Problem with objects

New Here ,
Aug 16, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

_MG_0620.JPG

Hi all!! im a new contributor and i want to improve my photos. Mods reject some of my images due to object issues. Can you help me by showing my fauls?  The text says that it could be because of dust on the sensor of my camera but i dont see any artifact. Thank you all!

I shot this image with 400ISO f11.

Adobe Community Professional
Correct answer by Abambo | Adobe Community Professional

In addition to what has been said:

  • The image is lacking contrast. The left side of the histogram is missing entries.

    The right side, however has some nasty peaks due to sensor/lens limitations.


  • The trees are flattened like if there was to much noise reduction. This is also true for the rocks in the background. Given the file size, I do not think however that the artefacts have been introduced with a high JPEG compression. I suppose the original file is a RAW file (if I remember well RAW file names start with an "_MG" by default).
  • The sky is blown out, the transition between the sky and the rocky surface contains some artefacts introduced by the limitations of the lens and the sensor.
  • There are some spears of weed in the image because of the low pov of the camera.
  • The only sharp element in the picture is the rocky overhang. That's not enough for such a picture. And I even suspect that to be over-sharpened.
  • Right to the rock there are some light artefacts like lens reflections/light leaks.

Some recommendations:

  • I suppose you did put the camera on the floor or near the floor. It would have been better to use a light tripod.
  • The focus should have been somewhere in the middle of image instead of the small overhang.
  • If you didn't use a lens-hood, get one. It even protects your lenses from breakage.
  • Use the full range of the histogram. This image (if the camera has been stabilised as I suspect from the exposure of 1/5s) could easily be composed from a bracketed shot. That would have given you a nice sky and a correctly exposed landscape. An gradient filter (physical, mounted in front of the lens) would have helped too. But that is more a question of budget, as those filters are not cheap (and I do not own a gradient filter neither).
TOPICS
Contributor critique

Views

141

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more

Problem with objects

New Here ,
Aug 16, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

_MG_0620.JPG

Hi all!! im a new contributor and i want to improve my photos. Mods reject some of my images due to object issues. Can you help me by showing my fauls?  The text says that it could be because of dust on the sensor of my camera but i dont see any artifact. Thank you all!

I shot this image with 400ISO f11.

Adobe Community Professional
Correct answer by Abambo | Adobe Community Professional

In addition to what has been said:

  • The image is lacking contrast. The left side of the histogram is missing entries.

    The right side, however has some nasty peaks due to sensor/lens limitations.


  • The trees are flattened like if there was to much noise reduction. This is also true for the rocks in the background. Given the file size, I do not think however that the artefacts have been introduced with a high JPEG compression. I suppose the original file is a RAW file (if I remember well RAW file names start with an "_MG" by default).
  • The sky is blown out, the transition between the sky and the rocky surface contains some artefacts introduced by the limitations of the lens and the sensor.
  • There are some spears of weed in the image because of the low pov of the camera.
  • The only sharp element in the picture is the rocky overhang. That's not enough for such a picture. And I even suspect that to be over-sharpened.
  • Right to the rock there are some light artefacts like lens reflections/light leaks.

Some recommendations:

  • I suppose you did put the camera on the floor or near the floor. It would have been better to use a light tripod.
  • The focus should have been somewhere in the middle of image instead of the small overhang.
  • If you didn't use a lens-hood, get one. It even protects your lenses from breakage.
  • Use the full range of the histogram. This image (if the camera has been stabilised as I suspect from the exposure of 1/5s) could easily be composed from a bracketed shot. That would have given you a nice sky and a correctly exposed landscape. An gradient filter (physical, mounted in front of the lens) would have helped too. But that is more a question of budget, as those filters are not cheap (and I do not own a gradient filter neither).
TOPICS
Contributor critique

Views

142

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Aug 16, 2018 0
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 16, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi Lubo

Welcome to Adobe. This is a nice landscape you captured. The trees form a very unique pattern. However to the right of the capture, your cropping could be an issue. I'd say it would be better selected if you had capture it wider, or moved a little towards the right for the crop so that you capture the entire right circle pattern the trees form. In addition I believe the photo looks a bit flat, and requiring vibrancy and clarity. Whenever you capture an image you need to inspect it carefully and ensure that the vibrancy clarity and saturation is correct. Create better photos for Adobe Stock with 7 tips for success | will help you to see the appearance of the images as required.

And because you are new you will need to read the information at tagproducts_SG_STOCK-CONTRIBUTOR_i18nKeyHelppagetitle , following all the links and especially the "Adobe Stock Contributor Guide".

All the best

JG

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Aug 16, 2018 2
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 17, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi there,

I guess when you say 'objects' you mean 'artifacts'? (Sometimes if you use the translator function, it may come up with a different word.)

If so, when enlarged to around 100% you see this: It's a bit blocky - so JPEG issues.

It can be seen throughout the image

_MG_0620artifacts.jpg

Therefore 'artifacts' rejection.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Aug 17, 2018 3
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 17, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

In addition to what has been said:

  • The image is lacking contrast. The left side of the histogram is missing entries.

    The right side, however has some nasty peaks due to sensor/lens limitations.


  • The trees are flattened like if there was to much noise reduction. This is also true for the rocks in the background. Given the file size, I do not think however that the artefacts have been introduced with a high JPEG compression. I suppose the original file is a RAW file (if I remember well RAW file names start with an "_MG" by default).
  • The sky is blown out, the transition between the sky and the rocky surface contains some artefacts introduced by the limitations of the lens and the sensor.
  • There are some spears of weed in the image because of the low pov of the camera.
  • The only sharp element in the picture is the rocky overhang. That's not enough for such a picture. And I even suspect that to be over-sharpened.
  • Right to the rock there are some light artefacts like lens reflections/light leaks.

Some recommendations:

  • I suppose you did put the camera on the floor or near the floor. It would have been better to use a light tripod.
  • The focus should have been somewhere in the middle of image instead of the small overhang.
  • If you didn't use a lens-hood, get one. It even protects your lenses from breakage.
  • Use the full range of the histogram. This image (if the camera has been stabilised as I suspect from the exposure of 1/5s) could easily be composed from a bracketed shot. That would have given you a nice sky and a correctly exposed landscape. An gradient filter (physical, mounted in front of the lens) would have helped too. But that is more a question of budget, as those filters are not cheap (and I do not own a gradient filter neither).
Regards, Abambo
Hard- and Software Engineer and Photographer.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Aug 17, 2018 2
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 17, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Just for information, _MG_0001.JPG is for images shot with Adobe RGB and is the same for raw - CR2,

_MG_0001.CR2.

Files which have IMG is for the sRGB colour space.

This is of course with Canon cameras.

And by the way, RAW should be in small letters - raw - because it's not an acronym or an abbreviation.

I guess the raw term was adopted as the file was 'unprocessed' or uncooked - raw file. Could be synonymous with raw food.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Aug 17, 2018 2
Abambo LATEST
Adobe Community Professional ,
Aug 18, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

ricky336  wrote

Just for information, _MG_0001.JPG is for images shot with Adobe RGB and is the same for raw - CR2,

_MG_0001.CR2.

Oh go, I just needed to read the manual... You’re right, the underscore designates the colour profile. As I switched to RAW Adobe RGB, I attributed the name to the image file format and not the colour profile.

As for RAW, that’s for sure not an acronym its raw versus processed. Raw image format - Wikipedia

Regards, Abambo
Hard- and Software Engineer and Photographer.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Aug 18, 2018 1
New Here ,
Aug 17, 2018

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I have so much to learn. Thank you all for the tips and the information!!!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community Guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
Reply
Loading...
Aug 17, 2018 1