glennstewart
Posts: 952
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:11 am

1600 Resolution

Fri May 05, 2006 11:27 pm

Hi All,

I have been attacking the queue tonight and can't help but post another thread about another pet peeve of mine.

1600 wide resolution shots

A little hint from me to any of you who upload 1600 wide shots:
They better be perfect...

It's only common sense that the more you blow up an image, the more flaws it will reveal. For example, who in their right mind would blow up a portrait to 1600 wide?

1600 wide shots generally make it very easy for me as a screener to see problems like softness, grain and other quality issues that would otherwise go unnoticed if the shot was uploaded at 1280 or 1024 wide.

Statistics aren't stored about rejection rates per resolution, but from my own experience the rejection rate is higher for 1600 wide shots.

I'll note however that some photographers out there take very high quality shots that work well at 1600 wide. A decent quality shot will be accepted at 1600.

Kindest Regards,

Glenn Stewart
Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
 
viv
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 5:17 pm

RE: 1600 Resolution

Fri May 05, 2006 11:53 pm

I have a few recent 1600 ones in the database, but I generally upload at 1024 or 1200.

1600 is good for shots taken in oblique light that highlights small details.
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
 
linco22
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:16 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 12:00 am

I'm really liking 1200 uploads. For some reason I just think they are nice size, call me strange....

But I do agree that 1600x uploads should be avoided unless the quality still stands

Regards
Colin  Smile
 
LHRsunriser
Posts: 395
Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 1:28 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 12:01 am

Yeh I agree,

Large shots are annoying if they aren't bang ong perfect. 1200x800 is always good not to small not too big :P

Cheers Dom - Capital Aviation Photography
Getting back into it
 
KFLLCFII
Posts: 3174
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 7:08 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 12:08 am

Quoting Glennstewart (Thread starter):
Statistics aren't stored about rejection rates per resolution, but from my own experience the rejection rate is higher for 1600 wide shots.

Thanks for the info. Considering I'm 3 for 3 at 1600, I'm glad to know I managed to beat the apparent odds  Smile
"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
 
glennstewart
Posts: 952
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:11 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 12:13 am

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 4):
I'm 3 for 3 at 1600, I'm glad to know I managed to beat the apparent odds

You must be nailing the shots then  Smile
Keep up the good work.

Quoting LHRsunriser (Reply 3):
1200x800 is always good not to small not too big

It's my recommended resolution for current day DSLR's. It also maintains the 3:2 ratio as well.

Quoting Linco22 (Reply 2):
'm really liking 1200 uploads. For some reason I just think they are nice size, call me strange....

Not strange at all! The other recommended 3:2 res is 1024x683

Glenn
Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
 
GBOAB
Posts: 353
Joined: Mon Mar 22, 2004 12:29 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 1:02 am

Glenn
I think the King of the 1600 wide photo has to be Mike Moores
just some of his recent additions:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike Moores



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike Moores



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike Moores



Ian
Concorde's gone but not forgotten
 
Stealthz
Posts: 5546
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:43 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 6:03 am

And just a point of interest, Mike doesn't use a "current day DSLR"!!
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
 
romeokc10fe
Posts: 183
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 3:45 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 7:33 am

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 7):
And just a point of interest, Mike doesn't use a "current day DSLR"!!

Hey watch it!! I shoot with a D60 also.  wink 
 
Stealthz
Posts: 5546
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:43 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 8:11 am

Quoting RomeoKC10FE (Reply 8):
Quoting StealthZ (Reply 7):
And just a point of interest, Mike doesn't use a "current day DSLR"!!

Hey watch it!! I shoot with a D60 also.

That is great, the point I was trying to make you don't need to upgrade every few months to the latest model just to keep up with A.net.
I am sure you & Mike will continue to get fine results with your D60s for a long time to come as I will with my 10D and sometimes D30

Cheers
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
 
eadster
Posts: 2125
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:31 pm

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 9:32 am

Mike's shots are a fine example of the quality needed to upload at 1600.

Also I'd personally like to thank Glenn for his help offered to everyone of late. It's been a great help and hopefully we have all gained something from it. Just another step to hopefully save the screening team's time.

Martin
 
glennstewart
Posts: 952
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:11 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 9:29 pm

Quoting RomeoKC10FE (Reply 8):
Hey watch it!! I shoot with a D60 also.

The D60 paved the way for recent DSLR's by setting a very high benchmark. I would certainly consider it modern enough to compete against most of the DSLR's we use.

This is where Professional lenses probably come in. I'd say you can get more from a professional lens and a D60 than you can from a poor quality lens and a 30D. Haven't got benchmarks to prove my theory, but the DSLR's certainly show up faults in lenses.

Glenn

[Edited 2006-05-06 14:30:09]
Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
 
LHRSIMON
Posts: 1314
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 5:59 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sat May 06, 2006 9:42 pm

For me its 1200 for photo's i think are spot on. Or down to 1024 if in my eyes there borderline in any aspect apart from motiv......

Seems to work for me.  Smile
Canon 1D Mk III,Canon 20D+17-40 L f4.0,70-200 L IS USM f2.8,400 L USM f5.6,135 mm L f2.0, 50 mm f1.8,1.4 x II extender
 
christeljs
Posts: 528
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:08 pm

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sun May 07, 2006 1:03 am

Quoting Linco22 (Reply 2):
For some reason I just think they are nice size, call me strange....

Now, why on earth would we call you strange, Colin?  bouncy 
Christel A Photography
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sun May 07, 2006 1:47 am

Very good thread. I am been wondering when I can try my hand at 1600. I may try 1200 first and see how it goes. Thanks for all the info guys!
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
andrewuber
Posts: 2142
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:45 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sun May 07, 2006 8:44 am

Quoting Glennstewart (Thread starter):
They better be perfect...

No kidding Glenn. Even though I have quite a few 1600 wides in the database, this atrocity was rejected twice today for quality.

http://drew.charliej.net/albums/user...cs/10002/AUBER_SEA_FXHeavy%7E0.jpg

I thought it might have a chance, but even the appeal was rejected without comment or explaination.

We get it. Don't try it.

I'll remain at 1280 wide at airliners.net from this day forward.

Drew

[Edited 2006-05-07 01:49:36]
I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
 
dc10tim
Posts: 1380
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 12:21 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Sun May 07, 2006 10:15 am

Hi Glenn,

Are you telling the right audience? When I first started uploading 1600 wide was a religion because of what I read in the upload guidelines. Is it "us lot" or inexperienced photographers who are causing you problems?

Regards,

Tim.
Obviously missing something....
 
glennstewart
Posts: 952
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:11 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Thu May 11, 2006 4:57 pm

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 16):
Is it "us lot" or inexperienced photographers who are causing you problems?

Hi Tim,

It's hard to gauge what percentage of the site are pro's from way back, and what percentage are newbies cutting their teeth with first purchased DSLR's.

All I can say is that most of the 1600 shots I come across just don't cut the mustard. There are many photographers though which have perfected 1600 uploads - and typically they've been uploading to this site for years and using high end lenses and cameras.

If can you master 1600, and your rejection rate is low - then by all means, continue uploading at this res. But this message is more of a suggestion to the majority who would have more success at 1200  Smile

Glenn
Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
 
linco22
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:16 am

RE: 1600 Resolution

Thu May 11, 2006 5:00 pm

Quoting Christeljs (Reply 13):
Now, why on earth would we call you strange, Colin?

There are many reasons, but we wont go there  Wink

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests