PHOTO:House.Noise.Lighting

Displaying 1 to 12 of 12 matches.
Mak_photo
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Mon Dec 3, 2012 7:55PM
Hey guys, 


I got the following rejection reason for the following two photograph and I'd appreciate your help understanding it.



1st photograph:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/57670414/_MG_2814-Edit-2.jpg

Rejection Reason



The overuse of a noise reduction application (such as NeatImage, Noise Ninja, Noise Reduction in a RAW converter, etc.) or similar smoothing technique has left your image with a smoothed appearance thus, degrading the image detail. If you require further explanation regarding this rejection, please submit a ticket to Scout (http://www.istockphoto.com/contact_ticket.php)

For more information about iStock Standards, please visit:
http://www.istockphoto.com/training_manuals.php

__________


We found the overall composition of this file's lighting could be improved. Some of the technical aspects that can all limit the usefulness of a file are:

-Flat/dull colors
-Direct on-camera flash and/or flash fall-off (bright subject, dark background)
-Harsh lighting with blown-out highlights that lack details and/or distracting shadows
- Distracting lens flares
-Incorrect white balance


 


So I don't understand the first reason since I didnt use noise reduction software. and for the lighting other than the weird thing going on in the top left of the corner is there something else wrong? And would resizing the photograph help eliminate the rejection reasons? 


2nd photograph


https://dl.dropbox.com/u/57670414/_MG_6190-Edit-Edit.jpg


Rejection reason


This image appears to be over-filtered/over-processed which has affected the image quality. This may include Photoshop filters & effects (over-sharpening, excessive adjustments to levels, curves, contrast, hues, gaussian blurs, saturation, added textures, noise reduction...) or other manipulations. We feel the image would have more value to designers with minimal or no post processing effects so that the designers could add their own post-processing effects. Some images can benefit from minor touch-ups to grab the viewer?s attention and there is no definitive line to what editing makes or breaks a great image but the end result should be a single image that can still be molded into a design. Inspectors judge images based on quality, composition and usability.


I really dont know what I did wrong so any advice is appreciated. 


 


Thanks!


 


 

(Edited on 2012-12-04 06:19:31 by kelvinjay)
sjlocke
Member is a Black Diamond contributor and has more than 200,000 Photo downloadsMember is a Gold contributor and has 5,000 - 12,499 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto IllustratorExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Mon Dec 3, 2012 9:01PM
The first has nothing really in focus. It's all sort of blurry/smeary. And the composition is kind of poor. Show the whole house, show the front door, but make something the focus and compose around it.
pixzzle
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Dec 4, 2012 4:16AM
2nd photograph:
My guess is this photo came out of the camera with the boat dark and underexposed, you have tried to brighten it, but the pixels are low quality and mushy because of the underexposure.
esp_imaging
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Dec 4, 2012 5:38AM
1st phots - it's not technically dreadful, but the composition is poor which is probably enough to trigger the rejection. A tightly framed shot of 3/4 of a house is an odd image.


2nd photo - looks like there is loads of noise reduction on the boat, it looks vary soft and smooth with no texture in the details.
The sky also looks weird - turquoise isn't a natural sunset colour. I think you (or the camera's auto white balance) have removed too much magenta?

(Edited on 2012-12-04 06:52:56 by esp_imaging)
kelvinjay
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Dec 4, 2012 6:16AM
My guess for the first shot is that your long exposure combined with sharpening has given a very similar appearance to what we see when someone over uses noise reduction software i.e. smooth and lacking detail, as is apparent on the brickwork. As noted the composition is a little awkward and the lighting less than ideal.
Mak_photo
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Dec 4, 2012 9:39AM

thanks guys, 


for the first photograph, i took multiple angles and this was the one that I zoomed in a bit. If I resize it, would that "hide" the effect of smoothing? 


 
slobo
Member is a Diamond contributor and has 25,000 - 199,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsMember is a Bronze contributor and has 125 - 1,249 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Tue Dec 4, 2012 10:08AM
Posted By Mak2662:
 If I resize it, would that "hide" the effect of smoothing?  

it would, but I wouldn't bother with that photo. Dark tree in a foreground is a problem and image will likely be rejected for lighting on a second run.
Mak_photo
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Dec 4, 2012 3:14PM
but wont that dark tree space be used as print place for text etc?? at least that was my intention
kelvinjay
Member is a Gold contributor and has 10,000 - 24,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Dec 4, 2012 3:24PM
The tree is not useful copy space and it's a massive distraction to the main subject.
Mak_photo
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Tue Dec 4, 2012 7:25PM
one last question: i use lightroom to edit the raw photos, sometimes i export them for editing in photoshop, when I return the image to lightroom the colors in the photograph sometimes change or look different without me doing any lighting or color adjustment, is that normal?
erniedecker
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Dec 4, 2012 8:20PM
Don't "export" the photo, use the "edit in" feature. Just right click on the image after doing all you can to it in Lightroom. Then when you're done in PS just save it and it should come right back to LR with no color changes.
Mak_photo
Member is a contributor and has less than 250 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Video downloadsExclusive iStockphoto Videographer
Posted Thu Dec 6, 2012 7:48AM
sorry i actually described my process wrong, i do it exactly how erniedecker described above, any feedback?
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 1 to 12 of 12 matches.
Not a member?Join