Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'noise'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Shutterstock
    • Forum Guidelines
    • Announcements
    • Contributor Experience
    • Show and Tell
    • Technical Issues
    • Hardware & Gear
    • Archive
    • Critique Forum

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Twitter


Instagram


Facebook


LinkedIn


Location


Interests

Found 27 results

  1. Can anybody tell me how many times they have received this with their uploads: Noise / Artifacts: Content contains noise, film grain, compression artifacts, pixelation, and/or posterization that detracts from the main subject. I uploaded 6 videos and all were rejected, yet I uploaded the same videos on competitor platforms, Pond5 and Adobe Stock and they were all accepted. I've added a screen shot of the video to this post, keep in mind the original video 2.7k so the screen shot wont be the same quality but as for the rejection who knows Any thoughts would be appreciated UPDATE: I was informed that I can try to re-submit the same videos again if I think they were rejected in error. Which would mean re-uploading through FTP yet again, Looks like Im cancelling my account
  2. Yesterday, I submitted 20 photographs. All of them were rejected by Shutterstock for the exact same reason of Noise/Film Grain. Most of these photographs do not have noise/film grain, and some pictures of mine that were much worse than these have been approved in the past (take a look at my portfolio; you'll see what I'm talking about). These photographs were taken with different equipment, so there isn't something wrong with the camera I'm using. Is there a way to appeal? I have submitted photos before, and many have been rejected, therefore I'm familiar with this system. What happened today is very strange, though. Any help would be greatly appreciated! Attached are some of the images I submitted. These are previews of the images, so the actual quality of the files is much higher than what you see. The preview also makes them slightly blurry. The black and white image was taken with a film camera, so there may be some film grain, but without the film grain, the photo would look digital, which isn't what I'm going for.
  3. Hello there, I sent first 10 pictures, 4 commercials and 6 editorials. It is mix from Canon 7d, iphone 5 and Samsung 8. I use Lightroom for getting details back, boosting colors and reducing noise. I have got 4 commercials rejected because of focus, noise/grain. Still I am waiting for editorial ones. I am wondering: 1. Why commercial pictures have been checked first, is it always divided the checking up between commercial and editorials? 2. Because commercial pictures are going to be used for more "picky" clients (high resolutions posters, flyers etc) than editorial (mostly newspapers, blogs or websites) are harder to be approved? Is it a good way start to upload a picture as a commercial and if is rejected, upload as a editorial and have higher chances to be approved? I read this opinion somewhere, is it right? 3. Is it worthy to fix it up a rejected picture, or is it waste of time? I read some people upload them again and again even without any changes and they have been approved (sometimes even with a 4th attempt). Is it depends of the person who checked this up? Also I can try to fix it up, like with noise (again), focus or to use more tricky movements like cut the part of focus or resize it and make it smaller. If I can ask do you have a lot of rejections? Do you upload them again as they were or work on them again? Do you have any methods for them for fix it up? When do you upload rejected pictures? Straight away? Or is it better to wait and how long? The last question is, right now I want to be approved as a contributor. That's why is sent 10 first pictures. Is it harder to get in and after all uploads are going easier? I mean after approval rejections ale will be not so often? How many pictures I have to get to be approved, just one? I am sorry for maybe silly questions, but I am new here I and am trying to understand it.
  4. Hi guys, I have read about the video rejections here a lot recently and wanted to share my latest experience as (I think) it further proves that the reviewers are not checking all the files sent for review. Sorry for the longer text. First, I want to say that I am very new to this. I have started just in October 2019 and 95% of my contributions is aerial footage from my drone - Mavic 2 Zoom. I know it's not a highly professional equipment/camera, just a very casual, consumer drone. However, even though it produces noise, I always denoise my footage (a lot) and am trying to do my best to make the footage as good as possible, every time. And I am learning new things with each recording session. When I started, I didn't cranked up the denoising that much and it was enough to get approved. And as I was new, I thought it's enough. Now even if I denoise everything as much as possible, my footage gets rejected in 90% now - for noise and artifacts. And I started to think that this drone is just not possible to make the footage good enough for shutterstock. Which made me sad but started to accept it. But this is the interesting part: I am an animator by trait and recently I have made some motion graphics animations as well. 3D renders can have something you could call noise too, due to render/lighting settings - so I will not talk about them. However I did some animations just in After Effects, with no outside elements. Everything made there, with no possibility of noise - rendered in ProRes 422. I have submitted 4 of these clips in different batches, together with some of my drone footage mixed in. Animations approved, drone footage rejected. Fine. But my last submission - 6 drone footage clips, 1 animation. All rejected due to Noise/Artifacts. Which proves that it couldn't be the AI trying to detect noise and rejecting it. It had to be someone manually going through them and just overlooking that one clip, or they just flat out refused them and didn't even look at them due to high volume of submits. I don't post on forums (or anywhere on internet) often, and I am fine if I don't have the equipment to meet the quality they want, but this is simply not true because of that last example I have mentioned. Not to mention that the clips get accepted elsewhere (but as I have read, that's common). I have read here that even people with good cameras get rejected for noise now more often then before. It seems like there is something else going on, than just noise in all those clips.
  5. We are entering the dark time of year where we be lucky to see a sunny day before March. But I still want to go outside and take photos. The thing I want to take photos of are mostly chickens (as practice for future wildlife). But, I haven't figured out how to take good photos of chickens with a slow shutter speed (they move too much). Which means, taking the choke off my ISO so that it can go high enough to get the right exposure. Which makes noise. So even if I get the composition and focus right, the image isn't technically good enough for my purpose (some stock, but mostly for a personal project I'm working on) I'm getting frustrated. Use noise canceling software and the image doesn't look in focus (or possibly the word I want is sharp) anymore. I apply sharpening software and it makes more artifacts. It's like the two things are fighting against each other. There's something I need to learn but I don't know what it is. Can you help point me in the right direction for what to learn next? Do I need to improve my camera handling so I can lower the shutterspeed? But how do I keep the chickens still? Is there something special I can learn about post production? Is it something else? Is asking to take low-ish light images of chickens that are technically good impossible? If you could just give me some words I can plug into google, that would be a huge help!
  6. Oh dear, not this one again: Noise / Artifacts / Film Grain: Image contains excessive noise, film grain, compression artifacts, and/or posterization. I haven't had this rejection since I got my new camera and I was hoping you could help me see what the reviewer saw. ISO 400. I put the camera on a solid surface and used the remote shutter. So I think it's something I did wrong in the editing. The only thing I can see is the bit at the back where the wall starts, but maybe there is something really obvious that I'm missing because I haven't trained my eyes well enough yet? I know it's not the best composted picture in the world, but my goal right now is to learn the technical aspects of photography. Anyway, if you have a moment, can you point me in the right direction so I can read up on exactly what I did wrong so I can not do it wrong again? (hopefully the crop photos worked - first time doing this too)
  7. Hello. I uploaded like 40 pictures a few days ago, and yesterday they got approved. But at least 15 of them got rejected for having noise and I dont know why. They just dont have it or I can't see it. 5 of them were pictures of a river taken at ISO 250 with a Canon 80 D. Others were taken at ISO 800 or 1000, never more than that. Actually some of them were taken a month ago and I had already uploaded some of those, they are similar pictures taken in the same place at the same moment with the same camera parameters. They were accepted before but not now. I'm kinda new here (only 150 pics uploaded and a very few sales) and I don't know how all this works, but I had a few photos rejected for this reason before and they actually did have some noise. But never so many and with no noise at all. I'll try to upload one of the pictures here so you guys can see it. Should I reupload again the same pictures? Do I waste time in PS trying to eliminate the almost non-existant noise before uploading? Was this just a reviewer having a bad day? Is it because they are getting more strict with the pictures they allow? Maybe I'm over sharpening them in PS? Please enlighten me because I'm lost. Thanks for the help in advance.
  8. I'm new to photography and have only been selling photos for a little less than a year. i have a new nikon d5600 which shoots pretty good photos in jpeg format but a good portion of my photos are declined for excessive noise,film grain and compression artifacts. I shoot in all my pictures on the fine setting because from what i understand shooting in raw means spending alot of time editing photos. should i start shooting in raw or keep shooting in jpeg to get more practice, or are there camera settings i'm missing that would stop this from happening?
  9. I recently bought a dji Inspire 1 drone because I want to add some aerial photography to my portfolio. All the clips I have uploaded have been accepted by other agencies, but I am having trouble getting the footage accepted by Shutterstock. A lot of what I have submitted has been rejected for noise and artifacts. When I watch the clips, I don't see anything unusual, but perhaps I don't know what to look for. Can anyone give me some advice on what to do/not do when shooting video with a drone? I would upload a sample clip, but they are all over the allowed limit. I appreciate any help that anyone can give. Have a great day.
  10. Hello everyone! I'm currently trying to submit some new footage that I believe is perfect for stock sales. The content has a crisp, clear image, and is in 4K quality. However, when I try to upload the clip, it gets rejected for "Noise / Artifacts / Pixelation -- Clip contains excessive noise, compression artifacts, and pixelation " . But like I said, on my end the video is perfectly clear and crisp. There's no detectable noise, artifacts, or pixelation in the video, which leads me to believe that somehow my videos are getting compressed in a strange way when I upload the file. So what precautions can I take when rendering out the video file, and uploading the content? Currently I'm splicing the clips in premiere pro, and I render the clips in H.264 mp4 (matching the native quality and fps as the original clip), and then I use FileZilla for ftp upload. Is there a better format to be rendering my clips in to avoid strange compression post upload? I seriously have no clue as to why my clips would appear noisy or distorted post upload. Thanks for the help!
  11. Hello everyone! I'm currently trying to submit some new footage that I believe is perfect for stock sales. The content has a crisp, clear image, and is in 4K quality. However, when I try to upload the clip, it gets rejected for "Noise / Artifacts / Pixelation -- Clip contains excessive noise, compression artifacts, and pixelation " . But like I said, on my end the video is perfectly clear and crisp. There's no detectable noise, artifacts, or pixelation in the video, which leads me to believe that somehow my videos are getting compressed in a strange way when I upload the file. So what precautions can I take when rendering out the video file, and uploading the content? Currently I'm splicing the clips in premiere pro, and I render the clips in H.264 mp4 (matching the native quality and fps as the original clip), and then I use FileZilla for ftp upload. Is there a better format to be rendering my clips in to avoid strange compression post upload? I seriously have no clue as to why my clips would appear noisy or distorted post upload. Thanks for the help!
  12. Good day everyone, We all know that 'noise' is one of the major issues for high rejection. But today I'm seriously confused while reading this article https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/behind-scenes-look-sweet-funny-life-family-photographer. I am personally thankful to Carrie Yuan for her amazing photography but at the same time kind of lost and frustrated to see that many of her images are over iso 500 and one of the most highly regarded one has been taken in iso 2500. I would appreciate some comments from experts in regards to what am I missing out or haven't achieved yet! Thanks everyone in advance.
  13. I can make picture that can be pass review without any problem but that wont be picture I wanted to upload. Is there possibility to pass review with mentioning issues like overexposed or too sharp or film grain as artistic intention ?? It kills my artistic freedom. Im sending you pictures that I want to pass as they LOOK now, call them invalid, I don't care, just accept them as they are! Is that manageable ??? ... or this is only for creative people with really expensive equipment ?? Please explain me, cause it is been driving me crazy, and I'm about to quit if I don't manage to understand your machine that is examining these photos. Is it solution to resize pictures to minimun? ....Cause when I see them in this previewer, i dont like them either, like li like them on my screen.
  14. Hello I received an email today saying Franzis Denoise projects professional is on offer for £30.00, regular price £111.20. I have read ephotozines review and there verdict overall was that it is very good. I was just wondering if anybody uses, or has had any experience with, Franzis Denoise projects professional and, if so what you think of it?
  15. Hi, I'm sure there's probably questions like this every day but I'm new to Shutterstock (and stock photography as a whole) so excuse my inevitable ignorance, but this is something I'd really like to get into and even make a small secondary income from. I've just submitted my trial batch of 10 and have had all 10 rejected. All on focus and poor lighting, 8 also on noise and 2 even on composition. I shot them all (bar one on a Canon compact) on a Canon 700D and intentionally had a shallow depth of field in a couple of the photos (is this allowed in stock photography?). I didn't play with them much other than raising the colour saturation and maybe contrast in a few of them in an attempt to make the images more 'striking'. None were taken with stock photography in mind, but are just my own photgraphs I thought I'd submit as a starting point before I really get into it, I wondered if you could have a look at a couple and tell me where I'm going wrong, and maybe give me some pointers in this world I'm new to? Thanks all!
  16. Hi, I'm sure there's probably questions like this every day but I'm new to Shutterstock (and stock photography as a whole) so excuse my inevitable ignorance, but this is something I'd really like to get into and even make a small secondary income from. I've just submitted my trial batch of 10 and have had all 10 rejected. All on focus and poor lighting, 8 also on noise and 2 even on composition. I shot them all (bar one on a Canon compact) on a Canon 700D and intentionally had a shallow depth of field in a couple of the photos (is this allowed in stock photography?). I didn't play with them much other than raising the colour saturation and maybe contrast in a few of them in an attempt to make the images more 'striking'. None were taken with stock photography in mind, but are just my own photgraphs I thought I'd submit as a starting point before I really get into it, I wondered if you could have a look at a couple and tell me where I'm going wrong, and maybe give me some pointers in this world I'm new to? Thanks all.
  17. Whole batch of photos rejected all for "Overuse--Image has excessive noise reduction and/or excessive sharpening effects applied" Here are 3 samples. The photo of the white street arrow has a lot of texture in the asphalt. The photo of the tire and leaves has a lot of texture on the tire edge and sidewall. Is the reviewer perhaps confusing texture for noise? As far as sharpening, I think any less sharp would be rejected for soft/out of focus. As for the photo of the leaves on tile floor, I can't see the problem at all. Opinions would be appreciated as to what I should look for in the future to avoid this type of rejection.
  18. Hi everybody, I've recently had this photo rejected and I would like your comments. I am a new Photographer and new to shutterstock as well. The reason for rejection was Lighting and Noise. I've checked the image in full size, but I am not good aneough yet to know where the noise is so discrepant at the point to be a problem. Anyway, I accept their rejection reason but I would like to understand to improve my technique. Thanks much in advance to those who take a moment to critique my photo. Have a great day!

    © Gustavo Rezende

  19. I'm not yet an accepted contributor and after having several photos rejected for the same "excessive noise" reason, I'm seeking some advice. I've attached one of the rejected images hereto and given the scene is sand, I can't see digital noise and am at a loss for what the reviewer was seeing. Can any of you shed light on what the reviewer may be seeing? Thanks, David
  20. Hello folks, I really appreciate if you can help me in this one! This and other imagens were rejected for noise or poorly I can't see the noise... maybe I've looking to much to the images: I tried to crop the darker areas, thought it would be more likely to have noise: Basket detail center of the frame
  21. I like some pictures processed in dxo codec pack ... imitation of the films 60-80 years ... there nice effect for some it with a grain .. but the reviewers here, they distinguish noise and grain or not waste time and choice "no grain"?
  22. Hi guys and gals, Just wondering, I recently did some photography in a gym. In the images, the subject is crisp and noise free; however, the background is quite noisy. Will this lead to rejection? I could obviously use noise reduction to remove the background noise; however, I am wondering even if I did this, would the images be rejected for using excessive noise reduction? Also, just wondering. Do Shutterstock not accept any images with noise, not even ones with grain added for artistic purposes? Thanks.
×
×
  • Create New...