Matt Ashmore Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 It would be nice if there were a way to try out new things without the fear of ending up in the 'sin bin'. The sort of thing I mean is... try submitting images from a new camera when you are unsure as to whether it meets Alamy's expectations. trying creative editing... maybe trying adding different tints/more creative approach. Maybe this could be achieved by having another folder available when doing an FTP upload which Alamy QC could look at in quieter periods (assuming they have quieter periods). I guess there would have to be some restrictions on how many experimental images you could upload. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted January 15, 2016 Share Posted January 15, 2016 It would be nice if there were a way to try out new things without the fear of ending up in the 'sin bin'. The sort of thing I mean is... try submitting images from a new camera when you are unsure as to whether it meets Alamy's expectations. trying creative editing... maybe trying adding different tints/more creative approach. Maybe this could be achieved by having another folder available when doing an FTP upload which Alamy QC could look at in quieter periods (assuming they have quieter periods). I guess there would have to be some restrictions on how many experimental images you could upload. I have tried 'creative' editing based on the recently clarified description as to what constitutes SoLD (see the Downsizing thread) and have had no issues with those uploads, even an obviously heavily manipulated image.. At the end of the day if we are to be considered professionals we should be setting a higher technical quality bar for ourselves than Alamy QC requires. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Rooney Posted January 17, 2016 Share Posted January 17, 2016 "we should be setting a higher technical quality bar for ourselves than Alamy QC requires." - Martin Hold that thought, Martin -- it sounds like a valid general approach. I no longer think of myself as a professional photographer. I was a full-time professional photographer for over 35 years. I'm retired from that, so I think of myself as . . . what? Semi-professional? I'm not sure of the label. I shoot stock regularly, but my involvement is not as intense or as deep as it was when I was a pro. However, I would not be happy producing junk. I see a lot of what I would call experimental work on Alamy; some of it is very good, and everything I see seems to have passed QC. What I tend to do is less complex, less experimental. I shoot romantic realism. That is I'm shooting what I find out in the world, but I remove the candy wrapper and butts from the sidewalk. Matt, If you want to try new things, try them! Don't let fear of failing QC control your work. But as Martin suggests: shoot for quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted January 17, 2016 Share Posted January 17, 2016 Ed's correct. See the Case for downsizing thread where I attempted to put the new SoLD explanation into context. To prove it to myself I tried various 'creatively' edited images without any QC issues including this: BTW There was no downsizing to increase apparent sharpness, in fact the point of the processing was generally reduced sharpness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Ashmore Posted January 18, 2016 Author Share Posted January 18, 2016 Ed's correct. See the Case for downsizing thread where I attempted to put the new SoLD explanation into context. To prove it to myself I tried various 'creatively' edited images without any QC issues including this: BTW There was no downsizing to increase apparent sharpness, in fact the point of the processing was generally reduced sharpness. I like your picture! That's pretty much exactly the sort of thing that I envisaged wanting to try but didn't feel confident trying to submit. I hadn't realised that the downsizing thread and gone on a tangent and discussed this sort of thing.. I'll have to catch up with that thread! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted January 18, 2016 Share Posted January 18, 2016 Thanks Matt, Gofrit! Trust your own judgement. Picking up Ed's comment on my previous post, I have just worked at a small batch of recent images and I have decided that they are not quite good enough, they would probably pass QC but I am not prepared to submit (downsized or not). They do not pass my personal quality check, I will have to have another go at taking them more thoughtfully.BTW The mentoring aspect is one of the reasons I created the M-dash web site as much as a magazine as to promote my own work (still need to restore the gallery, the site is being rebuilt after it was hacked). I put this in the wrong thread - Doh! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Ashmore Posted January 18, 2016 Author Share Posted January 18, 2016 Thanks Matt, Gofrit! Trust your own judgement. Picking up Ed's comment on my previous post, I have just worked at a small batch of recent images and I have decided that they are not quite good enough, they would probably pass QC but I am not prepared to submit (downsized or not). They do not pass my personal quality check, I will have to have another go at taking them more thoughtfully. BTW Its one of the reasons I created the M-dash web site as much as a magazine as to promote my own work (still need to restore the gallery, the site is being rebuilt after it was hacked). Thanks Martin - I'll take a look at your website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.