Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: STOCK IMAGING, AGAIN!!  (Read 2255 times)
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« on: September 02, 2005, 04:21:22 PM »
ReplyReply

In general, no. The minimum uninterpolated file size most decent agencies will accept is the 11MP of the 1Ds. THe "20 cents per download" stock sites will take almost anything, but getting decent money from them is wishful thinking.
Logged

EAD
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 70


« Reply #1 on: September 03, 2005, 08:40:31 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the replies!!

Reason is that I have been planning (and saving for) a long Asian trip with my camera. Photography will be obviously one of the main reasons of the trip, but not the only one(travelling and the mere "seeing" is a pleasure in itself...).I am not in any way a full time pro photographer, only a part of my income comes from photography and I am pretty happy with my 20D, and though still considering the purchase of a 5D (the 1 bodies are simply too much for light travelling-stealth shooting) It would hurt to see some of the savings fly in  the way of a new body(you can travell quite a bit with 3grand)...I would like to carry one body, 3-4 lenses(and that is beggining to be too much)and a tripod.Simple as that. I would like to see if I´m able of selling some (or many if I´m lucky  )images to help pay for the trip or maybe fund another future trip...combining photography and travelling (two of the most pleassurable activities in this life) and making some money, maybe even a living out of it (yeah, yeah, call me a dreamer) seems like a  big challenge for me at the moment, but something that I wouldnt want to give up without even trying...The 20D seem like the perfct compromise to me (size/weight, APS long reach advantage,pop up flash for a little of fill flash in certain situations and file sizes(storage is a pain in the rear when travelling, never enough space, whatever devices you carry...), plus I know my camera very well and am managing to get fairly good results out of it.I would prefer to concentrate on the technicall quality of my shots and compensate that way for the lack or MP. I´m just worried that I might come back with some good images that won´t be marketeable because coming from such a machine...

Once again thanks for your replies and any other opinion would be most apreciated..

Erik.
Logged
EAD
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 70


« Reply #2 on: September 02, 2005, 12:21:48 PM »
ReplyReply

Right, I know this has been asked before (or sort of), but the answers sometimes seem to get lost in discussions that dont really adress the question...

Can a 8 megapixel machine (20d or 1DMKII) meet the requirements for serious stock agencies.Please dont answer me that what I need is a 1DSMKII. I dont contemplate the possibility of purchasing one.Please try to hold yourself from mentioning the 5D(which is dangerously on the back of my mind). The question, simply put, is :can stock agencies be contented with a 8MP MACHINE.

The requirements of majority of the agencies I have seen mention file sizes of 45-50Mb.(8 bit. Tiffs).But, and this is where I get confused, they do mention very clearly interpolation as a valid method for reaching  this file size.But, how much interpolation? Hence the question , will a 8MP camera....

Please if you have first hand information that can help me out on this one I would appreciate it without letting this thread get lost again in  considerations that have nothing to do with the original question (If you have been around for a while you might know what I mean...)  

Thanks in advance, and happy shooting.

Erik
Logged
Quentin
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1119



WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 03, 2005, 07:18:19 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, 8mp is fine if your original image is of the highest quality.  Alamy will accept (and in fact insists upon) 48mp minimum size images, and is content with interpolated files.  Try rezzing up your 8mp images and see what they look like at 100% on screen.  If they look OK at 100% after interpolation, then you should be OK.

The micros that Jonathan refers to have high standards (surprisingly), particularly iStock, but their system is based on uninterpolated files, so the buyer knows what he or she is getting.  Jonathan is wrong to think the micros have low standards. Its the reverse.  Don't think you can send them you second rate work, because they won't accept it.  

Quentin

Its a funny thing about the micros.  iStock has what I think is the most sophisitcated stock site I have ever seen.  Pity the money is not better  ::
Logged

Quentin Bargate, ARPS, Author, photographer entrepreneur and senior partner of Bargate Murray, Law Firm of the Year 2013
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad