M.Chapman Posted February 26, 2020 Share Posted February 26, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, MDM said: As I said, if I can get nice clean A4 prints and pass QC I won't be producing A4 prints, but I do like "clean" images with a level of grain that is well below "obtrusive" and I also want my images pass Alamy QC. That's the bit that concerns me most. Looking at the files you uploaded here (A few downloadable examples), unless Alamy QC are significantly more lenient when it comes to what they perceive are slide copies, I would be quite worried about submitting PriestLeap032, and to a lesser degree Blackhead027 to QC. (Maybe I'm paranoid?) If, as others have mentioned, Alamy apply lower QC standards to slide copies (which aren't submitted via the archival route) I don't understand their logic. If a customer selects an image submitted via the archive route, they are given a warning "This image could have imperfections as it’s either historical or reportage". No such warning will appear on slide copies submitted via the normal route. So surely the QC standard should be nominally the same as for straight digital camera shots? Otherwise don't they risk disappointing the customer? Here are a couple of further examples I've produced (using the Topaz workflow I described earlier). These are, I hope, good enough for standard Alamy QC with no leniency since (to my eyes) they aren't easily recognisable as slide copies. https://drive.google.com/open?id=1iFateIxBP1cRpLEphNsE_QKGorlMTfNj https://drive.google.com/open?id=16-G_CdoLgYryXOlX0iDpMUKn9j9wDZaE For proper inspection it's probably best to download as I'm not sure if Google Drive renders them 100% accurately. Mark Edited February 26, 2020 by M.Chapman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now