Attention: These forums are no longer active.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

Photo:Overfiltered Skeleton

Displaying 1 to 5 of 5 matches.
DarrenMower
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Mon Jul 6, 2009 8:04PM
Hello all. I would like your opinion on the "filtering" of this creepy skeleton image. What is overfiltered? I decided to change the eyes as I did on all the rest of my skeleton and grim reaper pics. I went with green this time, I think it works. I may be new in images but I think I know what is acceptable and what is not. I have a 97% acceptance ratio right now.


I just checked the link and the image does not look the same in the VOX link as it does in photoshop. The background sky is not the same and the eyes don't look near as well done, actually I think they look poorly done in the VOX linked picture. I downloaded the VOX linked pic and viewed it in photoshop and it looks as I intended. Please view in both photoshop and on VOX.


Can someone tell me why it looks horrible in VOX? Color space issues maybe? It is in AdobeRGB.


Thanks.


Link.

(Edited on 2009-07-06 20:13:38 by DarrenMower)
jeridu
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Mon Jul 6, 2009 11:09PM

Hello,


To make sure, you can convert to sRGB before sending to Vox and it should appear in all browsers closer to what you intended. My acceptance rate, I don't know, but it sure is much lower than yours, so you can ignore this if it does not make sense.


I saw a moderate amount of sharpening artifacts and jaggies. The edge of the blown highlights on right side of face (cheek) is much too rough (it looks much better on left side of face and looks best on the chin). Both eyes are not well done but he right eye looks better. Is the face sharp if you undo the sharpening? I'm not sure but looks like the sleeve of the shirt is sharper than the face.


Note: I looked in MS Internet Explorer. Not ready yet to look in Photoshop, but I think the things that I mentioned are not different in both. There might be other issues but I'm sure you know much better than myself as to what is acceptable or not.


Cheers,
DarrenMower
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Jul 7, 2009 6:53PM

Thanks for looking Jeridu.


I didn't sharpen the file. I know it does not look right on VOX and I don't think that is what the inspector saw.  I think they see what I see when I look at the file in Photoshop. The file looks very different when viewed in Photoshop. This is not my first time "fixing" eyes like this.  I did several files for my wife and one was placed in the VETTA collection recently.  What concerns me is that the saved jpeg does not look the same in a browser as in photoshop, the EXACT same file.   I'm not talking just about color vibrance, etc.


Can someone tell me why it looks horrible in VOX? Color space issues maybe? It is in AdobeRGB.


Anyone?
igermz
Member is a Bronze contributor and has 250 - 2,499 Photo downloadsExclusive
Posted Tue Jul 7, 2009 11:26PM
Scout.
jeridu
Member is a Silver contributor and has 2,500 - 9,999 Photo downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 125 Audio downloadsMember is a contributor and has less than 250 Illustration downloadsExclusiveExclusive iStockphoto Audio Artist
Posted Wed Jul 8, 2009 1:44AM
/
/Hi there,


Color space difference might be the problem and I once had problems with MSIE a few years back, but that problem disappeared for some time now and so I understand that MSIE and Windows XP Pro SP3 (and later versions of Windows) now understands the embedded color space in jpeg files already. And I think I have read about that in the Microsoft website too, but I'm not very sure.


I once hated the slide show in Windows Explorer but now I think it's good again. As already said, from your finished uncompressed format, you can put on the watermark then convert to sRGB, then save to JPEG (at same quality setting) before sending to Vox.


Now I look at the file in Photoshop (color-managed, working color-space adobe RGB) and I think it is not different at all with MSIE. I switch back and forth many times.


I saw what I once saw. There are sharpening artifacts. There has been sharpening sometime in this file. I don't know who sharpened it or when. Both eyes are not well done. Lower edge of right eye not good. Nasal (medial) edge of left eye not good. They look like polygons rather than circles. There are signs of sharpening in the eye. All the rough edges that I described are there (I think it might be the result of too much curve editing/plus sharpening).


There are signs of camera shake/subject movement. Some chromatic aberrations. Some posterization. And I think the best point of sharpness is not on the face. Pixel quality don't look good in lower part of photo (might be mixed causes). All these, I saw yesterday in MS Internet Explorer.


The blownout areas read from 251-251-251 to 255-255-255 (I see this in Photoshop only).


You talked about "color vibrance", I admit I don't know what it is.


Cheers,


Edited to add: I am surprised that you see the difference in VOX and in Photoshop, but did not see the strange effect on the eyes.

Edited to add: Yesterday, I was doing some audio and had four big applications running. I was bored and opened MSIE and saw your thread down in the list with zero answer. So I clicked on it.

(Edited on 2009-07-08 02:10:37 by jeridu)
This thread has been locked.
Displaying 1 to 5 of 5 matches.
Not a member?Join