Dazed767
Topic Author
Posts: 4967
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:55 am

Size - Give Me A Break!

Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:08 pm

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...?filename=20071213_N529USjcmco.jpg

Ok so my image was 1024x681 and apparently the minimum is x683. Come on now, can we nit pick just a little bit more here??
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:15 pm

Hi Justin

It's a nice image, just reupload at the minimum size. Make sure you set the crop tool to 3:2 in PS and you should always end up with images that have the correct ratio.

Cheers
Tim
Alderman Exit
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9042
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:28 pm



Quoting Dazed767 (Thread starter):
Ok so my image was 1024x681 and apparently the minimum is x683.

Actually your image was 1024x668, the copyright bar adds 13 pixels.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 1542
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Thu Dec 13, 2007 11:29 pm

That is actually really annoying because if you do a straight resize on the image from some nikon cameras (2000x3008) it comes out as 1024x681 they should let that through in my opinion but never mind. Its a really nice shot btw.

Fred
Image
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:19 pm



Quoting Dazed767 (Thread starter):
Ok so my image was 1024x681 and apparently the minimum is x683



Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 2):
Actually your image was 1024x668

Well, a friend of mine, Eggert Norddahl, uploads in 1024x667, last time I checked, and he told me that he did that.

I noticed a long time ago that Jerrold Wu (Je89 W.) uploaded in 1024x693 (1024x681). His newest photo is like that, and all his nice pics I've checked in the past two years have been like that.

Note; I'm not trying to accusing anyone, I just noticed this. Yes, Jerrold's last photo was uploaded in late August, and Eggert's photo in the end of September, so I can believe the screeners got more strict since then.

Still, I do not know, and if I did, I wouldn't post this. I have uploaded pics in almost a 2:1 ratio here, so I'm not saying I'm any better with size than any others.  Silly

D
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 12:58 pm



Quoting Aero145 (Reply 4):
1024x693 (1024x681).

What's wrong with that? x683 is the minimum, so x693 is perfectly valid...!?
Jet Visuals
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:00 pm

Just to clarify, anything in between 3:2 and 4:3 is perfectly fine with a minimum of 1000 pixel width

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13369
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 1:57 pm



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 6):
Just to clarify, anything in between 3:2 and 4:3 is perfectly fine with a minimum of 1000 pixel width

Of course, sometimes it makes perfect artistic sense to crop a photo at a different ratio to the one it was shot at.

Shot at 3:2, cropped to 4:3

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steve Brimley

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:36 pm



Quoting INNflight (Reply 5):
What's wrong with that? x683 is the minimum, so x693 is perfectly valid...!?

683 is the minimum, so 681 is under the minimum. The "693" part was *with* the banner.  Smile
 
Stealthz
Posts: 5546
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:43 am

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 2:59 pm



Quoting Flipdewaf (Reply 3):
1024x681 they should let that through in my opinion but never mind.

And I believe they do but I could be wrong..
The image in question was not 681, it was 668.
Only 13px but the line has to be drawn somewhere!
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
 
ZakHH
Posts: 1570
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:32 pm

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:04 pm

I think the given limits make perfect sense. So why accept if they are missed by 15 pixels?
If missing by 15 pixels would be acceptable, then why would missing by 18 not be? Or 20? Or 25?

I guess it should be fairly easy to re-crop to 3:2. No need to bitch about nitpicking, imho.
Tired of a.net? Join a friendly aviation community!
 
User avatar
dvincent
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 9:53 am

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 3:35 pm



Quoting Flipdewaf (Reply 3):
That is actually really annoying because if you do a straight resize on the image from some nikon cameras (2000x3008) it comes out as 1024x681 they should let that through in my opinion but never mind. Its a really nice shot btw.

All of my 1024 wide shots are 1024x681 (without copyright bar, 693 with) and not a single one has been rejected for size. Canon sensors are slightly taller than Sony sensors (which the vast majority of other DSLRs use, including Nikon, Minolta, Pentax, and Sony themselves).

Fifteen pixels is about a quarter of an inch on most displays. Seems like a minor quibble to me, but I suppose the line is drawn somewhere...
From the Mind of Minolta
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13369
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:06 pm

Quoting Dvincent (Reply 11):
All of my 1024 wide shots are 1024x681 (without copyright bar, 693 with) and not a single one has been rejected for size. Canon sensors are slightly taller than Sony sensors (which the vast majority of other DSLRs use, including Nikon, Minolta, Pentax, and Sony themselves).

Regardless of the size of the sensor image, if you crop in 3:2 ratio and resize (with constraints) to 1024 wide, your image will be exactly 683 pixels high. The only way this won't happen is if you're resizing without doing any cropping, in which case, the sensor's ratio will be retained (which may not be exactly 3:2).

1024 / 3 * 2 = 682.666 (which PS rounds up to 683 since you can't have less than a whole pixel!)

[Edited 2007-12-14 08:10:46]
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1645
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:26 pm

The line has to be drawn somewhere and I cannot imagine any screener rejecting for a pixel or two out. As pointed out, take the copyright bar off and yours is well under size. We are far more lenient with oldies as mistakes in taking cannot usually be rectified
A pet peeve of mine is people never giving any thought to the composition of the image and the size that best suits the situation. Simply setting the crop tool to a given ratio and never considering any more is the way a lot of people do this. I am loathe to provide examples (they are very easy to find though) but the type of inappropriate size I am thinking of is a straight side-on of an airliner, say an A340 that is long and thin, yet the image is uploaded at 1024 x 768 when it would better fit at 1024 x 683.
My way is to use a freehand crop tool and to crop to suit the image - to compose it. When I re-size I simply make sure that it is within the permitted range.
I am not saying that my way is necessarily the right way, merely saying that the size and composition should be considered and my way is simply one way of doing that.

Mick Bajcar
 
User avatar
dvincent
Posts: 1486
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 9:53 am

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:59 pm



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 12):
Regardless of the size of the sensor image, if you crop in 3:2 ratio and resize (with constraints) to 1024 wide, your image will be exactly 683 pixels high. The only way this won't happen is if you're resizing without doing any cropping, in which case, the sensor's ratio will be retained (which may not be exactly 3:2).

I use the crop tool in Adobe Lightroom set at the original aspect ratio of the image.

The point is that it's so close as to be negligible because the sensor is actually slightly wider than "true" 3:2. If I resized to 683 tall, the image would be 1027 pixels wide. You get about three "free" pixels at the same height. The point is that size differences that small are nearly negligible.
From the Mind of Minolta
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13369
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 5:16 pm



Quoting Dvincent (Reply 14):
I use the crop tool in Adobe Lightroom set at the original aspect ratio of the image.

OK, that makes sense and explains the "odd" size.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
D L X
Posts: 11655
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 3:30 am

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 5:38 pm

To the screeners and software folks: If I understand correctly, the screener page alerts the screener if the uploaded shot is not within the size guidelines. Could that be ported to our upload confirmation page? I think that could have prevented this minor tiff. (Get it? TIFF? hah.  Wink)
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13369
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Fri Dec 14, 2007 8:12 pm



Quoting D L X (Reply 16):
Get it? TIFF? hah.

Don't give up your day job!  smile 
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
Dazed767
Topic Author
Posts: 4967
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:55 am

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Sat Dec 15, 2007 4:57 am

Sorry I didn't have a chance to go back and look on my old computer as I was installing everything on my new build, so I didn't get to look and see it was 668, my fault. I'll try and keep an eye out so I don't do it again. I've just had so many rejections for minor stuff lately, it gets aggervating. Plus I haven't had much time to go back and re-edit everything again and upload.

I did get feedback from a screener on one rejection, which is always appreciated.

Thx,
Justin
 
User avatar
Kereru
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 8:19 am

RE: Size - Give Me A Break!

Sat Dec 15, 2007 7:27 am



Quoting Dazed767 (Reply 18):
I did get feedback from a screener on one rejection, which is always appreciated.

I agree with that even though I was once a screener a long time ago. Things change and keep up the good work guys.  bigthumbsup 

Colin  old 
Good things take Time.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: PeterB and 14 guests