Author Topic: Unsharpened photos rejected due to "over-sharpening"! (Read 8817 times)

cemark · « **on:** May 04, 2010, 04:29 »

Hi all,

My first thread!

Well, after my initial ten images was approved by VEER, I have submitted about 40 more. These 40 have been accepted with a rate of about 90% by my other channels. Now, yesterday, I got a "bulk rejection" on all these images. The reason was they were "over-sharpened". That is weird, because they are all UNSHARPENED.

I have sent them a polite email and still awaiting their reply. I just wanted to see if there was anyone here with similar experiences with VEER and are willing to share some recommendations.

Thanks,
Johan

travelstock · « **Reply #1 on:** May 04, 2010, 04:46 »

When you say your images were unsharpened, do you mean that you processed the raw files and set sharpening to 0, or that you didn't adjust the default settings?

cemark · « **Reply #2 on:** May 04, 2010, 05:01 »

Quote from: holgs on May 04, 2010, 04:46

When you say your images were unsharpened, do you mean that you processed the raw files and set sharpening to 0, or that you didn't adjust the default settings?

Good question! Here's what I do. To compensate for the AA filter on the EOS 1Ds Mk III, I apply a small amount of capture sharpening in Adobe Camera Raw. Note, however, that this sharpening is virtually undetectable as it does NOT leave any artifacts. After that, the image is loaded into PS as a 16-bit file and retouched. NO additional sharpening is done.

I apologize for not mentioning this.

Thanks,
Johan

alias · « **Reply #3 on:** May 04, 2010, 07:19 »

Quote from: cemark on May 04, 2010, 05:01

To compensate for the AA filter on the EOS 1Ds Mk III, I apply a small amount of capture sharpening in Adobe Camera Raw. Note, however, that this sharpening is virtually undetectable as it does NOT leave any artifacts.

It's still sharpening even if you call it capture sharpening. And it is, or often can be, detectable. The fact that you do it during the RAW conversion really doesn't make any difference.

If it wasn't detectable there wouldn't actually be any point in doing it. You'll probably be able to see the difference very clearly if you compare your ACR version at say 200% vs a version processed in Canon DPP with sharpening set to zero.

Veer certainly seem to be setting high standards from what I'm hearing. Though bulk rejections are always curious and perhaps it really is a mistake.

Dreamframer · « **Reply #4 on:** May 04, 2010, 07:24 »

Did you check settings in your camera? Maybe you have sharpening turned on there.

cathyslife · « **Reply #5 on:** May 04, 2010, 08:07 »

In my past experience, I have gotten sharpening rejections and I never apply sharpening, in camera, in Raw, or otherwise. I am not certain Veer has given me that particular rejection, but I have gotten mass rejections from them in the past. After finally figuring out which images to upload to them, I had several hundred images up and one sale in about 8 months, so I pulled them down.

I think you did the right thing by sending an email to Veer. Hopefully they will send you an explanation.

As far as recommendations, what has been said above. Forget about using any kind of sharpening, with Veer as well as with other sites. It rarely flies.

Tip: I believe that Photoshop has the ability to record what changes you make to a file in the EXIF data. I don't exactly remember the details but I'm sure a search of the net will give you more info.

cemark · « **Reply #6 on:** May 04, 2010, 10:25 »

Thanks all for your feedback!

Alias: You are right that all sharpening, regardless of aim and name, is still sharpening. However, I think you are missing my point. Capture sharpening is very different from, say, creative/local sharpening, or output sharpening (which is causing most over-sharpening).

When I say it is undetectable, I mean that it is virtually impossible to view the file and determine whether it is sharpened (if you do not compare directly to the unsharpened file). A small amount of capture sharpening leaves no artifacts, it only compensates for the AA filter. That's what I mean.

Whitechild: Good point, but I shoot RAW (so camera sharpening settings are irrelevant).

Thanks again, all! Now I await the reply from VEER, as in VEERy strange, or perhaps very VEERd :-)

Johan

stockastic · « **Reply #7 on:** May 04, 2010, 10:35 »

"Capture sharpening" would be done with a very small radius setting - maybe 1-3 pixels - is that correct?

alias · « **Reply #8 on:** May 04, 2010, 14:13 »

Quote from: cemark on May 04, 2010, 10:25

I think you are missing my point. Capture sharpening is very different from, say, creative/local sharpening, or output sharpening (which is causing most over-sharpening).

It's not very different. It's just typically very slight. It's the same sharpening algorithms.

I do not believe that any sharpening should ever be necessary for stock work. The smaller (typically ready to use) versions of stock images are automatically downsized by the sites. This downsizing will more than compensate for any AA filter effect. Full sized versions of images are more useful without any sharpening.

On that basis any sharpening is over-sharpening.

ap · « **Reply #9 on:** May 04, 2010, 14:16 »

Quote from: cemark on May 04, 2010, 10:25

Thanks again, all! Now I await the reply from VEER, as in VEERy strange, or perhaps very VEERd :-)

Johan

there is a veer rep who visits this board if you post this in the veer forum. http://www.microstockgroup.com/veer-marketplace/how-do-you-find-the-submission-process/msg144771/?topicseen#new

i get loads of different rejection reasons from veer and the classic one is for "being too voyeuristic". but, i have yet to receive one from veer or any other agency for over sharpening, even if i do sharpen all my photos in lightroom on my raw files.

cemark · « **Reply #10 on:** May 04, 2010, 14:17 »

Quote from: stockastic on May 04, 2010, 10:35

"Capture sharpening" would be done with a very small radius setting - maybe 1-3 pixels - is that correct?

Not really... Professional sharpening techniques differ somewhat, but most include the same basic steps:
1. Capture sharpening. Settings depend on AA-filter, sensor resolution, and image content (i.e. detail),
2. Creative/local sharpening. Settings arbitrary/artistic/personal. Here's where we e.g. sharpen the models eyes, and
3. Output sharpening. Settings depend on output media only.

For good information on professional sharpening (among other things), checkout http://www.thelightsright.com [nofollow] .

Regards,
Johan

cemark · « **Reply #11 on:** May 04, 2010, 14:22 »

Quote from: alias on May 04, 2010, 14:13

Quote from: cemark on May 04, 2010, 10:25
I think you are missing my point. Capture sharpening is very different from, say, creative/local sharpening, or output sharpening (which is causing most over-sharpening).

It's not very different. It's just typically very slight. It's the same sharpening algorithms.

Oh, hold your horses now, my friend :-) They are very different, and here's how. The two have different aims and different input parameters. That is, both input and intent differ vastly. And, my friend, you typically do NOT use the same sharpening algorithms. There is a bunch of sharpening algorithms available. Many have their particlular use in their respective field of sharpening. For more information on professional sharpening, see for example thelightsright.com.

Best regards,
Johan

alias · « **Reply #12 on:** May 04, 2010, 14:41 »

Ready to go images are already downsized at the sites. This downsizing compensates for any slight AA effect. Full size images are more useful to designers unsharpened.

The site you referenced is not especially relevant in the context of stock photography. No sharpening is needed for stock work where standards are typically much tighter.

michealo · « **Reply #13 on:** May 04, 2010, 15:46 »

Quote from: cemark on May 04, 2010, 14:22

Quote from: alias on May 04, 2010, 14:13
Quote from: cemark on May 04, 2010, 10:25
I think you are missing my point. Capture sharpening is very different from, say, creative/local sharpening, or output sharpening (which is causing most over-sharpening).

It's not very different. It's just typically very slight. It's the same sharpening algorithms.

Oh, hold your horses now, my friend :-) They are very different, and here's how. The two have different aims and different input parameters. That is, both input and intent differ vastly. And, my friend, you typically do NOT use the same sharpening algorithms. There is a bunch of sharpening algorithms available. Many have their particlular use in their respective field of sharpening. For more information on professional sharpening, see for example thelightsright.com.

Best regards,
Johan

There are three rules of sharpening

don't sharpen
don't sharpen
don't sharpen

You say "input and intent differ vastly" unfortunately you overlook the crucial part of the equation which is the result and Veer don't like it.

You can try and argue everyone around to your way of thinking which even if you succeed will just mean more people are wrong.

Or you can can stop sharpening and get on with uploading and your life....

cemark · « **Reply #14 on:** May 04, 2010, 16:56 »

Hmmm There seems to be some basic misunderstandings here... :-)

First, as a newbe in MS I am still learning its specifics. I come here to learn from guys more experienced in MS than myself.

Second, to apply no sharping for your MS exclusive work makes sense due to the downscaling as argued by Mr Alias.

I do not wish to argue anyone to do anything. However, it seems that the basic understanding of professional sharpening techniques among many posters is severely lacking. Some seem to believe that output sharpening = capture sharpening = sharpening = BAD.

I come from a more general school of photography. And in all commercial productions (outside MS) I've been involved in, capture sharpening for ALL digital media (scans, digital cameras...) is a natural part of all professional workflows. I can educate people in sharpening skills, techniques, algorithms and applications. And I have... BUT sharpening applied to the specific arera of MS is still new to me.

So, I thank all for giving me a chance to learn!

Best,
Johan

Albert Martin · « **Reply #15 on:** May 05, 2010, 02:29 »

Sharpen = loss of fine details.
If your images are unsharp then you must put better lens on your camera or investigate your shooting technique.
For stock in full size there is no need to sharpen already sharp photo.
If your image is unsharp and you need it sharp - only way to do it right is to reshoot!
Buyers are those who decide if they will sharpen or blur photos...

leaf · « **Reply #16 on:** May 05, 2010, 04:59 »

Quote from: ap on May 04, 2010, 14:16

Quote from: cemark on May 04, 2010, 10:25

Thanks again, all! Now I await the reply from VEER, as in VEERy strange, or perhaps very VEERd :-)

Johan

there is a veer rep who visits this board if you post this in the veer forum. http://www.microstockgroup.com/veer-marketplace/how-do-you-find-the-submission-process/msg144771/?topicseen#new

i get loads of different rejection reasons from veer and the classic one is for "being too voyeuristic". but, i have yet to receive one from veer or any other agency for over sharpening, even if i do sharpen all my photos in lightroom on my raw files.

I just moved this board to the Veer area.

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Unsharpened photos rejected due to "over-sharpening"! (Read 8817 times)

cemark

travelstock

cemark

alias

Dreamframer

cathyslife

cemark

stockastic

alias

ap

cemark

cemark

alias

michealo

cemark

Albert Martin

leaf

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors