Rejected : Any Nite shots like this moonrise

Forum|Forum|9 years ago
April 5, 2017
3 replies
475 views

I guess freezing yourself to death in 20F and high winds to capture a snowstorm over Bryce Canyon under full moon isn't much of an image. sure it was shot at high ISO - its the only way to keep the camera stable. since when is some grain an over riding concern in a nite shot ? Or this shot reject because it was "underexposed" - its freaking nite ! Shot in Zion, full moon.

Contributors

This topic has been closed for replies.

Correct answer MatHayward

Thanks for writing. I can appreciate the effort you put into the capturing the images. That being said, the technical requirements are the same for all content regardless of the scene itself. When viewing at full size, these files appear to have too much noise for us to accept for commercial licensing. They will probably make great prints for your wall and it sounds like you've got some distinct memories from capturing them.

I wish you the best of luck with your future uploads!

Mat Hayward

MatHaywardCorrect answer

Legend

Thanks for writing. I can appreciate the effort you put into the capturing the images. That being said, the technical requirements are the same for all content regardless of the scene itself. When viewing at full size, these files appear to have too much noise for us to accept for commercial licensing. They will probably make great prints for your wall and it sounds like you've got some distinct memories from capturing them.

I wish you the best of luck with your future uploads!

Mat Hayward

S

Steven OakleyAuthor

Participating Frequently

Hi Mat

thanks for the personal response. there are many iconic images that are technically poor, but famous anyway because of the content, so nobody cares. Likewise the particular image if printed at say 3-4” wide for a brochure, the dot pattern in the printing would completely obscure the noise. Likewise many scaling reductions for web use would again reduce the noise to not being visible.

there are tradeoffs to be made in creating images. Sure a low ISO several minute exposure would of made for a less noisy image, but then the long exposure would of blurred things. So you have to compromise sometimes in shooting. Its not like Nat Geo thats infamously picky hasn’t published in print similar images…

My point is, let the market decide. If the image is compelling, noise is hardly an issue. In fact part of the auto response is kind of funny “ a client can add fx … “ but a client can also decide to do some noise reduction too, or all sorts of things to it…. or perhaps I should get a NR filter, process the image and send it back again noise reduced.

I also think you should appreciate I’ve been shooting ( cinematographer, network TV, national spots, high end corp, and yes stills sometimes ) for a living for 30 years, so I some what resent being panned off as “it’ll make a great print on my wall”. It would make a great print on anyone’s wall… or in their publication… or on their website.

S

MatHayward

Legend

S, you make strong points and I understand. Of course the process of reviewing images can be subjective. Unfortunately, we aren't able to accept these images but we do appreciate your contribution.

Best,

Mat

S

Steven OakleyAuthor

Participating Frequently

oh and the 1st image I missed...