Question for those who sell images.

[mh68]

I`m nowhere near the stage to even think about selling any of mine just yet, but something I`ve been wondering about for a while is how those of you who sell images, judge whether theyre sufficient quality?
The visual attractiveness of an image aside, do you judge on the full size image, what it looks like when downsized or another way?
Thought I would ask, as it may prove to be helpful to others who are thinking of selling shots...

Mark H

[eeyore]

it depends largely on what you are selling them for but in general terms i'd judge on the full sized image. they need to be technically perfect, clean of dust etc , largely not interpolated and without too much post processing

another point is to bear in mind that the most attractive image isnt always the best seller - for example if you are selling to magazines then you are often better off with more dead space in an image than would otherwise be desirable as this gives space for editors to drop in text.

One thing i'd definitely advice would be to join the Bureau of freelance photographers - when you join you get their handbook which covers this stuff in more detail and lists every publication which is know to buy images , plus lots of contacts for stock agencies etc etc - membership isnt cheap but its definitely worthwhile for anyone who is serious about sales.

[mh68]

Cheers Pete, some good info there. There was discussion of images with plenty of space in them for publication purposes on another thread on here the other day.
How would you judge the likes of noise and sharpness on a full res shot? Obviously noise disappears to some extent when you downsize an image, and even slightly blurry shots can look sharp at smaller sizes but what about full size?

Mark H

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by mh68

How would you judge the likes of noise and sharpness on a full res shot? Obviously noise disappears to some extent when you downsize an image, and even slightly blurry shots can look sharp at smaller sizes but what about full size?

Mark H

sharpness wise i generally judge by looking at the image at 100% in photoshop - if the important features arent sharp it aint good enough - e.g with a mammal shot it is generally critical that the eyes and face are sharp (though there are always exceptions) - while its fine to up sharpness at the raw conversion stage i would stay away from unsharp mask etc in post process as a lot of clients dont like it

noise - again i look at the image at 100% paying particular attention to fur detail , edges for haloing , and areas of darkness - some noise can be zapped using noise ninja, neat image or whatever but too much of this will break down detail so its best not to over do it - how much noise is acceptable varies with the client - newspapers generally arent too bothered as their print process is quite ropey and disguises a lot of noise (also hard news or sport pages are more concerned with impact and scarecity than IQ) , where as glossy print media and post cards, calendar etc makers are very fussy.

when you do start selling expect a lot of rejections - particularly from soft news, features , and post card images etc , I reckon i get about 25 rejections to every sale and the ratio was higher when i started - thats is on direct approach - working through agencies you get more salesbecause they vett the images first - however you make less per sale as the aghency takes a cut.

another tip for print media is to think about supplying words as well as pics because if you can supply article and illustrations it makes a lot less work for the editors and production team which is always a good way to get in their good books

[mh68]

More good info, thanks Pete. I always have difficulty judging how sharp a shot is at full size though. Since moving from the fz50 bridge cam to the Fuji DSLR , all the Fuji shots look sharp in comparison ...much much less noise too.Although as I said, it`ll be a while before I even contemplate selling anything, I`d like to try and at least get the image quality side up to scratch - the overall visual aspects of a shot are another thing,and something I need to work on.
I suppose what I should have asked was for someone to post example 100% crops of what they would consider sharp enough for a sale, and an example of what they would consider an acceptable noise level....if anyone would be prepared to post some examples it would be extremely useful, not just to me but anyone else considering selling shots.

Mark H

[zan]

I would get onto as many photography sites as you can that offer a critique-Gallery and see what kind of standard is there already. You should also get advice on sharpness\colour etc. on your own pictures (although maybe not at full size).

It also depends who you'll be selling to. If you sell prints through your own website\craft fairs\local shops it's a good idea to get prints of every photo in every size that you are selling and judge based on that.

Zan

[mh68]

Thats what I was getting at Zan, everyone posts downsized images, where even a shot thats blurred at full res can look acceptable at say, 800x600. Most of the full size images or crops I`ve seen posted anywhere have been commented on from the respondent`s own taste, regarding noise or whatever, not from a commercial perspective. I can`t recall ever seeing examples of the type of standard commercial shots should attain, which is what got me wondering and prompted me to post.

Mark H

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by zan

It also depends who you'll be selling to. If you sell prints through your own website\craft fairs\local shops it's a good idea to get prints of every photo in every size that you are selling and judge based on that.

Zan

I wouldnt necessarily go that route as it can be expensive - and also if you are selling a lot of prints its better to take orders than to have lots of prints done on spec

if the image is sharp on the screen it ought to be sharp on the page - assuming you have a decent printer or printing service.

another point - if you are serious about comerce you ought to get a spyder to colour balance your monitor (and get a profile to match if you are doing your own printing) Clients will mostly have proffesionally coulour balanced monitors and its a good idea if the shot that looks good on yours also looks good on theirs (if yours isnt balanced that shot that looks nicely saturated on your screen could be vastly over or under saturated on the clients which wont get you many sales)

decent spyders start at arround £60 quid - but can run to several hundred depending on what you want. THere are loads of makes but gretag macbeth , and pantone are two good ones to start you off

[eeyore]

Originally Posted by mh68

Thats what I was getting at Zan, everyone posts downsized images, where even a shot thats blurred at full res can look acceptable at say, 800x600. Most of the full size images or crops I`ve seen posted anywhere have been commented on from the respondent`s own taste, regarding noise or whatever, not from a commercial perspective. I can`t recall ever seeing examples of the type of standard commercial shots should attain, which is what got me wondering and prompted me to post.

Mark H

If I get a moment i'll do some 100% crops out of ones ive sold - though its hard to say how the wab resize process will effect the general sharpness etc

Failingf that I can email you a couple of them - or if you email me a few of yours i'd be happy to give you an honest second opinion.

[mh68]

Just emailing me one example crop would be great Pete, cheers

Re calibration, thats something I need to sort out, even for printing shots for my own use....sometimes printed results are different from what the computer shows which leads me to think my monitor and printer arent matched closely enough.

Mark H