Jump to content

Alamy

Administrators
  • Content Count

    892
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Alamy


  1. As posted elsewhere, we’d like to share our deepest sympathies with the family and friends of Keith Morris. He was an incredibly talented, smart and energetic man and this is a huge loss for all that knew him.

     

    Keith was one of Alamy's most admired and successful photographers; his photos were regularly seen on newspaper front pages and websites around the globe. The past couple springs he held a workshop in Cirencester where he taught other photographers how to shoot for Alamy giving them tips on Stock and News while inspiring them with his mantra #shootlocalsellglobal. He will be sorely missed by the Alamy family.

     

    See more of his work: http://ow.ly/vmXX50wEzux

    • Like 9
    • Upvote 12

  2. 4 minutes ago, liverpix said:

    If you think that image is noisy, shot at Iso 125 and not sharp then I am lost for words. I'll stick with only posting news and find other stock sites to post on. You seem to be happy with the flickr photo which is inferior to the larger file I sent you.

     

    Wouldn't say we were happy with the Flickr photo - just that the photo posted to Flickr bears little resemblance to the image at full resolution and 100% magnification. 

     

    ISO levels are irrelevant if you've manipulated the image beyond what it's capable of taking. No matter what label it has, "Noise, Soft" etc, the image is severely degraded and lacking technical quality. 

     

    Alamy

    • Upvote 3

  3. 7 minutes ago, liverpix said:

    It looks pretty sharp to me and no noise in the sky. Recently I have been using the free Photos software in Windows 10. In the past, I used Photoshop Elements( you still failed me on those photos). You can see the fisherman at the edge of the lake clearly.

     

    To confirm, this level of image quality is way off acceptable. There is a highly insufficient level of sharpness and detail.

     

    We also wouldn't recommend using the free photos window software to post process your images, and would always recommend shooting and processing in RAW. 

     

    Alamy

     

     

    • Upvote 11

  4. 2 minutes ago, liverpix said:

    Ok, as long as you can confirm it was the same file I sent you at 5359 x 3543 pixels. It should be exactly as the one I have on flickr.

     

    Yes, we can confirm they are the dimensions of the image. Here is a 100% crop of the tree area, right of centre:

     

    image.png

     

    And here is a 100% crop of the top of the centre tree area with the roof in the background:

     

    image.png

     

    Can we just ask - what software are you using to process these images?

     

    Alamy

     


  5. 1 minute ago, liverpix said:

    Hi Alamy,

     

    The image I sent you was exactly the same file that I put up on flickr. There is no way that could have been inferior in any way unless something drastic happened to the file during the upload. The dimension of the original file was 5359 x 3543 and over 10mb. Not sure what you are talking about Alamy or seeing !

     

    Are you happy for us to post a 100% crop of an area of the image that shows the issues? This may help you identify the problems we're seeing.

     

    Best

     

    Alamy

    • Upvote 3

  6. Just to step in here before anyone thinks that the example posted above was representative of what we were sent. To confirm, it isn't. 

     

    The file QC received, when viewed at 100%, looks nothing like the image posted above and is one of the most extreme examples of a QC failure we've seen in recent times.

     

    We wouldn't post a 100% crop here without permission but this really was nowhere near the borderline of acceptability.

     

    We don't normally intervene in threads like this but the problems with the image that was sent to us are excessive.

     

    Alamy 

    • Like 1
    • Upvote 6

  7. Unfortunately it's not possible for us to provide this. 

     

    Although we do sometimes have visibility of ISBN numbers, this isn't always the case and retrieving this information for claims incurs considerable cost and internal resource, which varies per individual claim within the overall large claim.

     

    Alamy

     

     


  8. On 09/08/2019 at 18:58, Chuck Nacke said:

    Thanks Alamy,

     

    This is the longest I have ever waited for an Alamy payment.

    Care to share what happened?

     

    Chuck

     

    A simple admin error on our side meant a delay in sending the funds to transfer. 

     

    Contractually we are bound to pay within the month but we'll always try and get the money sent asap.

     

    Cheers

     

    Alamy


  9. Hi everyone - I think we can all agree that at certain times, certain pockets of tourists can cause frustrations for the seasoned stock photographer and the general public. That said, we'd appreciate it if you could all refrain from making sweeping national generalisations in the way certain groups behave based on their country of origin. 

     

    Many thanks

     

    Alamy

    • Like 4
    • Haha 1
    • Upvote 3

  10. Just to clear this up, we may have recommended that Adobe RGB was a preferred workspace for processing back in the day for various reasons including processing compatibility, but it's never been a QC requirement. Some of our standard responses still included that reference and we've now updated them for clarity.

     

    There is no conspiracy to uncover :) - just process your images in whatever works best for you then when you upload we will:

    • Convert to sRGB
    • Display in sRGB on the website
    • When ordered by a customer, provide a file without a colour profile for compatibility reasons

    We won't keep an Adobe RGB version of your file if you do send one. We have no recorded cases of a client asking for one, but if they did, we would contact you directly to see if there is one available.

     

    Cheers

     

    James A


  11. 13 minutes ago, DJ Myford said:

     

    So does that mean that the fraudster gets to keep the file they downloaded, but the contributor has their payment taken away? Please clarify.

     

    No payment was received and no payment would ever have been received as it was credit card fraud. The sale was cancelled rather than any money refunded. This is another reason why credit card sales don't clear instantly, as we need to allow time for potential fraud to be reported to us so we can cancel before a contributor is actually paid. 

     

    It's likely the user in question had no actual interest in that particular image, however it's impossible to know for sure.

     

    These situations are unfortunate but thankfully rare - frustratingly they are impossible to prevent 100% of the time.

     

    Alamy

    • Thanks 1

  12. 1 hour ago, York Photographer said:

    Just had a PU refund!

     

     

    This was a sale cancellation as we had actively spotted some fraudulent activity on the purchasing account and banned the user in question.

     

    Also, to pick up another thread of conversation here, differences in price and territory are common depending on what type of user you are and whether or not we are running any a/b pricing tests at the time.

     

    Thanks

     

    Alamy

    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.