Re: Does this Photo Look Pixelated to You?
You're getting confused between pixel dimension, inch dimension and pixels-per-inch.
For brevity, simply export your photos at full resolution and send those images to the printer. So, do NOT check the box that says to resize your photos.
Your camera shoots images at 5568 x 3712 pixels, which is plenty for printing at those sizes. However, any cropping reduces that size. Being a nature photographer, I know how much we often need to crop. So depending on how far you've cropped your images, it's possible you don't have enough pixels to get the best print quality when blown up to 36". So keep that in mind. Ideally you'd like to print at 300 dpi, which for 36" is 10,800 pixels which obviously you won't have. In that case the printer software enlarges the photo to your size, but quality is lost in the enlargement. That minimum dimension of 3600 pixels they gave you for 36" dimension is only 100 PPI which is very low anyway, so you definitely don't want to go lower than that.
So go ahead and export at full size, and then check the pixel dimensions of your exported images to make sure they meet the minimum dimension they asked. Bigger is better.
Re: Does this Photo Look Pixelated to You?
The image posted in this thread appears to be 1200 x 800 pixels, or what's commonly referred to as a "1 megapixel" image. What I see in that image appears to be heavy JPG Aliasing, which I usually see in an image with post-processing which involves an interpolation of the image plus the addition of contrast and sharpening earlier in the processing process as well as after the interpolation. (IOW, a double-dose of contrast and sharpening.
Yes, I see obvious Aliasing pixelization. If an enlargement print was made from this it will show obvious pixelization as well.
If this was originally captured by a current enthusiast grade or professional grade camera with at least 24 megapixels and as a RAW image file, then I suspect a post-processing error has occured somewhere in the process.
If you have the original RAW file and if it meets the above criteria for potential image quality (24 megapixels or better, RAW image file, from a modern enthusiast or professional camera/lens) you might consider hiring a trusted professional photographer to assess the file and, using the image you posted here as an example of the color tonality you expect, they might achieve more usable results without the pixelization in an enlargement print.
Re: I can't believe that the Flavicon issue on Google search is still unresolved
I just want it to be clear that I do not work for SmugMug nor do I represent SmugMug. I'm just interested to know what you tried.
But I saw this and did a bit of checking. As far as I can tell, favicons only work on your SmugMug pages. That's according to the documentation SmugMug provided. It also mentions that favicons don't always work with some browsers. If you go to Google's developer page, it gives you the details for including a favicon in its search results. It also says, about midway down the page, that it's not guaranteed to work even if you follow the instructions.
Were you able to edit the header and add the single favicon as described in Google's doc?
Re: 18+ : Laura Jayne - Nude
Nikolai wrote:Welcome to GoFigure!
Nice lighting, lovely pose and a gorgeous model!
On a C&C side (I mentioned this a few times before): shooting female models full height from the (male, i.e. taller person) eye-level is not the best angle, IMHO, since it shortens the legs. I typically prefer lower (waist or knee level) position, although sometimes a higher one (ladder, catwalk) can work for some desired optical effect..
How about this one taken from waist level ....
Re: Dover AFB Air Show - May 2022
Very nice set, and nice selection of Aircrafts
Re: Got to see his one
Wow, just amazing. I always enjoy the background story you provide. Thanks!
I'm really glad to hear that, Cristóbal. My wife has, on occasion, wished for a bat with which she could beat some of the verbosity out of me. Can you imagine that? Would it hurt?
Re: The Never Ending Alphabet Game Challenge!
X is for Xylem
Re: Are you actually having any sales?
Are any of you selling/shipping outside your home country? I'm curious how you are handling sales outside the US SmugMug options for drop shipping? Any issues with extra shipping and/or VAT adding to the cost to client?
My sales seem to be a 60/40 split between Europe and USA respectively. I chose the US lab (Bayphoto) as I proofed my files for them and like the results and options SM give us with them. I can't produce quality prints here in Vietnam so have to drop ship regardless.
I get quite a few blind orders on my SM site both from countries in western Europe and USA/CAN, but majority of Europeans tend to e-mail me first asking questions about prints/shipping etc, so that's when I tend to take charge and fulfill the order personally outside of the SM system. Biggest issue is with larger prints and metalprints which can cost a fortune to ship, even through USPS. So I'll weigh up ordering through BayPhoto or switching to WhiteWall which is a German lab that can ship around Europe/UK for much less.
One thing to note, especially if you are using BayPhoto as your SM print partner, is that the shipping costs for larger sized framed prints/metal/acrylic/canvas actually might be cheaper through the SM partnership rather than ordering direct. Sure customers might be put off by the high shipping fees, but the reality is that's what it costs and they're not just arbitrarily marking up the prices. The biggest benefit of SM over doing it all yourself is that they handle any tax related stuff in the checkout, and help deal with any customer issues i.e. refunds/reprints. Doing it yourself is a lot harder and keep in mind most labs don't offer refunds so if you place an expensive order and the customer doesn't like it then you gotta handle that situation all on your own.
It's hard to find the right balance if you're trying to sell to the whole world, but eventually you'll find where your primary market is and work around it.
Re: Kenyan Safari
Great series and thank you for posting.
Lesley, looks like you have the same problem as me. A gallery is limited to 1000 photos being displayed. Example, your keyword "australia" has reached that limit. I solved this by using multiple keywords sorted by date. I used a smart gallery to count KW's for each year then added years to not exceed 1000.
example: (number behind KW not part of KW but year count)