File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
My favorite photos got rejected from iStock Photo because they had too much noise at full size, is there any good way to avoid noise when shooting with a fairly cheap digital (Fujifilm finepix S6000)?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Equipment MakeFUJIFILMCamera ModelFinePix S6000fdCamera SoftwareQuickTime 7.4.1Maximum Lens Aperturef/2.8Sensing MethodOne-Chip Color AreaMaker Note Version0130Image-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandImage OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution72 dpiVertical Resolution72 dpiImage Created2008:03:28 00:39:46Exposure Time1/4 secF-Numberf/2.8Exposure ProgramLandscape ModeISO Speed Rating800Lens Aperturef/2.8Brightness-3.2 EVExposure Bias0 EVMetering ModePatternLight SourceUnknownFlashNo Flash, CompulsoryFocal Length6.20 mmColor Space InformationsRGBImage Width2848Image Height2136RenderingNormalExposure ModeAutoWhite BalanceAutoScene Capture TypeLandscapeSharpnessNormalSubject Distance RangeUnknownSharpnessNormalWhite BalanceAutoFlash ModeOffMacro ModeOffFocus ModeAutoSlow Synchro ModeOffPicture ModeLandscapeContinuous/Bracketing ModeOffBlur StatusBlur WarningFocus StatusOKAuto Exposure StatusOver Exposed
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>162340
Agreed. Great image, ruined by your lack of tripod.
>> Anonymous
If you want to do stock photography you need to buy a better camera.

Also designers generally want a lot of space in their images.

You know, for text and shit.

And pictures of people emoting.
>> Anonymous
good tips thanks, I was hoping to use iStock Photo to get more money to get a better camera, but I guess I should just save first.
>> Anonymous
>>162355

do you realize how long it would take for you to get $500 from stock photos websites?
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>162355
>I was hoping to use iStock Photo to get more money to get a better camera
Lots of people are. Which is why it's unlikely to work. Not a lot of people get any noticeable income from stock photography nowadays, from what I've heard. Too many people with cheap digitals have glutted the market.
>> Anonymous
lol, I'm just trying to make a little extra money.
>> Anonymous
>>162374

a little extra money is fine

just don't expect that $500 any time soon
>> Anonymous
Well, if you DO want to do stock photography, try to take the kinds of pictures you see in magazine ads.

Most of the images have a single focal point with LOTS of dead space around the focus. You've got to imagine that people who buy the pix are going to want to slap text around them about "OMG FIRE SALE AT MERVYN'S EVERYTHING 50% OFF" or "1/2 OFF SPA TREATMENT AT SPA CENTRAL™"

Also for stock photos people don't care about fake DOF or Photoshop tricks. Feel free to go wild with that shit.
>> Anonymous
>>162369
>Or does anyone have a better idea?

Yeah, get better gear so you can take photos you can actually sell. Not only is no one going to take you seriously with a cheap point and shoot, but you're going to have noisy unusable crap like this.
>> Anonymous
>>162409Not only is no one going to take you seriously with a cheap point and shoot

lulz, someone never bought stock photos
>> ac !!VPzQAxYPAMA
>>162409
The only problem here is that it's ISO800. If it were at a low ISO, it would be fine.
>> BurtGummer
>>162442

needs moar stability though. It might be a bitch dragging a tripod all the way into London, but if your serious about stock photos, you need one bad.