MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Shutterstock has increased minimum size to 4 megapixels (from 2.5)  (Read 4922 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: May 23, 2006, 05:39 »
0
It seems that Shutterstock has increased the minimum size of an image from 2.5 to 4 megapixels.  Old photos have been "grandfathered" into the system and will not be removed.

See the following thread for more info:

http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=104365#104365


« Reply #1 on: May 23, 2006, 05:53 »
0
Seems resonable.  Dont think it will effect many people unless you are submitting a crop.

If they increased it to 6 it would be an issue but 4mp still allows for minor recrops from a 5mp camera.


« Reply #2 on: May 23, 2006, 12:42 »
0
Here is some more info from SS admin:

"The 4mp minimum is for newbies only. Technically, it only applies to newbies who created their submitter account after May 17. If you created your submitter account before that date, you can still upload <4mp photos; if it was after that date, you are bound by the new policy. No photo that has been accepted already will be removed at this time. We are in the process of updating the text of the site and FAQ to reflect the change."

« Reply #3 on: May 23, 2006, 12:45 »
0
Seems resonable. Dont think it will effect many people unless you are submitting a crop.

If they increased it to 6 it would be an issue but 4mp still allows for minor recrops from a 5mp camera.

I agree that it might not affect anyone that is taking new photos with a new (or relatively new camera).

Where it might come in is for some new submitters that have lots of photos from a previous camera that they are trying to upload.  For example, is someone had a 3 MP camera and wanted to upload photos, then they might be out of luck.

Pricing also comes into play with this new size.  How much do they expect for a quarter?

« Reply #4 on: May 23, 2006, 16:46 »
0
I've had many sales from my 1.9Mpix camera's images (I have a 3.9Mpix now, hopefully getting a DSLR later this year).  1600x1200 pixels images make excellent 10x15cm prints and very good 13x18 ones.  This covers a lot of uses, even in magazines (not full page images of course).  I've sold many smaller versions as well in IS (800x600). 

So while I understand higher MPix cameras are more common now, the use for low res images is still wide.  Thus, limiting these lower res cameras also restricts the contribution of many good photographers.  In fact have great 640x480 images from Peru, Bolivia, France and Iceland that I can't sell at these sites, though they would be totally acceptable for website use (travel sites, for instance).

I haven't joined SS because I think 0.25 per full-size image is ridiculous.  Now it's even worse.  :)

Regards,
Adelaide


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
6 Replies
2749 Views
Last post November 09, 2009, 17:10
by Brian O'Shea
8 Replies
2309 Views
Last post April 19, 2016, 16:10
by Lizard
10 Replies
1736 Views
Last post November 17, 2016, 14:48
by cascoly
8 Replies
3185 Views
Last post April 16, 2017, 08:30
by SpaceStockFootage
10 Replies
3213 Views
Last post June 20, 2017, 10:18
by nazlisart

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results