How about 6x4.5 or 6x7 chromes?

You know, join "The Brotherhood".  I'm going to as soon as I finish nursing
school next May.

Robert
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ann Sanfedele" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 11:40 AM
Subject: sad stuff about stock photography and up-to-date technology


> Well...
>
> after a long talk with my stock agency gal on the
> phone a couple of days ago I've
> found out a lot about what I can't do when
> submitting stuff - so thought I'd share.
>
> Bottom line, unless I spent thousands of dollars
> to upgrade my equipment, the
> digital stuff I could produce to show them is
> useless.
>
> The stock company will accept my slides, as they
> always have done, but they
> then scan them and send them out.
>
> The Epson 1640SUP doesn't scan slides and negs
> well enough to make
> files that are up to spec for industry standards.
> And even if I shoot digital
> and get something done professionally because I
> think the stock agency would
> love it, I don't have enough digital power to do
> it.
>
> (Herb once said I didn't know enough to ask the
> right questions, and I have
> to confess I bristled at that but he was
> undoubtedly right.)
>
> The agency gave me the correct info, they just
> didn't know that my equipment
> was not strong enough to handle the requirements -
> and I really can't afford to
> get into it full blast.
>
> The rejection rate has gone way up for those
> photogs in the agency who have tried
> to do the scanning and clean-up themselves.
>
> Black and white photography for them is dead.  (at
> least my prints are in a safe place :) )
> Clients who want black and white just change it
> from color.
>
> And then there are my eyes, which have a very hard
> time recognizing "razor sharp" and
> noticing the noise.
>
> The one thing I did do that she found
> "interesting" was using the flatbed as a camera -
> for tight close-ups of natural objects - but there
> was too much noise in what I sent her,
> and I'm really not into spending a lot of time
> working on stuff like that.
>
> I was very grateful for the time she took to
> explain a lot to me, but a bit discouraged
> about my nature stock at this point.
>
> annsan
>
>


Reply via email to