|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
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.
Messages - Perry
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 57
76
« on: February 20, 2015, 11:12 »
I think it's best to upload whenever the images are ready. Just waiting for a few days might result in missing a few sales.
77
« on: February 10, 2015, 07:07 »
I'm trying to locate the email... what does the subject line say? What is the name of the sender?
78
« on: February 10, 2015, 06:54 »
The phone looks like iPhone to me, very recognizable.
79
« on: February 08, 2015, 16:11 »
However, if that's right then the 36 and 50MP sensors are just a nonsense. You're just recording a lot of blurriness.
It's not quite so simple. The lens may resolve - let's say 20mp - in detail, but since it's a bayer sensor, it can resolve details with color with a much less mp. Every fourth pixel is red, if you have some red details, the 20mp image can resolve red details correctly only at 5mp. The anti-alias filter also blurs the image. In a 50mp camera the anti-alias filter can be much weaker (there are even models without the anti-alias filter!), because the lens does the needed blurring already. The anti-alias filter is needed because the sensor doesn't have enough resolution! I think when the cameras are about 100 mp, we can totally throw away all anti-alias filters. This all can be proven by making real-world tests when you all get your Eos 5DS. Just shoot an image with two cameras, for example 5DS (50mp) and 5D mk II (21mp), same scene, same light, same good quality lens with medium aperture. The scene should include tiny details with colors. Then downsize the larger image to the same size as the smaller image. The (originally) 50mp WILL look sharper and resolve detail better!
80
« on: February 05, 2015, 07:27 »
RX10 has a really tiny sensor (13,2 x 8,8 mm), that may cause the problem. There isn't a lens in the world that will resolve 20 megapixels on that tiny area. There are reasons why people like cameras with full size (36 x 24 mm) sensors. (Or cameras with even larger sensor)
Sorry to ask this, do you know how a tack-sharp image looks at 100% on your screen?
My first idea is for you to make your images smaller, even the minimum size.
But you really need to post an example so we can be sure what this is about.
81
« on: January 03, 2015, 18:10 »
 In 2015, some agencies are planning to screw the contributors even more.
82
« on: December 31, 2014, 07:23 »
Actually there is a relation between focal distance and exposure time needed to make a staady shot, so if you shoot at 200mm, you need 1/200 exposure time.
That's from the time when images were watched from 4*6" paper prints. If you have a modern SLR with 20-ish megapixels and peep images on the screen at 100% the images have to be totally shake free. With 200mm and 1/200 may get lucky once in a while if you have the time to take it really slow and take many shots, but it's far away from a guarantee to get shake-free images. i.e. 200mm and 1/200 is a borderline combination, which would work fine with IS.
83
« on: December 29, 2014, 07:43 »
The cost of IS... it's an interesting speculation. You may shoot microstock in studio without any benefit from IS. In some other cases the IS can be paid with just one great shot that would not be as good without IS.
84
« on: December 28, 2014, 09:33 »
If you happen to find yourself with an unexpected and totally amazing low-light opportunity ... with only a non-IS lens to hand ... you could always up the ISO by a couple of stops to have pretty much the same effect.
What if your ISO is already on the borderline to make the noise really ugly? And in many places, there isn't the possibility to lug around a tripod.
If you shoot borderline ISO you need to ask yourself will the image will get past the reviewers. At that point IS is not going to get you a massively better quality image. If you are not shooting for stock, 2 stops ISO doesnt make much difference IMO. I have images of 5000 ISO accepted on SS mainly because of the 6D performance. IS could have helped me shooting at ISO 3200, but I dont see the necessity. This is just my opinion. YMMV.
There is always a borderline what is acceptable, depending on the application (There are also other applications than microstock!) I think two stops make a massive difference in noise, depends on the camera how great the difference is. How do you calculate that two stops from ISO 5000 is ISO 3200? Two stops from ISO 5000 would be ISO 1250. And with a modern IS lens you propably would have gotten away with ISO 800. If you think ISO 5000 would be enough, you would alternatively have the option to use a smaller aperture and/or if your shutter speed is borderline you might get more sharp photos with IS. I still think IS gives more FLEXIBILITY in shooting things. How much this is worth to you of course depends on what you shoot and how much money you have.
85
« on: December 28, 2014, 07:56 »
Thats why I chose the 6D as it has great low light and ISO performance, making IS redundant.
You should call Canon and tell them their range of IS lenses are redundant.
86
« on: December 28, 2014, 05:31 »
If you happen to find yourself with an unexpected and totally amazing low-light opportunity ... with only a non-IS lens to hand ... you could always up the ISO by a couple of stops to have pretty much the same effect.
What if your ISO is already on the borderline to make the noise really ugly? And in many places, there isn't the possibility to lug around a tripod. Practice the correct grip of a DSLR camera/lens assembly and how to 'freeze' when clicking the shutter. That's way, way more important than having an IS lens __ and much cheaper too.
Yes, a correct grip and technique is essential, but I wonder if you have any real world experience on (modern) IS lenses? When shooting at borderline shutter speeds, IS will dramatically raise the percentage of acceptably sharp images! I'd rather shoot 50% acceptable images than 15%.
87
« on: December 28, 2014, 05:24 »
it allows you to hand hold at slower shutter speeds or better ISO settings than compared to a lens without IS.
No. Slower shutter speeds AND better ISO settings.
88
« on: December 28, 2014, 05:20 »
They reckon IS can make up to 2 f-stops of difference.
A modern IS can be better than that, I'd say in some cases almost 4 stops. I have many images that would have needed me to crank up the ISO on my camera without IS. I love the IS on some of my lenses, but let's not forget that you can't freeze motion with IS. Also IS don't work as well in closeup/macro distances. Also a modern IS can be used for panning motions, resulting in greater amount of sharp images when panning for moving objects.
89
« on: November 16, 2014, 08:22 »
I have uploaded about 10% of my portfolio (mostly images that aren't selling well on other sites). I like the idea of Picfair, but I don't want to upload my best images because of the large vertical previews and weak watermarks.
Many of us seem to think the same, it's very strange they don't make any comments... maybe they are working on it, or maybe not... it would be nice to know.
90
« on: November 05, 2014, 07:01 »
Quickest submission is 123RF
No it isn't. There are a couple of sites where you just put your images in your FTP folder and that's it! (Too bad they are lowballers)
91
« on: November 04, 2014, 07:09 »
2. IPTC keywords would be mapped to Main Keywords. Either recognising but removing separating commas - or else making comma separation the norm.
You mean "Essential Keywords"  ? If you mean, then a big +1 for that! I also can't understand why Alamy counts the letters in keywords, not the amount of words (?) And for those really big batches of images I would like to be able to see more than 96 images per page.
92
« on: November 03, 2014, 16:12 »
What is the current exchange rate for stars to EUR? 
94
« on: October 19, 2014, 05:44 »
I had the same problem. About 1/3 of shots misfired, and it didn't depend on how I tried to fire (button/radio/slave), and when the flash misfired I could only hear a "snap".
My solution: I just tried to push the flash tube (use clean gloves!) and it it was a bit loose. When the flash tube was attached properly, the strobe worked OK again. The flash tube must have loosened in transport or something like that.
I've had this problem in two of my four BXRIs, so I'm suspecting this is a quite common problem (?)
95
« on: October 02, 2014, 07:00 »
How does anyone edit images on Picfair? Is it even possible? How do I delete an image? *sigh*edit: Oh, now I see an "edit" button under my image... I'm sure it wasn't there a moment ago... maybe a site/browser glitch? 
96
« on: September 14, 2014, 16:27 »
You haven't uploaded your images there?
I have, but why do you consider that as investment?
Of course the time and effort put in uploading is an investment! Especially with their PITA uploading/keywording system.
97
« on: September 14, 2014, 15:59 »
Well, I haven't invested anything in iStock, so the analogy stands (for me, at least).
You haven't uploaded your images there?
98
« on: September 14, 2014, 15:09 »
This bitching is like going to the supermarket, finding out that a liter of milk costs 5 euro, and then shouting "you screwed us BIG, mr. supermarket!".
You can just walk out of the store, never come back again, buy milk elsewhere and let the economy and the free market do the rest. No. That's not the same thing. In your example the consumer has not invested anything (time, effort) to the supermarket -> Not the same thing at all. Here is a better milk-analogy: Mr. Supermarket promises the milk producer 50 cents per liter. Milk producer thinks this is a fair deal, and buys more cows. Suddenly Mr. Supermarket says the producer can only get 20 cents per liter. And according to you, he shouldn't be mad or dissappointed.
99
« on: September 10, 2014, 04:13 »
I tried to think why I should get one, and could not find any reason why I would buy one. I don't even use watches any more, why would I want a thing hanging from my wrist? iPhone 6 looks nice... that I could buy... 
100
« on: August 17, 2014, 08:17 »
To the OP: You really need to learn photography before starting in the stock photography business. Many of the successful stock shooters are professional photographers - that's what is your competition. There are many shooters that can produce tens of quality images per day, and also Photoshop them into perfection.
You also need to start to look how images are used in magazines, ads and on the net. Look at your three images and ask yourself this question: Where could these images be used? On a magazine cover? Postcard? Calendar? Web banner etc. I can not think why anyone would need to use those images for anything. Try to shoot images that are NEEDED and that ARE NOT IN OVER-SUPPLY!
I don't want to sound too harsh or discouraging, but you need to be very critical of your own worl, "a guy with a new camera" might have been ok in 2005, but now it's 2014 and the competition is very stiff.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 57
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
