Robert Woerner wrote: > > 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
These days they are converting those to digital, too. ann > ----- 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 > > > >
