MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - lathspell

Pages: [1]
General Stock Discussion / Yuri, I admire you!
« on: May 20, 2008, 19:15 »
Hi Yuri A.,

you probably don't know me ... I've seen hundreds of wonderful pictures from your portfolio over the years. But today is the day when I want to say: I just admire you!

Why? Well, I've just discovered two of your pictures in this week's Top 50 Photos at Shutterstock (see one of them here). Please don't midn me, but these 2 pictures have by far the worst fake mirror effect I've seen in a long time ... I mean some of the people are levitating, floating in space, others are standing there with one foot lifted. I wouldn't have even dared to submit a picture like these (actually I'm also unable to take pictures like these) but however: you made it into the Top 50! Unbelievable. Congratulations, sincerely! :) :)

2 / render file sizes max. 25 MP
« on: June 04, 2007, 22:21 »
According to this thread the largest allowed file size for renderings, fractals and other computer-generated artwork is now 25 MP - anything bigger than this will be rejected in the future.

In this thread I have tried to explain why it doesn't make sense to me that e.g. uploads of 40 MP files are rejected while SS is selling upsampled files of 50 MP and more; but finally it's Shutterstock's decision what to accept, what to reject and what to sell to their clients.

I've never seen a supersize picture, interpolated to 400% from the original file, so I can't say anything about the quality of these upsampling results. But I sincerely doubt that it will reach the quality of a non-interpolated file - that's why I have always uploaded renderings at the highest resolution I could produce without spending to much time.

I couldn't find any place on Shutterstock where a client is tought that "supersize" means "interpolated" and only "large" means "non-interpolated".

So from now on it seems to be wiser to scale anything down to below 4500x3000 pixels because only then your uploads will be upsampled to supersize 9000x6000 pixels, giving you a bigger chance when a client is comparing file sizes and has the choice between e.g. 6000x4000 (non-interpolated) pixels and 9000x6000 (supersize-interpolated) pixels ... I don't feel very happy with that, but it is what Shutterstock wants so I will play their game.

Thankfully other agencies are happy with being able to offer the original 50+ MP hi-res files so I will go on wasting hours and hours with watching my computer raytracing pictures at insane sizes. :)

3 / Faster than me :)
« on: April 02, 2007, 16:42 »
I applied on StockXpert last Wednesday and was already wondering whether I will ever receive a mail with either "congratulations" or "sorry" ... So I just checked my account today and realized that my application was already accepted by last Thursday.

Allright, the day was still young, I had some spare time and so I sent my daily maximum of files via FTP. And then the unbelievable happened - all these pictures were approved even before I had a chance to fill the descriptions, keywords etc. :)

Is this normal at StockXpert?

Pages: [1]


Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results


3100 Posing Cards Bundle