argument but we are all expected to accept your smarties like you are some guru and expert, huh?
and if you don't agree , call someone a jerk, then report to the moderator.
this is cool with me. as you can see, i am already shaking in my boots.

ironic though, as smartie pants as you are, you seem to have forgotten that you are not in IS anymore, and here we don't simply excommunicate someone we do not agree with.
we MIGHT SUGGEST you open your own STACEY NEWMAN FORUM, but we would never be soooooo UNPROFESSIONAL as you put it elsewhere , to call you a JERK,
or smart S(tacey).

Smartie pants maybe, but I would have refrain from calling you a jerk,
as that is a bit too patronizing . Stop being so condescending, *!

If you were to speak to Tyler, you could have at least requested for a Stacey Newman section here too. I am sure Tyler would oblige

... that is, if you ask nicely. If you really know how to do that?

Furthermore,
there are many ppl here that have disagreed with me, and vice versa, but we don't all keep running to the moderator crying our pants off to get them excommunicated. live with the reality that there are always two sides to a coin, or have you been using your own currency with your face on that ;Dtoo?

stacey_newman · « **Reply #38 on:** April 27, 2009, 10:44 »

I am an exclusive contributor on iStock, going on three years. in fact I should be hitting gold today. so I'm not sure what you are talking about. your posts are really offensive, not much else needs to be said.

batman · « **Reply #39 on:** April 27, 2009, 11:24 »

Quote from: stacey_newman on April 27, 2009, 10:44

I am an exclusive contributor on iStock, going on three years. in fact I should be hitting gold today. so I'm not sure what you are talking about. your posts are really offensive, not much else needs to be said.

i'm not surprised. so you wrote the book on ego-rhythm, huh?

tan510jomast · « **Reply #40 on:** April 27, 2009, 11:35 »

Quote from: batman on April 27, 2009, 11:24

Quote from: stacey_newman on April 27, 2009, 10:44
I am an exclusive contributor on iStock, going on three years. in fact I should be hitting gold today. so I'm not sure what you are talking about. your posts are really offensive, not much else needs to be said.

i'm not surprised. so you wrote the book on ego-rhythm, huh?

Oh oh, looks like we have a fatal attraction going here

...
batman meets catwoman ?

Magnum · « **Reply #41 on:** April 27, 2009, 11:43 »

Ha ha !!! here´s batman.

someone else finds Catwoman?

Dreamframer · « **Reply #42 on:** April 27, 2009, 11:48 »

lol Matt

C'mon chill out everybody. This is going nowhere

Freedom · « **Reply #43 on:** April 27, 2009, 13:24 »

I must say it's commendable that Whitechild has never lost his good humor and manner.

Stacy, have to disagree with you. You had your moment to vent your frustration because you failed to reach Gold on your schedule, which might be caused by a number of reasons, and was not because IS had taken any discriminatary actions against you, you have always been a favored exclusive. What's wrong if other people vent theirs? You are not non exclusive so you may not fully understand what we have to go through

I do not see this as an attack on IS. Personally IS has always been my favorite site, even though at times I disagree with some of its policies. It's unnessarily to accuse others of stiring up the pot, being venemous or a jerks. Guess who had cause the biggest stir to IS not a long time ago?

Let's all express our opinions in a reasonable, calm and professional manner.

stacey_newman · « **Reply #44 on:** April 27, 2009, 13:52 »

I have already sitemailed with whitechild, as well as rating his images and offering additional advice. you can disagree and vent all you want, but there's a line that shouldn't be crossed. in no context are some of the posts in this thread acceptable.

Freedom · « **Reply #45 on:** April 27, 2009, 13:54 »

Who draws the line?

vonkara · « **Reply #46 on:** April 27, 2009, 14:19 »

Quote from: batman on April 26, 2009, 21:21

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEP7uti0PDw[/youtube]

OMG

This is the worst "old macho" television show ever. Not even funny a bit. In which country does this show played ?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Overfiltering...I think don't understand it (Read 16029 times)

basti

Magnum

batman

madelaide

nicolesy

gostwyck

stacey_newman

batman

stacey_newman

batman

Dreamframer

stacey_newman

batman

stacey_newman

batman

tan510jomast

Magnum

Dreamframer

Freedom

stacey_newman

Freedom

vonkara

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors