Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I recently invested into a new camera - Sony A7R4 with 61 MP, full frame. It is really a pitty that I have to downsize my pictures now because of the 50 MB limitation...
I think Shutterstock should re-think this.
Just a thought...

 

grafik.png.e625ba9b84b3b4f9cdfef138b370888a.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congratulations! I think after a while SS will raise the maximum size. But you can try your advantage on other sites where there is no restriction. And it seems to me that you can write an action to reduce the size of files and minimize the problem?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heide

 

this is not meant badly, but wouldn't you send the wrong signal if it was possible to upload full-res images?

Many of the photos here can be taken by the buyer himself with his cell phone. That may also be the reason why buyers are less and less willing to spend money. The second reason for the sinking incomes lies naturally also in the strong competition of the Microstock agencies. And of course the fact that contributors upload to free agencies - for whatever reason.

Nevertheless: Is it in times, where you often only get 10 cents for a download and something is still deducted from it for the conversion with paypal, the right sign to reward the agency or the thrifty buyer still with high-end photo material?

Wouldn't it make more sense in case of doubt to offer the 60 MP images where the RPD still justifies it? Because not many people have a 60 MP camera. An argument for the fact that such a photo must simply be worth more in my eyes.

So I personally see no reason why you should be annoyed about a file size limit when uploading.

 

Cheers,  Wilm

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Heide Pinkall said:

I think Shutterstock should re-think this.

The file size is limited to 50MB not the image resolution (MP). An 61MP image does not necessarily exceed 50 MB, does it?

InfranView shows two sizes, disk size and memory size. I don't know which one is shown on your image.

Here is an example of an image with the same size, same camera:

infran.jpg.ec576039904ab5a938cea8ce4b8c4f5f.jpg

BTW. congrats to your beautiful, new camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heide, does the SONY menu offer pixel settings of the images?  My NIKON D810 can be set for raw, JPEG normal and fine.  Raw is a huge file.  JPEG fine gives images between 20-30 megapixels.  The D810 has a SD and a CF card and I can have one file record in JEPG fine and the CF file record in raw or JEPG normal or fine.  Will your SONY offer such selections? congrats on your SONY.  cheers, Paul

Edited by Paul R. Jones
spelling error

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/25/2020 at 7:50 AM, Whiteaster said:

The file size is limited to 50MB not the image resolution (MP). An 61MP image does not necessarily exceed 50 MB, does it?

InfranView shows two sizes, disk size and memory size. I don't know which one is shown on your image.

Here is an example of an image with the same size, same camera:

infran.jpg.ec576039904ab5a938cea8ce4b8c4f5f.jpg

BTW. congrats to your beautiful, new camera.

Your graphic of a 60MP image is 36MB Disk size, you're right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before any misinformation arises here:

How many MB a 60 MP file has depends on many factors. First and foremost it depends on how heterogeneous an image is and how much image information it contains.

For example, if you photograph a relatively homogeneous background - a sheet of paper, for example - the 60 megapixel file will only be a few megabytes in size afterwards.

If you photograph a flower meadow with a turbulent sky, it will be considerably more MB. If you add for example 3% noise (comparable to film grain) to the image, such an image will quickly have 70 MB or more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wilm Ihlenfeld said:

Before any misinformation arises here:

How many MB a 60 MP file has depends on many factors. First and foremost it depends on how heterogeneous an image is and how much image information it contains.

For example, if you photograph a relatively homogeneous background - a sheet of paper, for example - the 60 megapixel file will only be a few megabytes in size afterwards.

If you photograph a flower meadow with a turbulent sky, it will be considerably more MB. If you add for example 3% noise (comparable to film grain) to the image, such an image will quickly have 70 MB or more.

I had no intention to misinform anyone. What I meant was that it is possible she must not resize all her images considering that Heide already has approved images of this size in her port. Maybe I should have been more clearer.


There are many reviews about this camera with full size SOOC images (also with flowers), mentioning that jpg-s are between 22-49MB in size.

Though I don't doubt that some files could be bigger especially after post processing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Whiteaster said:

I had no intention to misinform anyone. What I meant was that it is possible she must not resize all her images but she didn't provide complete image properties. Maybe I should have been more clearer.
There are many reviews about this camera with full size SOOC images (also with flowers), mentioning that jpg-s are between 22-49MB in size.

Though I don't doubt that some files could be bigger especially after post processing.

Whiteaster,

You phrased it correctly:

"An 61MP image does not necessarily exceed 50 MB".

An "average" photo with a resolution of 60 megapixels will normally not exceed 50 MB.

But if you rework the image, sharpen it, add noise, or whatever, it can take up a lot more memory and become too large to upload.

A 60 megapixel photo does not take up 36 MB. It can be 5 MB or 80 MB or whatever. It simply depends on what was photographed and how it was edited. This is what I wanted to express. All other information is not correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Wilm Ihlenfeld said:

No, Whiteaster,

You phrased it correctly:

"An 61MP image does not necessarily exceed 50 MB".

An "average" photo with a resolution of 60 megapixels will normally not exceed 50 MB.

But if you rework the image, sharpen it, add noise, or whatever, it can take up a lot more memory and become too large to upload.

A 60 megapixel photo does not take up 36 MB. It can be 5 MB or 80 MB or whatever. It simply depends on what was photographed and how it was edited. This is what I wanted to express. All other information is not correct.

Indeed. Because SS accepts only jpegs your 61 Megapixel image can be (almost) any size in megabyte that you want it to be. A very detailed photo with lots of fine structure and many colours will yield a large file in megabytes. If you sharpen it the megabyte size will increase and should the jpeg turn out at more than 50Mb in jpeg 12 (minimal jpeg compression) then to get it below 50Mb use jpeg 10 compression or lower when saving in the dialog box. If you insist on jpeg 12 then just reduce the number of megapixels (Mp) by reducing the long side (and the short side proportionally) to, say, 6000 pixels.

Here's a screencapture of a file of mine shot on a D800 (only 36Megapixel) and had I shot it on a Sony R7Mk4, then the file size would have been almost double what it is so.....saving at jpeg12: 23.4 Megabyte. Saving at jpeg10: 10.3Megabyte. Saving at jpeg8: 6.1Megabyte etc. You can see from the size file (left) that the photoshop PSD/TIFF file size is 103.4 Megabyte = 4,912X7,360 pixels (36Mp)  and that jpeg compression is quite significant but the quality isn't affected. If your jpegs are more than 50Mb, simply reduce the jpeg compression from 12 to 10 or 9.

 

Filesize&JPG.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Studio 2 said:

I've lost interest in my novel. My cat's abandoned me. So I'm reading this thread without really understanding or even caring. It's a last resort 🙁

As long as you don't go for the bottle, you will be fine. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rudy Umans said:

As long as you don't go for the bottle, you will be fine. 

That's a bloody good idea actually. A large G&T might help me to care less WTF everyone is talking about. Cheers 🥂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Studio 2 said:

That's a bloody good idea actually. A large G&T might help me to care less WTF everyone is talking about. Cheers 🥂

Actually, don't mean to be frank, but if you care about photography and you want to upload your images to stock sites or PoD sites, you should care because sooner or later you will run into this issue and it would be good then if you know the difference between MB, MP, and DPI. (I threw in DPI to make it more interesting and I could throw in 8bit and 16bit, but I won't. lol)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just created a 100 Megapixel file and saved it in maximum Quality. The file size is about 640 KB - less than 1 MB. If you want to see it in full resolution - here we go...

100MP.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Wilm Ihlenfeld said:

I have just created a 100 Megapixel file and saved it in maximum Quality. The file size is about 640 KB - less than 1 MB. If you want to see it in full resolution - here we go...

100MP.jpg

Gorgeous. It should sell well!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Studio 2 said:

I've lost interest in my novel. My cat's abandoned me. So I'm reading this thread without really understanding or even caring. It's a last resort 🙁

Ever tried Ken Follett? Pick up the Century Trilogy, and you'll be busy for a while... I love his writing. He somehow makes you care about history, by telling it from the very human perspective of those who lived in the times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Milo J said:

Ever tried Ken Follett? Pick up the Century Trilogy, and you'll be busy for a while... I love his writing. He somehow makes you care about history, by telling it from the very human perspective of those who lived in the times.

Thank you. I haven't. I will look into it. This thread has suddenly become more interesting 😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...