Current QC Times

[John Mitchell]

Sorry, I know this is a boring question, but have QC times been slow lately? My last two batches cleared within 24 hours each, but one uploaded on Sunday, April 28th is still "awaiting QC."

 

Am I back to knitting for the next month?

[John Morrison]

1-2 days QC for me...

[David Kilpatrick]

I've just had three batches from Monday overnight go through processing and QC, but one has got stuck in processing. It happens.

[John Mitchell]

Thanks. I had a batch stuck in processing for a week last month, but this latest one went straight to "Awaiting QC."  After a "soft and lacking def" failure -- which I didn't understand at all -- in March, I'm now totally paranoid. I've been obsessively checking each image at least a dozen times before submitting. Hopefully, the current delay is just a glitch in the system, but  my knittting needles are sharpened and ready...

[Vlad]

2 days during the last couple of weeks, mostly sunday evening to tuesday evening or wednesday morning. the only exception has been around easter when I had to wait about 8-9 days.

[DickJ]

I had a batch pass two work-days after uploading on the weekend.

Dick Janzig

[Richard Baker]

My last QC was overnight. But even if it were a few days more, I wouldn't be too worried.

 

And as David says, hiccups do happen. 

 

Richard. 

[Steve B]

Sometimes overnight and sometimes 2 or 3 days for me, generally not to worried at those times..just christmas and easter took longer, which is pretty understandable.

 

Steve.

[Alex Todd]

Last couple of evenings I uploaded around a dozen images and both times they cleared QC by lunchtime next day,

[John Mitchell]

Thanks, everyone, for the feedback. I fear that I will be in the Alamy doghouse for the next month (missing out on all those potentially big distributor sales). Time will tell, as always.

[Craig Yates]

Uploaded the morning of the 1st of May, batch has just passed which is pretty good going for QC times.

Ice creams all round for the QC team!

 

 

Regards

Craig

[Marvin McAbee]

Last two batches in before 5pm keywording the next morning.

[zollster]

my last batch was done in a few hours

[Chris]

I have had similar experience.  For the past couple of months it has been a day or two.  I have been in the 'sin bin' several times in the past.  I don't get why Alamy does that.  I cannot see any technical reason, but rather just their silly (and rather lazy) approach to quality control-- kind of punitive really.  

 

If photographers repeatedly submit low quality  work, ban them.   Unfortunately at least in my case, it is more often subjective judgement.  The images that Alamy reject almost always get accepted and sell on other sites.    I have a very high acceptance rate both here and on other sites.

 

I have come up with my own solution.  Although Alamy is my preferred stock agency, now, when they put me in the dog house for a month, I just submit to my second choice sites.  If Alamy wants to be punitive, I will place my images elsewhere while thy are playing their silly games.  I don't waste my time trying to figure out which photo in a batch did not pass and why.  I simply go somewhere else for that batch of work and any other work I have ready for submission until Alamy gets over their temper tantrum.  It may seem weak, but it is my way of striking back.  I encourage others to do the same, or at least let Alamy know that this month in the dog house is unacceptable-- it is costing all of us money.  Quality control is important, but rather than being punitive, give good prompt feed back.  That will help photographers learn what Alamy inspectors are looking for.  Taking a month off to knit does nothing for Alamy or my sales, and very little to help me understand what Alamy is looking for.  

[John Mitchell]

I have had similar experience.  For the past couple of months it has been a day or two.  I have been in the 'sin bin' several times in the past.  I don't get why Alamy does that.  I cannot see any technical reason, but rather just their silly (and rather lazy) approach to quality control-- kind of punitive really.  

 

If photographers repeatedly submit low quality  work, ban them.   Unfortunately at least in my case, it is more often subjective judgement.  The images that Alamy reject almost always get accepted and sell on other sites.    I have a very high acceptance rate both here and on other sites.

 

I have come up with my own solution.  Although Alamy is my preferred stock agency, now, when they put me in the dog house for a month, I just submit to my second choice sites.  If Alamy wants to be punitive, I will place my images elsewhere while thy are playing their silly games.  I don't waste my time trying to figure out which photo in a batch did not pass and why.  I simply go somewhere else for that batch of work and any other work I have ready for submission until Alamy gets over their temper tantrum.  It may seem weak, but it is my way of striking back.  I encourage others to do the same, or at least let Alamy know that this month in the dog house is unacceptable-- it is costing all of us money.  Quality control is important, but rather than being punitive, give good prompt feed back.  That will help photographers learn what Alamy inspectors are looking for.  Taking a month off to knit does nothing for Alamy or my sales, and very little to help me understand what Alamy is looking for.  

 

I agree, and I have voiced similar opinions on the old forum. Making those of us with good QC records wait a month or more for what could be accomplished with a short e-mail that would take only a couple of seconds to send is totally unfair IMO. This would not, as Alamy claims, take time away from processing other contributors' submissions. If someone has a history of chronic QC failure, then that of course would be a totally different matter. I find this punitive mindset to be very inconsistent and puzzling, as Alamy is fair and reasonable in most other areas. Also, given that we are now handing over at least 50% to Alamy on each sale, I feel that changing this policy is the least that they can do for those of us who help finance their business with consistent sales. It is in Alamy's interest to keep us motivated and productive. I believe that I am making constructive comments here BTW. 

[spacecadet]

I've never been made to wait, and, what's more, when I've had a fail, I've always been able to identify the offender and the edited resubmission has always been passed quickly.

Only one fail in 3 years, though.

[John Morrison]

I don't waste my time trying to figure out which photo in a batch did not pass and why.

 

Then you may continue to have trouble with Alamy's "silly approach" to quality control...

[Craig Yates]

 

I don't waste my time trying to figure out which photo in a batch did not pass and why.

 

Then you may continue to have trouble with Alamy's "silly approach" to quality control...

 

 

By not taking time to figure out which photo did not pass will cultivate potential future time wasted due to further fails in submissions.

The ball is always in our court to ensure our images follow the clear guidelines laid out. 

 

Regards

Craig

[Orhan Tsolak]

Well, I'have been waiting for more than a month now, and there is no sign as to why at all. Not happy. 

[Chris]

I see your point Craig, and early on I did try a little harder to figure it out, but most of the time it was not what I would really consider a technical problem.  Wouldn't it be so much simpler for the inspectors to let us know right away, several words of specific and meaningful comments rather than making us sit around for a month trying to read their minds.  I suspect that in the end, if serious photographers knew what the problem is and could correct for it, Alamy would spend less time on QC.  I don't mind rejection for good reasons, or even purely stylistic ones, but making me wait for a month to find out why and then largely guessing at the problem is counter productive.  

[Craig Yates]

Well, I'have been waiting for more than a month now, and there is no sign as to why at all. Not happy. 

 

Longer than a month! I would email member services. I once waited longer than a month, chased it up and there had been a glitch

in the system and the images passed the following day. 

 

Regards

Craig

[Doc]

QC for me has been absolutely excellent over the past year - I upload images in the evening and they pass the next morning (assuming its a normal working day) - most recently last night/this morning. No obvious problems here!

 

Kumar Sriskandan

[Orhan Tsolak]

Thanks Craig. I appreciate the advice.  Will do that once it is actually is 28 days. I re-checked and it was 5 April last time I passed QC, and been waiting since 12 of April. So my mistake there. But I am Chris on this one. Nearly a month I am trying  to guess too the reasons. I have almost 50 photos in the queue. It feels like a punishment really.  

[spacecadet]

  I don't mind rejection for good reasons, or even purely stylistic ones, but making me wait for a month to find out why and then largely guessing at the problem is counter productive.  

There's no editing for content so you are not rejected for stylistic reasons. The QC criteria are consistent and easy to understand. One becomes more critical over time and I have noticed four years on that I sometimes reject material which would have passed. So the bar can drop a bit but only if it's high to start with. I don't have to guess.

[John Mitchell]

 

 

I don't waste my time trying to figure out which photo in a batch did not pass and why.

 

Then you may continue to have trouble with Alamy's "silly approach" to quality control...

 

 

By not taking time to figure out which photo did not pass will cultivate potential future time wasted due to further fails in submissions.

The ball is always in our court to ensure our images follow the clear guidelines laid out. 

 

Regards

Craig

 

When I see that a submission is heading for the "sin bin," I always try to figure out which image might have failed, and I am usually surprised. It is seldom the one that I thought it was. Anyway, it's not the occasional failure that bothers me, it's the unncessarily long wait to hear about them. As far as Alamy's submission guidelines and samples go, they are clear for the most part but certainly not perfect,  just like the rest of us. Also, anyone who has done any kind of teaching knows that instant feeback is by far the most effective. Think back to high school when teachers used to wait a month to give you a test back and go over your mistakes. It did no good at all.