Attention: These forums are no longer active. The iStock Contributor forums have moved to the Contributor Community site.

Creative Resources Email - Mobile Photography / Weather Report

First pagePrevious pageof 9
Displaying 161 to 173 of 173 matches.
MikkoSuhonenCLOSED
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:25PM
I've uploaded a couple of full resolution files. In good light they look fine. Not sure what type of requirements are for print. Most of the people use normal camera phones, so in general camera phone images are not suitable for print and after Instagram the size is small.
Posted By stockwerk:

Posted By rogermexico:



Posted By SakariM33:

Not suitable for other uses? What do you mean by: Mobile devices can capture stock-quality images suitable for web usage.


 




That's strictly a comment about pixel size. You aren't able to generate those really huge resolution files. So these images are more likely to serve for web content than double page glossy magazine spreads.


The Nokia Lumia 808 has a 41 mp sensor. So you are able to generate those really huge resolution files using a smartphone.
DaveAlan
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sat Oct 20, 2012 11:51AM
On most of my mobilestock images I include the type of phone that was used to create the image. Most of my recent mobilestock uploads have had the phone type removed from the description. Should I add the phone type back in the description or is this now a no no?
Xerith
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Sat Oct 20, 2012 7:37PM

Please just make an FAQ to address all the questions in this thread so that everyone can refer to. Even the replies in this thread are sometimes contradicting. I feel that major changes like this should be formalized with more details. Thanks.
Xerith
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloads
Posted Sat Oct 20, 2012 7:54PM

I also wonder whether you could use one keyword for the "tracking purpose" you mentioned and another keyword to differentiate the difference in inspection criteria (e.g. allowing of more filtering and borders). These two do not have to be the same keyword. This way, you can still track whether your brief is efffective and at the same time, make it clear which are the lower quality photos so that clients can differentiate (and also be charged differently). This will also allow photos which are not taken from phone (device) but with similar "qualities" to be judged according to the different criteria.


e.g.


Keyword "MobileStock" to indicate allowance for more filtering, borders etc (REGARDLESS OF DEVICE USED... can be DSLR or Point and Shoot and also regardless of WHEN the photo was taken)

Keyword "MobileBrief2012" (e.g. only) just for your tracking purposes (for photos taken AFTER your brief issused)
zmeel
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Mon Oct 22, 2012 4:58AM
Did anyone else notice a change in acceptance of mobilestock images? I have around 20 mobilestock images that were easily accepted even with artifacts (due to hipstamatic or other editing apps). And now I have 3 consecutive mobilestock images rejected for artifacting (indeed there is some but hey it is shot on a mobile phone!) and I'm suddenly not allowed to use the word iPhone 4S in the image description. Bad luck or are the rules for mobilestock tightening?
pixelfit
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Mon Oct 22, 2012 5:12AM
Maybe, I haven't uploaded any mobilestock images, but friend contributor said, that all his uploads were rejected for artifacts or other similar reasons.
spooh
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Oct 23, 2012 1:36AM

Should we downsample images to nearly match normal inspection standards, when if that means losing some details?
zmeel
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:00AM
Posted By spooh:

Should we downsample images to nearly match normal inspection standards, when if that means losing some details?

That is what I did. I canceled all my mobilestock uploads and downsized to ~1600 pixels.
donald_gruener
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveForum Moderator
Posted Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:56AM
Feel free to bring some specific rejections to the Critique Request forum and we can take a look at why those shots might not be making the cut. There is quite a bit of tolerance for the image quality limitations of mobile devices. That said, it still needs to be a good enough photo to offset those quality losses. We've seen a lot of what are, frankly, really mediocre images that we wouldn't even accept if they were perfect quality from a DSLR. Just because something is shot on a mobile phone doesn't mean that lighting, aesthetic, & subject choice expectations go out the door.

Rather than making guesses about what went wrong, post some samples in Critique Request so you can refine your MobileStock product and find more success.
zmeel
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Thu Oct 25, 2012 12:04AM
^
I do not dispute there is no artifacting in the rejected images. There is. I have molbilestock images accepted with more artifacting than the rejected ones. Then, the acceptances stopped and I got 5 rejections in a row and was wondering if mobilestock acceptance policy had changed. Now, I downsize to medium size and hope images will get accepted again. If not I will visit the Critique forum as you suggested.

Just got 4 mobilestock (resized to medium) accepted. Happy again

(Edited on 2012-10-25 09:01:42 by zmeel)
swilmor
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloads
Posted Thu Oct 25, 2012 4:18AM

I've been putting the type of mobile used in the description and keywords and haven't had it removed yet. I've also had some mobilestock rejected for artifacting but as we all know it's a fine line especially for borderline images. I'm sure the inspectors are doing their job to the best of their ability.


In other news, I had my first mobilestock download yesterday and got my first mobile image accepted into Vetta. I'm excited about the prospects.
IvanJekic
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Sun Oct 28, 2012 2:48PM
Am I allowed to alter mobile images with regular Photoshop CS edition (like colours, noise-removing, etc.)?
DaveAlan
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Sun Oct 28, 2012 9:53PM
Ivan, yes you can use any software to improve the image taken on your mobile phone. I have used Photoshop on a few of my uploads to emulate the filters in Instagram for instance.
This thread has been locked.
First pagePrevious pageof 9
Displaying 161 to 173 of 173 matches.
Not a member?Join