QC failure - excessive similars

[geogphotos]

 

After a string of borderline/harsh QC fails - one confirmed by an email from QC ( leaves 'out of focus' in a silhoutte picture of a storm) - this is the latest.

 

My understanding was that five shots of the same subject was allowable, and in this case they are all different compositions. 

 

Yes, I am starting to think that I am the target of something here. 

Edited December 18, 2020 by geogphotos

[geogphotos]

https://geographyphotos.photoshelter.com/gallery/Brunel-Tower/G0000qSmy75IM5T4

 

Click thumbnails  to view to larger.

 

Has there been a change in policy? 

Edited December 18, 2020 by geogphotos

[spacecadet]

Seems tough- were they the entirety of the sub in which case perhaps they stuck out a bit.

When I had my spot of bother some years ago, I cured it by switching to RAW. But I also got some new glasses around that time, and my prescription had changed noticeably. A possibility? (I'm long-sighted).

Edited December 18, 2020 by spacecadet

[geogphotos]

I shoot everything in RAW and have new glasses with new prescription. The failure is not for sharpness, focus, or anything technical. It is because five images of the same subject each shot/cropped in a slightly different way is now a QC failure for excessive similars. These came from five RAW files - all that I shot and all that I submitted.

 

I have shot sequences like this of up to five images of the same subject countless times in the past

 

As I say my understanding was that up to five similar images was allowed - these are genuine similars they are not identical shots. From three different locations in one street, one from a different street at the back of the houses. 

 

Compare with Press Association pics of NHS hospital ward discussed recently when we were assured that the same rules applied to all. 

 

For me Alamy is just turning into a lottery, a waste of time to be submitting, waiting, resubmitting. Trying to guess what the latest subjective decision from QC will be or if I will strike lucky and have the pics accepted. 

Edited December 18, 2020 by geogphotos

[Allan Bell]

For different reasons I have similar feeling to you regarding QC.

 

Last submission was on 3rd Dec. Still waiting QC to look at it.

 

Just sympathising. (Is that really a word?)  And yes I know it can be spelt with a z.

 

Allan

 

[Cal]

On the "how to pass QC" PDF there is no upper or lower limit given to what they deem "excessive similars", so I guess it is up to their discretion.

 

I'm not really sure I can help much other than that. It's no use me offering my judgement on whether I would have uploaded 5, though I can say from looking through my own port and thinking to how I sort my images I get twitchy submitting more than three. When I did a sub of autumnal colour I had three similars of the same tree but two had different couples walking under the tree and one was landscape, the rest portrait. That said I've broken my rule of three with some subs of birds where I felt the change in pose or direction of the bird warranted it.

 

 

Edited December 18, 2020 by Cal

[geogphotos]

18 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

For different reasons I have similar feeling to you regarding QC.

 

Last submission was on 3rd Dec. Still waiting QC to look at it.

 

Just sympathising. (Is that really a word?)  And yes I know it can be spelt with a z.

 

Allan

 

 

 

Thanks for the sympathy Allan, I do get disheartened at Alamy treating me like a naughty child. 

[geogphotos]

1 minute ago, Cal said:

On the "how to pass QC" PDF there is no upper or lower limit given to what they deem "excessive similars", so I guess it is up to their discretion.

 

I'm not really sure I can help much other than that. It's not use me offering my judgement on whether I would have uploaded 5, though I can say from looking through my own port and thinking to how I sort my images I get twitchy submitting more than three. When I did a sub of autumnal colour I had three similars of the same tree but two had different couples walking under the tree and one was portrait. That said I've broken my rule of three with some subs of birds where I felt the change in pose or direction of the bird warranted it.

 

 

 

 

I am fairly sure that there used to be an actual rule that specified five similars. Maybe that has changed. If so it becomes even more subjective. 

 

What constitutes 'too many'?

[geogphotos]

Anyway, it has spoiled my plans for work today....uploading small batches to trying recover 5 stars.

 

Like playing snakes and ladders.

 

I have a better idea. Go and buy some beer and forget Alamy for the while....😁

Edited December 18, 2020 by geogphotos

[countryman]

Hi Guys,

 

1st post here after many years of joining Alamy. Had very same problem the other day... 4 marked as excess. ... coming from a previous world or corporate comms, I often shoot a subject for various media platforms I used to use (from M/M, to touchscreens, video format [adding 16:9 more recently], and print. So I was irked the other day when images with specific spaces for PIP/Copy text and captions under / title over space were trashed by QC. :(

[NYCat]

I remember the five similars rule too.

 

Paulette

[imageplotter]

8 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

Compare with Press Association pics of NHS hospital ward discussed recently when we were assured that the same rules applied to all. 

 

...and then there's Sopa/Zuma sending through 2 identical sets of almost everything (as SOPA, SOPA Images, Contributor/SOPA, SOPA via Zuma Wire, Contributor/SOPA/Zuma Wire or any other possible combination of those) almost every day. I assume these are eventually sorted and reduced to one? But they linger on the feed for a long time. Similars are sometimes inevitable with news uploads (I know I've inadvertently done it plenty of times, especially with people at events/Downing Street etc), so I'm not criticising the photographer, but why do these agencies get to send them through twice, it must be an awful lot of work to either automate their later merging or, in the worst case, for someone at Alamy to have to do it manually?

 

It confuses me, too, for stock -  I've often done sets of 3 or so in different crops with slightly different weighting of image elements/content where possible (always from different RAWS). 

Edited December 18, 2020 by imageplotter

[spacecadet]

1 hour ago, geogphotos said:

The failure is not for sharpness, focus, or anything technical.

You've ruled it out, but I wasn't referring to this^

but to this

3 hours ago, geogphotos said:

an email from QC ( leaves 'out of focus' in a silhoutte picture of a storm)

 

[Mr Standfast]

The mixture of portrait and landscape is justification for an appeal. There is scope for some discretion surely.

 

 

 

[spacecadet]

56 minutes ago, Cal said:

On the "how to pass QC" PDF there is no upper or lower limit given to what they deem "excessive similars", so I guess it is up to their discretion.

 

I'm not really sure I can help much other than that. It's not use me offering my judgement on whether I would have uploaded 5, though I can say from looking through my own port and thinking to how I sort my images I get twitchy submitting more than three. When I did a sub of autumnal colour I had three similars of the same tree but two had different couples walking under the tree and one was portrait. That said I've broken my rule of three with some subs of birds where I felt the change in pose or direction of the bird warranted it.

 

 

You're speaking to a contributor who has been submitting for nearly 20 years.

I remember the 5 similars too. That pdf is far more recent.

[Cal]

Just now, spacecadet said:

You're speaking to a contributor who has been submitting for nearly 20 years.

 

I can see that. What I can't see is what you're getting at.

[spacecadet]

Just now, Cal said:

 

I can see that. What I can't see is what you're getting at.

• Joined Alamy: 05 Feb 2019

You're not telling Ian anything he doesn't already know.

[Harry Harrison]

Could they possibly be trying out some kind of 'AI' QC now, or is that too far-fetched.

[meanderingemu]

i find this rejection, in line with some recent we see of "this is the rule" but it doesn't apply to everyone (see the montage rule) and "we won't actually tell you what the rule is" even more frustrating this week with the upload mess and images disappearing on no information back.  I'm lucky i didn't hit QC i guess, as not only do i have similars, I had same image a couple of times....

 

i am sorry you are going through this....

[Cal]

8 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

• Joined Alamy: 05 Feb 2019

You're not telling Ian anything he doesn't already know.

 

Right, I see.

 

Let's break it down into nice bite sized chunks.

 

- The OP asked the question, effectively asking the forum membership why he may have failed QC, stating that he understood the rule to be a maximum limit of 5 similars.

 

- I took time out of my day to have a quick read of the PDF guidelines on how to pass QC and noticed under the "excessive similars" there is no such stipulation of how many images constitutes "too many similars" and therefore it is indeed down to Alamy's discretion, indeed as is our usage of the site in general and as a whole.

 

- I relayed this in a post.

 

- The OP repeats his thoughts about the 5-similars rule but that it must have been changed.

 

- You then tell me I'm telling the OP nothing he doesn't already know.

 

Um?

[Mr Standfast]

44 minutes ago, Harry Harrison said:

Could they possibly be trying out some kind of 'AI' QC now, or is that too far-fetched.

If so it's gone skynet... More likely it's a newby in qc.

 

Stay safe.

Edited December 18, 2020 by Mr Standfast
Typoo

[Mr Standfast]

Just now, Mr Standfast said:

Double post

 

Edited December 18, 2020 by Mr Standfast

[dmj]

4 hours ago, geogphotos said:

 

After a string of borderline/harsh QC fails - one confirmed by an email from QC ( leaves 'out of focus' in a silhoutte picture of a storm) - this is the latest.

 

My understanding was that five shots of the same subject was allowable, and in this case they are all different compositions. 

 

Yes, I am starting to think that I am the target of something here. 

One subject from various perspectives which would could suit different layout formats, it’s what I always try (and usually forget) to do!

[geogphotos]

Hi Ian,

We know we’ve failed a few times recently, but this is because we want to provide the best imagery to our customers. We believe you can select the best of a series of very similar images, and this means the customer’s search results aren’t blocked up with additional shots that are close to identical. Our rule applies to images such as wildlife, where the subject of a similar looking scene might move into different angles – eg a bird that moves it’s head into different angles. A street is always going to be the same, so we feel that you can be more selective, providing strong, individual images that will be more useful to our customers.

 

Thanks,
Alamy QC Team

 

I actually find this insulting. Clearly it is based on the assumption that I couldn't care less about providing the best imagery to our customers but just chuck any old stuff out there for the hell of it. And since they have been rejected the imagery it patently will not be provided for Alamy customers. They can go elsewhere. 

 

"A street is always going to be the same"

 

Yeah it's always like that!

 

Do show me any existing image on Alamy that shows the David Murray John Tower in Swindon in winter evening light like this ( edit ...I see only one so hardly oversupply). Could it be that I travelled to Swindon on that day and at that time, to this specific street at that specific time in that light because I couldn't care less about providing useful imagery to our customers. 

 

Give me beer. FFS

 

 

Edited December 18, 2020 by geogphotos

[geogphotos]

1 hour ago, Cal said:

 

 

 

- I relayed this in a post.

 

- The OP repeats his thoughts about the 5-similars rule but that it must have been changed.

 

- You then tell me I'm telling the OP nothing he doesn't already know.

 

Um?

 

 

In which case since this rule of 5 has been in place for nearly 20 years wouldn't it make more sense, and show some respect, to inform the experienced contributor that they have changed the rule rather than failing an entire upload batch including other images?

Edited December 18, 2020 by geogphotos