MircoV

AI review

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

 

What do you think. Will there be on Alamy in near future a fully automatic approval process? Since Alamy looks in general only at the technical aspects i sounds realistic to have a system that automatically selects a sample of images and scan them on noise, sharpness etc.

 

Something like that would mean an almost direct review process.

 

What do you think?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sharpness would be very easy: Peaking Level already exists.

Dust bunnies are being found automatically in Lightroom.

 

In general such a process would have to go for the low hanging fruit.

It would have to flag images that would need excessive correction in a photo editor on Full Auto. Those could then be examined by a human judge.

(How this works for real court cases and real judges. Study the diagram.)

 

Maybe just check the list:

 

More easy:

(Easy=doable by machine.)

Blemishes – Dust, scratches or sensor dust - Think Lightroom
Camera shake; Soft due to size; Soft or lacking definition - Think Peaking

Chromatic aberration or ‘coloured fringing’ - Think ACR
Colour cast - Think ACR

Unsuitable material - Think Facebook; Twitter

Digital camera not suitable for Alamy - Just read metadata

Overly manipulated; Noticeable retouching - Use a forensics service (fotoforensics ; Izitru)

Excessive similars - Think Photoshop Align and Difference

Poor exposure - Think Photoshop Auto Levels

 

More difficult:

Subject out of focus
Compression artifacts
Excessive sharpening
Interpolation artifacts
Noise
Orientation
Scanning artifacts

Film rebate or border
Watermark
 

All is easy to do by hand - by a human.

It's a bit like why quality control is needed in a car factory.

Some factories don't have it. Stuff falls from their cars when you round a corner. ;-)

Other factories don't have it because they don't need it. And their cars always come first in longevity tests.

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think that it is necessary. The amount of human attention at the moment relates to who the contributor is and presumably the sort of images ( sky). No doubt there is also already mechanised/software support for the QC process. 

 

My issue would actually be a different one. The ability to request that QC examine an image or set that the contributor feels they would like to have a second opinion on. I had such an image recently and emailed Contributor Support about it and they were unable to help - they wouldn't or couldn't pass my message to the QC team.. The reaction was more as though I was asking for some sort of special advantage or special treatment when my feeling was more about us being on the same side and wanting to avoid anything slipping through that might lead to problems. 

 

The image passed QC but I do not know whether it was actually looked at because I have a good record and it might not have been examined.

Edited by geogphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

My issue would actually be a different one. The ability to request that QC examine an image or set that the contributor feels they would like to have a second opinion on. I had such an image recently and emailed Contributor Support about it and they were unable to help - they wouldn't or couldn't pass my message to the QC team.. The reaction was more as though I was asking for some sort of special advantage or special treatment when my feeling was more about us being on the same side and wanting to avoid anything slipping through that might lead to problems.

 

+1

Good idea.

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, wiskerke said:

 

+1

Good idea.

 

wim

 

I was a little shocked to be honest and upset at what it said about Alamy's relationship with me as a contributor.

 

Maybe its a function of Alamy's size but it worried me. I do like the feeling with some other agencies/relationships that we are working together in the same direction and that there is a spirit of give and take between us. Sometimes with Alamy contributors do seem to get treated like naughty children i.e.) that we are trying to sneak images through QC and they are trying to catch us!

 

 

Edited by geogphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

 

I was a little shocked to be honest and upset at what it said about Alamy's relationship with me as a contributor.

 

Maybe its a function of Alamy's size but it worried me. I do like the feeling with some other agencies/relationships that we are working together in the same direction and that there is amity of give and take between us.

 

Mwoah, maybe not expect too much. There's just no procedure for it.

And if the British basic disposition is a bit like the Dutch, the first reaction usually is:

What if everybody would do that, sir (mam)...

(... Civilization as we know it would come to an end.)

 

The solution I have chosen on some occasions is to just upload that single image.

You do get your answer. Unambiguously. ;-)

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, wiskerke said:

 

Mwoah, maybe not expect too much. There's just no procedure for it.

And if the British basic disposition is a bit like the Dutch, the first reaction usually is:

What if everybody would do that, sir (mam)...

(... Civilization as we know it would come to an end.)

 

The solution I have chosen on some occasions is to just upload that single image.

You do get your answer. Unambiguously. ;-)

 

wim

 

That's what I did to start with. Held back all other uploads. Then after Alamy's response I thought  'why should I bother'.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:-)

My upload speed&volume are slightly less than yours.

:-)

Ouch I have 4.2% of your collection?

That almost made me google underachiever.

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wiskerke said:

:-)

My upload speed&volume are slightly less than yours.

:-)

Ouch I have 4.2% of your collection?

That almost made me google underachiever.

 

wim

 

Yes but you have more than 4 x quality

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Similar issue as before - inability to get a message to QC.

 

Made a mistake and sent a batch with a failed image - selecting some using Ctrl - and had the dud one included lower down the page:(

 

Sent an email to CS asking to have the sub scrapped to save QC the time and bother ( and me another fail) but images just sitting there in QC.

 

Not possible to delete a batch once in QC queue. Would be a time-saver to permit this.  

Edited by geogphotos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a message saying I have 173 images ''not on sale, but these 173 images have just passed QC and under each it says that they are 'on sale'. 

 

Why not have both types of information saying the same thing? How about a 'pending' status?

 

No big deal, simply an observation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now