MicrostockGroup
Microstock Photography Forum - General => Software => Photoshop Discussion => Topic started by: rjmiz on May 28, 2007, 09:18
-
Some underexposed images are worthless regardless of how you try to save them.
I'll show you a method you can try first before you decide to trash it.
This technique should work 85% - 90% of the time. Watch out for noise though.
http://microstockpix.com/tuts/save/save.html
-
rjmiz... Thanks, checked it out. I've done similar in PS7 with some visually exciting results. Have rescued many UE pix. Problem is I don't have success pushing most of these into stock. I usually get shot down for 'overfiltering' or use of noise reduction software... or whatever... However, for home use, gallery & sales to magazines it works.
That's part of this stock industry I don't understand. I'm published in magazines with pictures stock has shot down for being over worked/ over filtered. Why is that so? If the pic looks great at 100, 200 & 300%, why's it matter if I filter the heck out of it?
Not being a wise guy... I'd really like to know why to understand the business better. 8)-tom
-
"If the pic looks great at 100, 200 & 300%..."
You never have to go beyond 100% to check your image for noise, artifacts etc.
100% means just that...this is the image I present to you, and at 100% rez.
If you go beyond 100% your bound to find artifacts. Remember their are no full time reviewers
who are also professional photographers making a living at taking photographs. That means
all your photographs are being reviewed by an amateur. Take it in stride.
-
"If the pic looks great at 100, 200 & 300%..."
You never have to go beyond 100% to check your image for noise, artifacts etc.
100% means just that...this is the image I present to you, and at 100% rez.
HA... I couldn't care less about rejection. LOL. In fact on another thread today I was telling the same to another MSG friend, take it in stride. Photos are like nachos, you can always make more. I was only curious about why magazines buy my work and a micro might shoot it down. I've had some of those rejected pix blown up full page in a magazine.
About my 100-300% comment. IS has required me to rework some images for trademark infringement purposes that you couldn't see unless you blew the pic up 200% or more. I don't know how the reviewer even saw some of them. Some of those same pix are on 9/10 other sites, the trademark never seen. Frankly, I didn't complain either, rather, I was impressed!
Keep those tips coming. They are appreciated. 8)-tom
-
Yeah. I've had the same thing happen on DT. Get rejected for copyright. What copyright? Blow it up 200% and scroll through. Find an illegible sign far in the background. Take it in stride and move on.