Alphasierra From Australia, joined Aug 2001, 34 posts, RR: 0 Posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1248 times:
At the moment I can only submit images of photos after being scanned on a HP 430 flatbed scanner. Anybody out there have a 'base' settings guide to achieve conformance for a.net requirements. (dpi, file size etc)
Bruce From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5035 posts, RR: 17 Reply 1, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1203 times:
I use a similar scanner and have 4 x 6 pics. what I do is set the dpi (resolution) high enough to where the scanned size at 100% will be at least 1024x768, then I can crop it in photoshop. The dpi setting usually comes out to be around 150dpi or 200dpi. The file format produced by the scanner is a tif and in your photo program you re-save it as a jpeg with low compression. That gets the file size smaller.
I wonder, am I doing it the best way to achieve best results?
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
Screener2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1161 times:
Not at all.
One thing that does bother us is when an inexperienced photographer/scanner uploads 20 or 30 (or more) pictures which are all of unacceptable quality. As we screeners are all contributing photographers with some experience, we know that the person spent a lot of time for nothing, and we feel kinda bad rejecting them all. That is why we try to tell the new contributors to only upload a few at a time, so that you can come to understand the standards and how to manipulate the files before uploading a huge batch.
New contributors are of course always welcome, of course, but when somebody spends a whole day or two uploading pics to get them all rejections, they get frustrated, and some of them leave (after sending us nasty e-mails). We don't want that. We would like them to understand that the standards are quite high, and that they need to do some trial-and-error first, which should prevent a lot of the frustration, and hopefully develop into a new "regular" on the site.
Alphasierra From Australia, joined Aug 2001, 34 posts, RR: 0 Reply 11, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1111 times:
I have tried various settings when scanning the better photos I have taken. I am currently 'scanning to output size 1024x??? (the software calculates the corresponding height) to conform with A.net requirements.
However when I view posted images, I find that images are outside the A.net spec. Are the images resized by A.net prior to posting?
Also, I feel I am a little limited because after I manipulate the image (colour, brightness, sharpness etc), the resulting image looks great on my laptop screen. Will it look as good when the screeners view it. As a stopgap, I hanve a similar posted image open at the same time to compare. Do you think this is worthwhile?
Look forward to your comments.
PS: Not sure if I should start a new thread but here goes:- I also have a Sony DSC-S70 and have shot some images in 640x480 and 1280x960. These are two of the 5 image size settings on the camera. Should I resize both or either image sizes prior to submitting for posting.
PSS: Sunday evening at MEL-Australia was excellent for spotting and shooting on both sides of the terminal.
Screener2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1108 times:
The image scanned into the PC should ALWAYS be significantly larger than the 1024-wide A.net standard. This allows you to rotate and crop the picture to be exactly what you want, before resizing it to 1024 pixels across. I would say that 1500 pixels wide for the initial scan is the minimum, although I usually scan at 3000-4000 wide.
If you do upload a picture larger than 1024, A.net's scripts automatically resize it down, but there will almost certainly be a loss of picture quality. Better to resize it yourself to the proper size.
640x480 is too small for this web site. The minimum is 800 pixels across, for a landscape-format photo. For your digital camera, I would set the image size to 1280 across, and even more if you can manage it, so that you can play with the image before resizing it.
About your laptop. Don't do it. When I am using my laptop, I never screen other people's pictures, because I know that the laptop's definition (even though supposedly at 24-bit color and 1024x768 definition) is not as good as a desktop screen, and a change of viewing angle of just a couple of degrees causes the image to look much different. Nor do I ever try to process my own pictures using a laptop screen.
Alphasierra From Australia, joined Aug 2001, 34 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1102 times:
Best feedback so far. Very much appreciated.
I will try the above and hopefully resubmit some pics.
which brings me to another issue- Do the screeners screen each submission as if posted for the first time.
Eg: the same pic, same photog etc submits a couple of times and is rejected. Goes back and rescans, crops etc. Then resubmits again. Will the screeners treat it as new or will they (especially if they recognise the image) treat it with some bias?
I am not insinuating that the above occurs and I believe the rejection criteria "..inferior in quality.." was quoted with the rejection email.
Screener2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (12 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1102 times:
There are 8 screeners, and the pics are distributed randomly, so you probably will fall on a different screener when you re-upload the photo.
Sometimes we do see a picture that we rejected before, and we always look at it from a fresh point of view. However, if the photo is still not up to par, we might look up the previously rejected submission (they stay in a buffer for a couple of days) so that we can see what improvements were made (if any) and if the rejection reason was clear enough, so that we might make a personal comment.