Awaiting QC

[Russell]

Hi,

 

Another newbie question, sorry.

 

As I understand the text on the manage my submissions page, if an image fails QC the whole batch is rejected. No problems with that.

 

But it goes on to say:

 

"If we fail one image, we will reject all images in all media awaiting QC
(they will have the same QC date)."

 

So if I have a batch that's been awaiting QC for 2 or three days and then submit a later batch - perhaps several days later, and an image in the first set fails for some reason, the later batch will fail too.

 

Is that how it works? I haven't dared experiment as I'm trying to get a minimal portfolio up and running & I'm trying to minimise QC issues.

 

Thanks again.

 

Russell

[spacecadet]

Yes.

One out, all out.

One batch at a time is good policy until you get the hang of it.

Although looking back I note that I didn't observe that rule myself. Either thorough or lucky, then.

[Paulstw]

My experience with QC of late is similar to when you're sure you turned the electricity off before swapping lights out. You go and double check, yet, just before you twist that copper wire together, you attach a volt meter to the wires, just to be sure. Even then you're still sweating. 8 batch fails in the last 3 months, and another one on the way by the look of it. If your images don't pass within a week, just forget uploading anything else until you get confirmation.  

[Ashish Agarwal]

Paul, exactly the same feeling. I do these checks, and yet had to sweat out the whole of September because a cloud had a dust blemish that I had missed, and QC NEVER MISSES :-)

[John Mitchell]

Paul, exactly the same feeling. I do these checks, and yet had to sweat out the whole of September because a cloud had a dust blemish that I had missed, and QC NEVER MISSES :-)

Actually, they do miss sometimes. I had an image pass QC in September. Afterwards, I decided to request deletion of this image because I didn't like the white balance. While adjusting the WB, I noticed some large-ish dust spots lurking in the shadows that QC had apparently overlooked. Ironically, when I uploaded the corrected and cleaned-up version, it failed QC due to "noise."

[Ashish Agarwal]

Well, I must be the lucky one. I missed a few soft ones (or was not so sure) while checking, but they were returned. And I can never make out the chromatic aberration, but have been failed by that on QC once.

[Chris E]

I don't think QC ever miss anything if they check an image.

 

They may look at 1 in 10, or 1 in 50 who knows.

 

I think it depends on your QC history.

 

Getting a dust spot through isn't lucky, it's just not been looked at.

 

Chris E

[Mirco Vacca]

You just need to be hard to yourself. Checking images of other people and seeing errors is much easier. But accepting 4% unsharpness on own images is harder for some people. You see it and you want to give it a try because you love your own image to much. You really have to check at 100 percent and it has to be 100 percent sharp. Just imagine that you want to sell your camera and show the maximum sharpness that the camera can produce in order to sell it quicker. You have to zoom on the image and when it is sharp until you see Pixels then it is SHARP. If it happens before get rid of the image.

 

I have 150 batch submissions and only 1 failed at the beginning. I think batch 3. But after never! This should be your goal.

 

Small tricky tip:

To much noise is something that will be also not accepted but on the other hand it is better to have noise then unsharpness. For example you have dark situation and your are standing with ISO400 and 1/40 shutterspeed.  To have more chance for sharp images just turn the ISO to 800 to get maybe 1/60. ISO 800 is still acceptable at many cameras. But again this is only a operating tip. The most important is the end result. So check if the images are sharp.... VERY sharp and acceptable noise.

 

Mirco

[Imagery by Charly]

Russell, sorry to go a bit OT....

 

Micro that may be good for your camera, but remember there are those out there that produce a lot of noise at ISO 800 when shooting RAW, whereas you are shooting JPEG. So it depends on the camera's capability as to what is a max ISO and other variables also. Everyone should test where their ISO limits are for their cameras.

 

My A33 camera which is in for repair is good to ISO 1600 if exposure is correct with virtually no noise at all. Look forward to see where the max is on the A65 loaner I have. No doubt whether mine can be fixed or not, I'll wind up with it. Oooooweeee can't wait to get out an shoot!

[sandhun]

Apologies for the thread hijack but I'd like to ask a newbie question prior to making a submission to QC.
 
Does an image have to be pin sharp throughout? Let's take for instance an image of a model's hands. Her hands are the focal point of the image (I was hoping to upload an attachment but can't see an option to do so...). The background however is blurred (intentionally) due the shallow DoF. Is this likely to be rejected from QC?  

[Lynn Palmer]

No, as long as the hands are in focus you should be OK.

[spacecadet]

As you might expect, the rule applied is: what's supposed to be sharp should be. QC have a feeling for that.