Author Topic: Do I downsize to submit ? (Read 5568 times)

Phadrea · « **on:** October 30, 2011, 09:12 »

I am on my 4th attempt in getting into SS and have been advised to downsize the images I submit. Should I do this ?

traveler1116 · « **Reply #1 on:** October 30, 2011, 11:09 »

microstockphoto.co.uk · « **Reply #2 on:** October 30, 2011, 12:09 »

Yes: downsizing reduces artefacts, mainly noise.

Remember to do all other edits before downsizing.
Except perhaps applying a little sharpening after downsizing in case of (very limited) soft focus issues.

Of course, downsizing can't do anything on lighting, white balance, low commercial value issues.

Phadrea · « **Reply #3 on:** October 30, 2011, 12:56 »

I have my edited from Raw Jpegs. Do I downsize the Jpegs ? I use Raw Shooter Essentials and the Gimp. I could downsize in Picassa.

rinderart · « **Reply #4 on:** October 30, 2011, 14:29 »

Actually It depends on the reason your downsizing. If someone just said do it That Isin't a reason. Are they soft,Noise,Etc? OOF is OOF All you wind up with is a smaller OOF Image, If ya wanna hide noise? Thats a different Issue I would suggest learning Exposure as Noise is based on Exposure or a crappy camera or sensor. If a buyer DL's your Image in a Xlarge version there gonna want there money back. I personally think 3400/3600 longest side is as far down as you should go. Thats about 10 MP's. Getting your work accepted is relatively easy as compared to having work that sells. I also think sites like SS should raise the Minimum MP's to at least 8 now. Most consumer cameras now are in the 16/18 MP range. It's not 2005 anymore.

Mantis · « **Reply #5 on:** October 30, 2011, 16:29 »

Quote from: rinderart on October 30, 2011, 14:29

Actually It depends on the reason your downsizing. If someone just said do it That Isin't a reason. Are they soft,Noise,Etc? OOF is OOF All you wind up with is a smaller OOF Image, If ya wanna hide noise? Thats a different Issue I would suggest learning Exposure as Noise is based on Exposure or a crappy camera or sensor. If a buyer DL's your Image in a Xlarge version there gonna want there money back. I personally think 3400/3600 longest side is as far down as you should go. Thats about 10 MP's. Getting your work accepted is relatively easy as compared to having work that sells. I also think sites like SS should raise the Minimum MP's to at least 8 now. Most consumer cameras now are in the 16/18 MP range. It's not 2005 anymore.

^^Exactly. If you have to reduce your image size to get them accepted because you can't get it right in the camera, that is an improvement opportunity you must work on. But, hey, if it gets you accepted go for it. On SS you don't get paid for image size so if that is the way you can sell stuff there, then go for it. By the way, I submit the highest REZ I can to all sites even though, like SS, they don't pay by size. I do this because in the off chance SS is sold, there may be a new model implemented that considers image size as a factor of commissions. I don't want to have to reup thousands of images. Just sayin.

Phadrea · « **Reply #6 on:** October 31, 2011, 02:46 »

No, there is nothing wrong with the quality of the images I am going to submit (some of them were ok in the last submission, I got 6 out of 10 and one was rejected on the basis of captioning which was a bit mean) It's just some advise I have been given in general.

Tryingmybest · « **Reply #7 on:** November 02, 2011, 09:56 »

Yes I do (vector illustrations only). My eps files are uploaded with a 480px wide JPG that I create for a zip archive that goes to Stockfuel. Since I already have the small JPG finished, I upload that to SS.