Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
M.Chapman

Where's the "Would this pass QC" thread gone?

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Did Alamy delete yesterday's thread on the homepage image? I can't find it.

I was going to add a comment about the banding and edge artifacts in the sky of today's homepage image.

 

Mark

 

 

Edited by M.Chapman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps it was considered to be critical. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

That's a little bit touchy.

Edited by spacecadet
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi there, 

 

We deleted the thread this morning. Not because the feedback was relating to our choice of picture, but because we didn't think it was fair on the photographer who wasn't included in this conversation. We welcome your comments and suggestions and will bear them in mind. 

 

Thanks,

Elisabeth 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was nothing to prevent the photographer from contributing.

Anyway the photographer couldn't be faulted- it was the QC process that let through an image that many of us thought should not pass, and which process has failed our own images for CA in the past.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, spacecadet said:

There was nothing to prevent the photographer from contributing.

 

Not really the point, is it?

 

I wouldn't criticise another contributor's pix unless I was asked for my opinion...

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, John Morrison said:

 

Not really the point, is it?

 

I wouldn't criticise another contributor's pix unless I was asked for my opinion...

Nor would I, but surely if Alamy say it was pulled because it was unfair on the photographer then it was the point.

IIRC the thread was critical of QC, not the photographer.

Edited by spacecadet
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Given that QC can only ever be a sampling process, I wouldn't blame Alamy QC. Yesterday's image probably shouldn't have been uploaded, or chosen for the homepage.

The banding and artifacts in the sky in today's image may have occured during conversion from AdobeRGB to sRGB or more likely as a result of the higher level of jpg compression used for images displayed on Alamy's website. Either way, it's not an ideal choice for the featured image on the homepage.

 

Anyway it's good to hear our comments and suggestions have been welcomed.

 

Mark

Edited by M.Chapman
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just please be more careful about what pictures you choose to showcase Alamy on the homepage.

 

It's fairly obvious. And not really much of a contentious issue. 

 

Everybody wants high standards - it works both ways. 

 

You expect it from us we expect it from you. 

Edited by geogphotos
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

Just please be more careful about what pictures you choose to showcase Alamy on the homepage.

 

It's fairly obvious. And not really much of a contentious issue. 

 

Everybody wants high standards - it works both ways. 

 

You expect it from us we expect it from you. 

 

What if it's a deliberate choice? Like it's more real in stead of stocky?

Same reason probably why we sometime see S*o images up there.

Or maybe I'm reading too much into it and it's just appealing to the one curating that page. (Which can still be for that reason, just not explicitly.)

Personally I'm all for the *Blink* method. Do first; reason later. In this sort of cases anyway.

 

wim

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, M.Chapman said:

Given that QC can only ever be a sampling process, I wouldn't blame Alamy QC. Yesterday's image probably shouldn't have been uploaded, or chosen for the homepage.

The banding and artifacts in the sky in today's image may have occured during conversion from AdobeRGB to sRGB or more likely as a result of the higher level of jpg compression used for images displayed on Alamy's website. Either way, it's not an ideal choice for the featured image on the homepage.

 

Anyway it's good to hear our comments and suggestions have been welcomed.

 

Mark

 

looked more like chromatic aberration to me, especially given it was at the edge of the frame. Even really stubborn CA can be removed with the click of a button in LR, though if its really really bad you just get left with grey where the CA was. 

Share this post


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

 

What if it's a deliberate choice? Like it's more real in stead of stocky?

Same reason probably why we sometime see S*o images up there.

Or maybe I'm reading too much into it and it's just appealing to the one curating that page. (Which can still be for that reason, just not explicitly.)

Personally I'm all for the *Blink* method. Do first; reason later. In this sort of cases anyway.

 

wim

 

 

If it is a deliberate choice then why was I made to check through hundreds of images when one of them in a Sub was found with a tiny trace of CA about 1% of what that image on the homepage showed?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Cal said:

 

looked more like chromatic aberration to me, especially given it was at the edge of the frame. Even really stubborn CA can be removed with the click of a button in LR, though if its really really bad you just get left with grey where the CA was. 

That was yesterday’s image. Take a look at today’s (wed) image (F65R42) which shows banding in the sky and compression artifacts along the skyline.

 

Mark

Edited by M.Chapman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

If it is a deliberate choice then why was I made to check through hundreds of images when one of them in a Sub was found with a tiny trace of CA about 1% of what that image on the homepage showed?

 

Obviously the home page is not done by QC.

Besides, maybe it was an agency image. And agencies are not tested for viruses at all.

Sorry so preoccupied these days. 😂

 

wim 😷

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone, 

 

The homepage images are chosen by our Picture Research team. They don't work with quality control, but have an extensive knowledge on what sells to Alamy customers. QC plays an important role in giving the customers an overall better search experience, but there will always be images passing through the net as long as a spot check system is in place. An image with CA or other technical issues can still be a sellable image, but if our search results were filled with them, it would probably put our customers off using our site in the first place. As with everything it's a fine balance :) 

 

Thanks, 

Elisabeth 

  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, Elisabeth. 

 

Personally, I couldn't care less about purple fringing. 

 

Stay safe there in Oxfordshire.

 

Edo

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Ed Rooney said:

Thank you, Elisabeth. 

 

Personally, I couldn't care less about purple fringing. 

 

Stay safe there in Oxfordshire.

 

Edo

 

Thanks Edo, hope you are keeping safe too!

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • 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.