Posted Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:35PM
Hi I have had a few rejections because of artifacting. I need some assistance in understanding what specifically in this photo is considered artifacting. Although it was also rejected for lighting I really need help with understanding the artifacting issue.
You can view the full size image at
Here is the specific rejection notice
This file contains artifacting when viewed at full size. This technical issue is commonly created by the quality settings in-camera, in post-processing, in RAW settings or scanner settings. Artifacting can also be introduced into an image from the result of other factors such as excessive level adjustments.
A little bit more about compression: The JPEG file format uses a lossy compression method. In order to make the file smaller, information is thrown away, or lost. The quality setting that most image editing programs and digital cameras have when saving JPEGs determines how much information is lost. At a certain point with lower quality settings the removal of information during the compression process can become visible in the form of compression artifacts (places in the image where too much detail has been lost). Too much JPEG compression can become visible either in the form of a general loss of detail, or grainy/patterned areas (especially in flat spaces, such as skies).
Compression artifacting can be introduced by the camera and/or by your image editing software at lower quality settings. Also, re-sizing, re-sampling, and re-saving can all degrade the quality of a JPEG image, so one should be careful about re-saving JPEGs. If for example, a photo was re-saved 4 times (even at a quality of 12 or Best) the image quality will become worse each time as pixel information is thrown out each time the file is saved. With this in mind, it is obviously best to start with the cleanest image possible. You may want to double-check your camera settings to make sure it is saving at the highest quality. If you continue to have issues you may try shooting in RAW/NEF mode, export to TIFF and then save as JPEG at the highest possible quality (level 12) with minimal or no post processing effects. Sometimes even trying a new RAW converter could be beneficial.
Noise (pixels of varying color where there shouldn?t be) is most commonly created by digital cameras, especially in darker shadows or under low-light conditions and exacerbates the compression issues mentioned above. You might want to double-check to make sure that your camera?s ISO/ASA setting is at the lowest number (usually 100). In digital cameras, higher numbers (200 or 400) will always result in more noise (just as with film). If you require further explanation regarding this rejection, please submit a ticket to Scout (http://www.istockphoto.com/contact_ticket.php)
Posted Sat Oct 27, 2012 1:08AM
Your link forces us to sign up to the site to download your image (we need to download it to see the full, original size that you uploaded. No one can tell what the issue is from the small size that's displayed on the site). Please read the sticky thread at the top of this forum called "Read this First". It tells you how/where to upload the original size for people to be able to help you
Posted Sat Oct 27, 2012 4:07AM
As Carole says, please post you image somewhere where we can view it at full size without having to sign up to anything.
Posted Sat Oct 27, 2012 11:21AM
I can see it for some reason, and yes, you have problems. Aside from the graininess, the image is underexposed, poorly lit, and has a weak composition. The depth of field is quite shallow, which some sites will accept, but it doesn't serve your image. More depth of field would make the food look crisper and fresher.
It seems your main problem is that you need to get better lighting. Just because the envrionment presents you this light, does not mean you have to accept it. Photography is about manipulating the light. Photo(light) graph(drawing)
Posted Sun Oct 28, 2012 7:45AM
From the medium resolution image I can view, it is under exposed and the focus point is too far back. Focus should be closer to the front of the image, on an point of interest in the subject. The shallow depth of field is not a problem.
Aside from the under exposure (light quantity is too low), the light quality is not very interesting, the light is quite uniform and not exciting.
The food styling is rather boring too.
I can't comment on artifacting on the medium resolution image I can see.
Posted Wed Nov 21, 2012 10:49PM
Esp_imaging: how would you improve the light quality of this shot? Just curious? I'm learning as well.
Posted Thu Nov 22, 2012 4:05AM
I agree with esp's comments above. The easiest way to find how to light food is to Google "Food Photography" there are loads of tutorials online. Food shots are often backlit.
This is an awkward crop as well, and the bowl is slightly angled.
Really as already said to get any meaningful advice on things like artifacting you need to put the file on Dropbox, or somewhere else we don't have to sign up to. Don't remove the EXIF either. it's useful to see what you are doing.