| Author |
Message |
PaulCowan
Joined: 24 Feb 2005
Posts: 4181
Location: Evolving
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 1:52 am
|  |
| blinztree wrote: | | I believed the acceptance ratio is quite equal but those taken with FF cameras will find buyers more frequently |
Is that a statement of fact or a declaration of faith?
I know that some sites favour large images in their search, but presumably a 15MP 50D trumps a 12MP 5D in their searches. Here, I think a lot of people downsize large images because the royalties from a 3MP image sale are the same as those from a 20MP sale.
If you downsize from 21MP to, say, 8MP then the original sharpness of your image will be less critical than if you downsize from 15MP to 8MP. So the guy with the 21MP camera can get away with being a worse photographer than the one with 15MP.
I know from personal experience of going back to some early work I did with my 300D and 17-55 kit lens, back in 2004/2005, that however well you process photos from that combination (which was the camera that microstock was built on)unless the conditons were optimum for the lens you are likely to run into softness/focus rejections when the photos are judged by today's standards (it doesn't stop the original work selling, either, and I don't get complaints about it from buyers).
So while people CAN get shots taken with almost anything accepted, it doesn't mean that the acceptance ratios will be the same regardless of camera or that better gear won't improve your acceptance ratio.
|
|
blinztree
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 1875
Location: Beats me... I'm Lost!
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 2:15 am
| |
| PaulCowan wrote: | | blinztree wrote: | | I believed the acceptance ratio is quite equal but those taken with FF cameras will find buyers more frequently |
Is that a statement of fact or a declaration of faith? |
Nil, Paul, neither. I am aware by one of your previous threads that you do downsize some of your images to 8-12MP. But by logic, I would think that if a buyer has found ports populated with higher resolution images that fits their needs, their preferences shifts from lower resolution ports to higher resolution ports unless they cannot find what they want in them.
But unless there are technical facts to look that SS is willing to share, we are all actually reading tea leaves in a teacup. Each one to his/ her own.
|
|
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39145
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 6:31 pm
| |
I think size,noise,artifacts,composition,Make or age of camera makes any difference at all.it's the impact of the Image. Period.And, Im pretty certain that over 80% of the use of our work is for web use at 800 longest side.or smaller.But I also think At least 6 MP should be the new submitter Minimum.
|
|
jeffbanke
Joined: 18 Dec 2005
Posts: 17461
Location: www.xlr8photo.com, The real California
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2012 7:11 pm
| |
| rinder99 wrote: | | I think size,noise,artifacts,composition,Make or age of camera makes any difference at all.it's the impact of the Image. Period.And, Im pretty certain that over 80% of the use of our work is for web use at 800 longest side.or smaller.But I also think At least 6 MP should be the new submitter Minimum. |
I agree, a large part of my port has been and is taken with 6MP cameras, just takes more effort. Like Paul said the more pixels you have the crappier photographer you can be :-)
|
|
wiml
Joined: 10 May 2011
Posts: 896
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 2:09 am
| |
Minimum requirement in microstock is 5D mark II these days, but that's old school stuff now.
|
|
barnabychambers
Joined: 23 Jan 2009
Posts: 264
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:31 am
| |
| blinztree wrote: | Nil, Paul, neither. I am aware by one of your previous threads that you do downsize some of your images to 8-12MP. But by logic, I would think that if a buyer has found ports populated with higher resolution images that fits their needs, their preferences shifts from lower resolution ports to higher resolution ports unless they cannot find what they want in them.
But unless there are technical facts to look that SS is willing to share, we are all actually reading tea leaves in a teacup. Each one to his/ her own. |
1 or 2 views a week is normal for me. Never bothered to count but thats a couple of views for every few hundred sales. I have read on these forums that buyers often bookmark a photographer to return to their port. Perhaps it does work that way for people with enormous ports but it doesn't seem to work that way for me. I don't believe anybody notices the size of my images one way or another.
My tea leaves tell me that the vast majority of sales on ss are from keyword searches and maybe just a bit of browsing the database.
| Description: |
|
| Filesize: |
16.15 KB |
| Viewed: |
590 Time(s) |
|
|
|
rudyumans
Joined: 19 Aug 2008
Posts: 10596
Location: www.businesshelpforyou.org www.rudyumans.com
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:43 am
| |
| wiml wrote: | | Minimum requirement in microstock is 5D mark II these days, but that's old school stuff now. |
Baloney. Minimum requirement is that the photographer is good. Maybe you are confused with RM.
|
|
wiml
Joined: 10 May 2011
Posts: 896
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:52 am
| |
bull, I'm being sarcastic ;)
ps. why did you refer to RM anyway?
|
|
peteklinger
Joined: 01 Aug 2007
Posts: 1027
Location: Great Place By a Great Lake
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:26 pm
| |
Even though I have others, last six shots accepted here were taken with a G12. So much for fancy L glass and big sensor DSLRs being necessary. (nothing fancy, some food shots, but the point is, they are acceptable)
If the image is good, clean and sharp, it should pass.
50D is a nice camera (back to the OP) there's nothing inherently wrong with the lens.
What are the rejection reasons, you don't say?
|
|
rudyumans
Joined: 19 Aug 2008
Posts: 10596
Location: www.businesshelpforyou.org www.rudyumans.com
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:55 pm
| |
| wiml wrote: | bull, I'm being sarcastic ;)
ps. why did you refer to RM anyway? |
The top ones only take full frame images
|
|
semmickphoto
Joined: 12 Feb 2012
Posts: 6465
Location: Stuck between a shutter and a hard place
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 3:56 pm
| |
| rudyumans wrote: | | wiml wrote: | bull, I'm being sarcastic ;)
ps. why did you refer to RM anyway? |
The top ones only take full frame images |
I downsize all my photos to 4mp. Is that a bad thing? Potentially fewer sales?
|
|
copidosoma
Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 3772
Location: Canada
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:40 pm
| |
| rudyumans wrote: | | wiml wrote: | bull, I'm being sarcastic ;)
ps. why did you refer to RM anyway? |
The top ones only take full frame images |
Really? I do'nt believe that.
They tend to have much higher MP minimums (I think ALA is 10MP) but I haven't seen anything that says FF only. That would be pretty silly.
|
|
copidosoma
Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 3772
Location: Canada
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:43 pm
| |
| jeffbanke wrote: | | rinder99 wrote: | | I think size,noise,artifacts,composition,Make or age of camera makes any difference at all.it's the impact of the Image. Period.And, Im pretty certain that over 80% of the use of our work is for web use at 800 longest side.or smaller.But I also think At least 6 MP should be the new submitter Minimum. |
I agree, a large part of my port has been and is taken with 6MP cameras, just takes more effort. Like Paul said the more pixels you have the crappier photographer you can be :-) |
I found the opposite. With a 6mp camera I was getting tack sharp shots all the time. Now with 18MP I have to be seriously careful to get things sharp at full resolution.
I sort of miss my 6mp days. Life was so much simpler.
|
|
rudyumans
Joined: 19 Aug 2008
Posts: 10596
Location: www.businesshelpforyou.org www.rudyumans.com
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 6:01 pm
| |
| copidosoma wrote: | | rudyumans wrote: | | wiml wrote: | bull, I'm being sarcastic ;)
ps. why did you refer to RM anyway? |
The top ones only take full frame images |
Really? I do'nt believe that.
They tend to have much higher MP minimums (I think ALA is 10MP) but I haven't seen anything that says FF only. That would be pretty silly. |
I don't consider ALA at the top of RM agencies. The RM branch of the big G and Bill Gate's place only take FF the last time I checked for instance
|
|
rinder99
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 39145
Location: Contact www.rinderart.com/Books and Workshops www.rindersmithphotography.com Youtube/rinder
|
|
Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2012 7:37 pm
| |
| semmickphoto wrote: | | rudyumans wrote: | | wiml wrote: | bull, I'm being sarcastic ;)
ps. why did you refer to RM anyway? |
The top ones only take full frame images |
I downsize all my photos to 4mp. Is that a bad thing? Potentially fewer sales? |
Well, If you intend to submit going forward and to other sites Thats a bad idea unless you wanna do the work again. One very good site is at 6MP now for submission and I think the others will soon follow.SS is great but not the only game in town. Your shooting yourself in the foot 10MP is as far down as I go.Trying to hide mistakes by downsizing is not a good choice going forward.
|
|
| |
|
Log in
