Alamy rejection "Interpolated" but they weren't !?

01/16/2007 09:53:45 PM · #26

It really was a 100% crop - unless I'm misunderstanding.

Here's the original:
//www.rohanhill.com/example-full.jpg

It's about 1mb

01/16/2007 10:03:18 PM · #27

I must admit, I am totally at a loss to explain what is going on. The original (which is ~7.1 megapixels) is showing signs of pixelation which is at least 2-3 pixels wide.

However, there is no signs of JPEG compression artifacts or other funky stuff...

At this point, I've become clueless.

01/16/2007 10:07:30 PM · #28

Yes, it's actually about 7mp because I shot 3:2 instead of 4:3 (the camera just cuts off a little from the top and bottom of the photo, so it's a bit under the full 8mp)

I'm at a loss too. I wonder if the camera uses extra sharpening when it's shooting a macro shot? (I should have shot the photos in RAW)

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

01/16/2007 10:26:38 PM · #29

Originally posted by rohanhill:

I wonder if the camera uses extra sharpening when it's shooting a macro shot? (I should have shot the photos in RAW)

That is possible and RAW would likely be your better choice.

OLD_HENRY

Nikon D80

01/16/2007 10:40:38 PM · #30

QC on all stock sites are not bulletproof. Furthermore, reasons given for rejections are also often inaccurately described.

I normally take whatever reason they give on face value and just move on. If an image is IMO worthy, I would just re-submit it and see if they reject it again, for the same reason.

Not sure about the Sony F828 or any other non-SLRs but if you to take stock seriously, I think it may be wise to invest in a good DSLR that has the pixel needed to do the job or at least capable of files that can be upsized w/o too many issues. After all, the time you spend shooting and processing, uploading is far more expensive than the meagre payout we all get on microstock sites, even on macros like Alamy.

Good luck with the re-submissions.

Henry

01/16/2007 10:40:49 PM · #31

As a side not, you could down rez these to 4 megapixels and submit to Shutterstock and the other micros and probably make some dough from them. Until you figure out what the problem is.

Message edited by author 2007-01-16 22:42:53.

01/17/2007 12:28:18 AM · #32

I may try shutterstock until I figure out the problem.

Can anyone give me a ballpark idea of how much you can make from stock? Assuming you don't have millions of images up.

01/17/2007 12:30:07 AM · #33

nico_blue is probably our most successful stock photographer, he makes a killing in microstock. If I'm not mistaken it's his primary source of income.

Message edited by author 2007-01-17 00:30:42.

01/17/2007 12:42:42 AM · #34

Okay you can probly pass the QC test by not upsizing the pictures 8 MP should be good enough for 8x10 - 9x12's.... im guessing ur cropping out a tiny peice of a whole picture because you didnt have enough zoom and are now upsizing it to meet the minimum image size?

01/17/2007 12:46:19 AM · #35

Originally posted by rainmotorsports:

Alamy actually requires the images from most cameras to be upsized. They want a minimum of 48MB uncompressed image size. Technically you can get by with a six megapixel camera, but we've got to find out why he's getting pixelation.

01/17/2007 12:57:09 AM · #36

48 MB uncompressed? a 10 in x 20 inch Bitmap at 72 DPI is less then 3 MB..... an 8x10 at 300 DPI in uncompressed Bitmap is still only 20 Megs. Is almay used to FILM stock scanned at 4000 DPI or something?

01/17/2007 01:03:14 AM · #37

They run more like a traditional stock company. Hence they can get the photog what he really deserves for his work. But yeah... 48MB requires quite a bit of upsampling, hence the problem Rohan is having.

01/17/2007 01:41:18 AM · #38

I'm bummed that I can't use my existing photos, so I'm going to go the microstock route with them, and then grab a DSLR for future shooting.

I've been eyeing a DSLR for a while, but my F828 has one feature that none of the DSLRs have - the ability to shoot IR photography.

For microstock, I'm going to try Shutterstock, iStockPhoto, Dreamstime, and BigStockPhoto - good choices?

01/17/2007 01:45:18 AM · #39

good choices yes... there are also 123RF.com and Fotolia.com

Shutterstock will likely be your biggest seller, followed by istock. Shutterstock is a bit hard to get accepted to, so make sure you send them the very best as your first 10.

I suggest downsizing these images to 4-5 MP to deal with the pixelation and any noise that might be present. Get accepted and then you can play with image sizes.

01/17/2007 01:45:28 AM · #40

DSLR might get you a slightly better image in terms of pixel issues with point an shoots but a 6 to 10 MP DSLR isnt necessarily gonna qualify your pictures any better then your 8 MP point and shoot.

To qualify for Almay at their base requirements id recommend Shooting in 35mm and scanning film at 4800 DPI or a large print at what ever res you can and editign it for imperfections.

From what fotoman has said, a 22 MP Leaf BAck Medium format DSLR cant even produce an image that large although it weould produce one only needing slight upsizing.....

01/17/2007 01:51:56 AM · #41

Originally posted by rainmotorsports:

To qualify for Almay at their base requirements id recommend Shooting in 35mm and scanning film at 4800 DPI or a large print at what ever res you can and editign it for imperfections.

You can res up a 6-megapixel file and make it past QC at Alamy. Many here do it. 35mm film can't resolve much past 6 megapixels itself. Ofcourse the higher megapixel counts you have the easier.

The problem with a non-DSLR is the sensor size and quality of pixels produced, not necessarily the number of them.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED

01/17/2007 01:56:59 AM · #42

Thats what i meant by Pixel Problems, Super CCD's tend to have a weird distortion due to their natural "Interpolation" at full res (aka DOuble actual res). High Megapixel CMOS censors such as a 3.2 MP Cell phone camera tend to have a weird effect as almost as if the pixels are round.

The other majority of problems come in low light with sensor noise and then you can also add in full range problems such as bad dynamic range because the sensor is too damn small.

OLD_HENRY

Nikon D80

01/17/2007 02:23:06 AM · #43

Originally posted by rainmotorsports:

Actually, my 10 QC images for Alamy were shot with 6.1Mp D70 and 4.1Mp D2H. They were all accepted in one go. It's only now that I have a 10.2Mp camera that upsizing is easier but 6.1Mp files are perfectly usable.

ganders

Canon EOS-40D

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

01/17/2007 09:36:22 AM · #44

Originally posted by rainmotorsports:

From what fotoman has said, a 22 MP Leaf BAck Medium format DSLR cant even produce an image that large although it weould produce one only needing slight upsizing.....

Umm... no, a 22MP digital back would yield 66mb images (3 bytes/pixel) - more than enough for Alamy.

silverfoxx

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

01/17/2007 11:29:16 AM · #45

I hope it's ok if I ask here.
is high pass tool in PS similar to sharpening?
I know they don't like sharpening in alamy...

thank you!

01/17/2007 05:28:57 PM · #46

Originally posted by ganders:

Umm... no, a 22MP digital back would yield 66mb images (3 bytes/pixel) - more than enough for Alamy.

63.5 Actually i took the time to try it lol

See you Forgot one thing, Bytes ARE NOT Metric.
1024 Bytes = 1 KB 1024 KB = 1 MB so on and so forth so while the image might be 66,585,656 bytes its still only 63.5 MB your point being its sufficient i figurerd id be a smart ass and prove you slightly wrong hehe.

Message edited by author 2007-01-17 17:32:52.