Ideal image size


posted on 27th of april, 2013

Hello everybody, I'm sure this must have been discussed before in this Forum, but I could not find the answer I am looking for.
I began processing my photos in a different way and as a final result, I end up with a bigger file (more resolution). After Dreamstime's resizing and acceptance, the files are around 20-27mp compared to 10-13mp size of my previous submissions.

These are my latest and biggest images:





And here is my question: is there an "ideal" image size for stock? will a too big of a file limit the amount of $ on each purchase since the buyer might select a smaller size? or are you giving the designer more options and increasing the chances of selling by submitting the biggest possible size image?

Thanks in advance for your opinions!

(I meant mp, not mb! thanks Marugod83)

Comments (12)

Posted by Vilaimages on May 06, 2013
Thanks Perstock and Montyloya, it is clear that we need to try to use the best tools available to create the best quality images possible. My question has to do with the relation between file size and revenue per image. How big is too big when it comes to getting the most for your photos. Of course, with my tiny portfolio, it doesn't really matter, I'm just curious to know how this might affect the sales of someone with thousands of images.
Posted by Montylola on May 06, 2013
Here's my 2 cents worth.
There is no IDEAL size other than the one that you can get from the pixels that your camera captures.
What you have to do is to make ALL of those pixels work for you by shooting in RAW in the first place, processing in the best image processing software you can afford.
Using noise reduction software and sharpening the finished image little as possible.

Besides that DO NOT use your camera in it's manufacturers default settings, there are better setting that will assist in you capturing colours and tones. Go on the web and do a search for your cameras ideals settings, you will find that one setting will not suit all your needs.
Posted by Perstock on May 02, 2013
By the way...
One way to improve - use the latest version of Photoshop/Camera raw!
Open one of your old files, say three years old. Adjust with the same settings, click the ? and compare with your old files.
The improvement is just amazing :-)
Posted by Perstock on May 02, 2013
Resolution is of course important. But really important is, NOT to oversharpen, that will ruin the possibilities for upsampling. High quality images even about 12MP may be used for display as large posters, walls etc. Theres some really cool methods for upsampling, but I believe it's better to give the buyer that option and keep the images as ”virgin” as possible :-)
Posted by Vilaimages on May 01, 2013
Thanks everybody for the opinions. I understand that more resolution is better from the designers point of view. I was just wondering if you upload huge files you might end up with less revenue per sale.
@Bradcalkins, upsizing is a big no-no, it would degrade the quality of the image. Very interesting the fact that buyers need different sizes for different applications. Thanks.
Posted by Bradcalkins on May 01, 2013
You should not be upsizing images I don't think - if you have a 12MP camera you should be submitting 12MP or smaller unless you are stitching multiple images together. Dreamstime handles upsizing to larger pixel sizes.

I tend to agree with Igordabari on file size not being the most important factor - but it does depend on your subject matter. Certain subjects might tend to be used in larger print applications where resolution plays a bigger role, but I think content tends to be most important for most buyers. In my experience, when people have to pay for size they often buy sizes below the maximum, while buyers using subscriptions will usually take the largest size that is available. Having larger sizes available gets you the higher pricing, but only to a point. 40MP files are priced the same as 20MP, for now...
Posted by Egomezta on April 29, 2013
The bigger the better, since there is more information on the file.
Posted by Fredbro on April 28, 2013
Bigger sized pictures give more opportunities to designers, but they take SO MUCH space on the computer and the software used to process them might go more slowly if you have an older computer. As for me, I submit pictures between 6 an 11 MP.
Posted by Igordabari on April 28, 2013
Size should affect sales somehow, that's obviously. But, in my opinion, size doesn't take a leading place in the factor hierarhy. Qualuty and stock orientation are much more important. Such important that the size factor can be easily neglected. To see that it's thrue you might have a walk through several portfolio looking just at 2 figures: sizes (in MP) and downloads. You will sea what I mean, then.
Posted by Marugod83 on April 28, 2013
also, don't mix the Mb with Mp
Posted by Marugod83 on April 28, 2013
If a designer has to chose between several pictures of the same subject and all are in practicly the same stardard of quality/composition, of course he will choose the one with better resolution
Posted by Solidsdman on April 27, 2013
You give the designer more options by submitting the largest size image. The designer could then use the file in anything from a web page image to a hi res print up to a high resolution still in a movie. In stock, bigger is always better.



Comments (12)

This article has been read 565 times. 1 readers have found this article useful.
Photo credits: Sergio Vila.
 
About Me
(Vilaimages)
Pembroke Pines, Florida, US
Archive
2014
March (1)
2013
2011
Exclusive user Blogs
    Search the blogs!
Latest articles (RSS 2.0 )
  For Nikon D800 users
  All those Myths...
  Ideal image size
  Low A.R. forgiveness...(but only once!)
  People and Activities collection!
  Interrupted start with DT

Create your own blog in seconds...
My favourite articles
None
More favorite articles

Related image searches

ideal image size for stock

Ideal related stock images