Jump to content
Augustins Mentor

Strange, almost kafkaesque comments from Alamy QC

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I'm in fourth attempt to try and get the OK for my first three images and the failure comments are bizarre to say the least. One of them was Film Rebate/not cropped and that was for a vivid digital image which I don't want to crop. I leave it to the wisdom of the gods at Almay to determine the type of film I have used on my DSLR Nikon D810.

 

Soft and lacking definition for images of 6000px or 8000px well exceeding the 48MB is also extremely frustrating as no other information is given. 

 

I have my track record in photography and also a Master's degree in digital arts so I'm no beginner and have award wining pics in my portfolio. 

 

Any tips and tricks would help.

Edited by Augustins Mentor
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Augustins Mentor said:

I'm in fourth attempt to try and get the OK for my first three images and the failure comments are bizarre to say the least. One of them was Film Rebate/not cropped and that was for a vivid digital image which I don't want to crop. I leave it to the wisdom of the gods at Almay to determine the type of film I have used on my DSLR Nikon D810.

 

Soft and lacking definition for images of 6000px or 8000px well exceeding the 48MB is also extremely frustrating as no other information is given. 

 

I have my track record in photography and also a Master's degree in digital arts so I'm no beginner and have award wining pics in my portfolio. 

 

Any tips and tricks would help.

 

Could you put them up for view/download somewhere? Preferably the exact same jpg quality and 100% size you have uploaded to QC. Maybe put a big watermark on them.

Dropbox or any other place that allows for a full download will work fine.

People at Alamy QC are photographers themselves and do understand blur and filters, but are quite keen on CA and unsharp main subjects.

Rebates can be only 1 px wide in  Photoshop and are quite common when cropping, but should be detected at 100%.

However glitches do occur. Both at our side and at QC's. But it's usually on our side I must admit. And the other thing: it's their game; they can set the rules.

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I once had a rejection for a tiny watermark I'd included accidentally in LR that was too small to see. I was baffled until QC sent me a crop of it. Could it be something like that? Or a line of pixels from somewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

For your first photos submitted to Alamy don't try anything remotely unusual or arty, just stick the camera on a tripod and take photos of some banal things in good light e.g. a bus , a house etc.  Ensure that your shots have a full histogram from black to white without any burnout or lost shadows, that they are in perfect focus and there is no subject blur. Don't over process, or boost saturation etc, ensure there is very little noise.

 

Alamy doesn't consider aesthetics at all, just photo technical quality.   Once you have successfully uploaded a few batches you might then try something more adventurous. There are shots on Alamy in which nothing is sharp but which convey an impression or concept, e.g. a speeding ambulance, but don't try this for your first submission!

 

I am assuming that you are using a camera that is regarded as being suitable by Alamy, i.e. any relatively modern DSLR or compact system camera.

Edited by Bryan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Ronda bridge has indeed a small line of white pixels at the top in the version on Flickr.

 

How do you guys download a full size from Flickr? I only see: Large 2048 (2048 x 1408) and am not able to download.

Not the regular way anyway, but with a slight workaround I'm getting the 2048 x 1408 ones.

And they look quite sharpened, which I'm guessing is done by Flickr.

 

wim

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Bryan, thank you for you suggestions. I'm not showing any award winning images; mostly good technical quality Travel shots which are mostly processed with LR or LR-PS. Cameras range from Nikon D3, D4s, D800 and D810. I have been through several gauntlets in trying to acquire technically sound images and some of my portfolio includes award winning images by the SWPP of the UK. I also hold a Master of Fine Arts(MFA) degree in Digital Arts but that was mostly on the theoretical side of the equation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Bryan said:

I am assuming that you are using a camera that is regarded as being suitable by Alamy, i.e. any relatively modern DSLR or compact system camera.

 

The metadata says Nikons 800 and 810.

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for highlight the white line but, really the Film rebate remark threw me off course. You should be able to download the original in Flickr. I made sure you can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see on the metadata that you are on f/16 for a couple of the shots. When you look at images taken at f/16 and smaller at 100% (which you should and Alamy will) then image softening due to diffraction starts to become evident. On full frame at f/16 its not as obvious as on a crop sensor, but I stick to f/11 to avoid that particular trap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think the photo of people on escalator looks as if it received too much treatment of noise reduction.  (Mind you, I am looking at it on a very low budget laptop.  I am away from home at them moment).

Edit) and looks oversharpened IMHO.

 Sung

Edited by SFL
added another sentence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't work out how to view your images at 100%, 2048 x 2048 is the maximum size and downloading is disabled (it says on the page). You might be well advised to put a visible watermark on the images too, even at the size they are showing on FlickR. Some of what I can see looks oversharpened, but that may not be on the files you are submitting. If you can say what failure reason Alamy has put on each image it will help people to comment too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Joseph Clemson said:

I can't work out how to view your images at 100%, 2048 x 2048 is the maximum size and downloading is disabled (it says on the page). You might be well advised to put a visible watermark on the images too, even at the size they are showing on FlickR. Some of what I can see looks oversharpened, but that may not be on the files you are submitting. If you can say what failure reason Alamy has put on each image it will help people to comment too. 

 

Maybe it's possible to download a full image when you're logged in. I'm getting into an infinite Catch-22 loop trying to log in, so Flickr is not for me any more. I can still view though, but that 2048px seems to be the maximum.

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flickr is saying that the owner has disabled downloading and max size is 2048 which is way too small as it is necessary to see what Alamy saw for an informed opinion. As Wim says, upload to Dropbox as it allows downloading of full size JPEGs as well as raws if necessary. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Is any of you guys logged in, while viewing in Flickr?

 

wim

 

edit: who started this Kafka thing? 😉 It's a deja vu all over again. (logging in to flickr I mean.)

Edited by wiskerke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I did a quick check directly on your flickr, two three of your images have some dirt/dust spots (maybe sensor or lens) on the clouds and blue sky.

One looks like over "Noise reduction" and not as sharp.

 

andre

Edited by AM Chang
update

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all for taking the trouble to enlighten me. I'm learning. 

These images only have raw input sharpening for the particular lens and sensor and JPEG output sharpened for screen as done by LR. They have not been sharpened or high-passed for output through PS . Also to be able to download from Flickr you will need to login to your user account. Temporarily I have set permission as public. I'll also upload to dropbox.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andre,

Thanks for you observation. On which images do you see the dust spots. I've been quite attentive to remove any but I can't exclude that one or two may have slipped. Also note that QC have not mentioned dust spots in their failure comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just activated the download of originals for anyone on Flickr so I have deleted the images and will be uploading watermarked ones soon.

Share this post


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

Hi Andre,

Thanks for you observation. On which images do you see the dust spots. I've been quite attentive to remove any but I can't exclude that one or two may have slipped. Also note that QC have not mentioned dust spots in their failure comments.

 

All the three exterior images, on the clouds and blue sky.

 

The "moving staircase's image" looks like over "Noise reduction" and not as sharp.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Andre,

You're right on the staircase image as it was a grab shot in available light at ISO 3200. My mistake to upload it. While on the others I got "Soft and lacking definition" for two of them while on the Plaza Spire i got Compression Artefacts from QC and no mention of dust spots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The image of the escalators has a lot of interpolation artefacts. Look at the brickwork and panelling. 7541. Also around the figures.

This is a straight QC fail in my book.

Edited by spacecadet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The images are fine artistically I think but they have an over-processed appearance - HDR style or high clarity look. These pics are probably more suitable for a PoD site than Alamy which tends to be aimed at the editorial market, although it is a lot broader than that really.

 

However, as Bryan said, Alamy don't use content in appraising image quality - all you need to do to pass initial QC is show you can take a technically good picture which no doubt you can. Keep it simple initially and you will fly through. A Nikon 50mm f1.4 on a D810 is a killer combo with optimum sharpness across the field at f11 so passing QC should be trivial really. There are no extra points in QC for aesthetics. It is an unusual model which results in a huge number and range of images on Alamy with aesthetic quality from amazing to awful. The whole world is here.

 

Also as Colin said, don't shoot at f16 on a 36MP camera as diffraction will start to have a strong effect on sharpness. This becomes more important the larger the sensor resolution.

 

I can't see any dust spots on any of the images.

Edited by MDM

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

×
×
  • 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.