Frozen Account

[ebersonimages]

Although I have been involved in stock photography for many years, I am new to Alamy.  I have had my account frozen a couple times due to the rejection of some photos.  I just had another image rejected and have been frozen again for 10 days.  None of my other stock companies have this and I am wondering why Alamy imposes this restriction (punishment.)  All it really does is give me more time to accumulate images to submit when unfrozen but it does just feel unfair especially when rejected images have been accepted at my other companies.

Thanking you in advance for your replies.

[Steve F]

Hi Charles,

Welcome to Alamy. Alamy does have quite high standards and it is a selling point to clients. They only have the resources to spot check each submission - they expect contributors to do checks on the quality of their submissions. Have you come across this:

 

https://www.alamy.com/contributors/alamy-how-to-pass-qc.pdf

 

I wouldn't think of it as a punishment, so much as a reason for improving your photography. If you let us know what the reasons given for the rejection were, the forum members can advise further.

 

Stephen

[spacecadet]

2 minutes ago, Steve F said:

If you let us know what the reasons given for the rejection were, the forum members can advise further.

 

.....and post a 100% crop! QC is on technical grounds only. If we can see it, we can offer opinions. But we need to see it.

[Mr Standfast]

Hello Charlie.

If you search through the forum to QC failures you will see much discussion on the subject. Comparison to other companies is a bit pointless, you are contributing to Alamy and Alamy's rules apply. Once you work out the standard it's easy to attain and you will fly through QC.

 

Stay safe.

[ebersonimages]

I thank everyone for your prompt responses.  To clarify, my issue is not so much with the rejections.  Each company has its own standards and rejections are part of the process, it is being frozen that I argue with.  Nevertheless, I'll just submit to my other sources until I am defrosted😀

[spacecadet]

Then we can assume you know why your images failed QC.

[Steve F]

45 minutes ago, ebersonimages said:

I thank everyone for your prompt responses.  To clarify, my issue is not so much with the rejections.  Each company has its own standards and rejections are part of the process, it is being frozen that I argue with.  Nevertheless, I'll just submit to my other sources until I am defrosted😀

 

Have fun thawing! Alamy has a different model than some other agencies, which often work on a subscription model for clients, and tends to receive higher prices for its images. I'm sure maintaining a consistently high quality is part of this. I would still see it as an encouragement to improve. Alamy QC failure reasons are all related to the technical quality of the photograph, e.g. excessive noise, unsharp, underexposed..  - it would be good to eliminate these as part of your workflow. 

 

As to whether freezing the account is a good thing? I'd reiterate that they rely on contributors to maintain a high quality themselves. If you've failed recently, I would expect subsequent submissions to be checked over more thoroughly by Alamy.

[Mr Standfast]

🥶

[MDM]

Alamy’s model is effectively self-certification that images submitted are up to a certain technical standard with some checks on samples of batches. That standard is simple: images must be sharp with the main subject in focus, a certain minimum pixel size, no chromatic aberration, reasonably well-exposed/developed and so on. 

 

Importantly they do not take content into account and after the initial batch they only check samples from batches. There is no doubt that this is all about economics as they don’t have to employ an army of quality controllers to check content and technical quality. However, they do need a deterrent to prevent contributors from just uploading anything which is where the sin bin comes in. It used to be stricter at 30 days in fact.
 

The idea is that you learn what is and what is not acceptable. It is not difficult. 

Edited January 4, 2021 by MDM

[Allan Bell]

10 days frozen is lenient compared to lockouts of 30 days a few years ago. A few on here may remember them.

 

Allan

 

[spacecadet]

1 minute ago, Allan Bell said:

A few on here may remember them.

(cough)

[MDM]

1 minute ago, spacecadet said:

(cough)

 

Is that new and persistent? 

[geogphotos]

Passing QC seems simple until you start failing.

 

Do not be too complacent or too superior.

 

It can probably happen to everybody because we are all human. 

 

I have no views on whether 'frozen accounts' are justified. It is Alamy's game and that's all that matters.

[John Morrison]

4 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

It can probably happen to everybody because we are all human. 

Well... most of us...

[meanderingemu]

7 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

Passing QC seems simple until you start failing.

 

Do not be too complacent or too superior.

 

 

 

i don't see OP as complacent or superior, I read posts as saying, i would like to upload images without pre determining if they meet the Agency's criteria, and if they don't feel free to reject, but let me immediately upload more unvalidated images.  

[MDM]

6 minutes ago, geogphotos said:

Passing QC seems simple until you start failing.

 

Do not be too complacent or too superior.

 

It can probably happen to everybody because we are all human. 

 

I have no views on whether 'frozen accounts' are justified. It is Alamy's game and that's all that matters.

 

The only way a photographer experienced in the ways of Alamy QC should ever fail is if they make a mistake (e.g. miss a dust spot). The rest is simple for any experienced photographer so complacency it must be then. If I was to fail QC, I would blame myself for not properly checking my images before uploading. 

 

 

[meanderingemu]

2 hours ago, ebersonimages said:

I thank everyone for your prompt responses.  To clarify, my issue is not so much with the rejections.  Each company has its own standards and rejections are part of the process, it is being frozen that I argue with.  Nevertheless, I'll just submit to my other sources until I am defrosted😀

 

so you agree that your image did not meet Alamy's requirements, you would just like to be able to upload more of the same without waiting, am I understanding this correctly?  

 

[meanderingemu]

1 minute ago, MDM said:

 

The only way a photographer experienced in the ways of Alamy QC should ever fail is if they make a mistake (e.g. miss a dust spot). The rest is simple for any experienced photographer so complacency it must be then. If I was to fail QC, I would blame myself for not properly checking my images before uploading. 

 

 

 

 

Complacency or lack of ownership in quality of submission.  I have seen it in some MS forums, where some feel it's up to the agency to do the checking, not the contributor.  Upload everything, feel free to reject what was wrong, in all impunity.  

[geogphotos]

18 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

The only way a photographer experienced in the ways of Alamy QC should ever fail is if they make a mistake (e.g. miss a dust spot). The rest is simple for any experienced photographer so complacency it must be then. If I was to fail QC, I would blame myself for not properly checking my images before uploading. 

 

 

 

 

That is surely a truism.  

 

Are you suggesting anybody deliberately makes mistakes?

 

But I did have a recent example of a fail because the 5 similars rule had changed without me being aware. 

 

Do not be complacent, any of us can fail QC.

Edited January 4, 2021 by geogphotos

[MDM]

8 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

Complacency or lack of ownership in quality of submission.  I have seen it in some MS forums, where some feel it's up to the agency to do the checking, not the contributor.  Upload everything, feel free to reject what was wrong, in all impunity.  

 

Sure. It beats me why any experienced contributors actually worry about passing QC unless they have eyesight problems. Taking pride and responsibility in your work is fundamental. It is not as if the QC bar is very high. Back in the day you had to upsize every image to a minimum of 48MB at a time when a lot of digital cameras were still at 12MP or lower. This meant a lot of borderline images in terms of sharpness, moreover because no sharpening whatsoever was allowed. A few early QC failures taught me to be very overcautious. 

[geogphotos]

20 minutes ago, meanderingemu said:

 

 

i don't see OP as complacent or superior, I read posts as saying, i would like to upload images without pre determining if they meet the Agency's criteria, and if they don't feel free to reject, but let me immediately upload more unvalidated images.  

 

Neither did I. I was reacting to some of the comments.

[meanderingemu]

Just now, geogphotos said:

 

Neither did I. I was reacting to some of the comments.

makes sense.  

[MDM]

1 minute ago, geogphotos said:

 

 

That is surely a truism.  

 

Are you suggesting anybody deliberately makes mistakes?

 

 

What ????????????

 

OK. I realise I just made the mistake of responding to one of your posts in an attempt to have a rational discussion. My mistake. Apologies to my more sensible self. Never again. 

[geogphotos]

3 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

Sure. It beats me why any experienced contributors actually worry about passing QC unless they have eyesight problems. Taking pride and responsibility in your work is fundamental. It is not as if the QC bar is very high. Back in the day you had to upsize every image to a minimum of 48MB at a time when a lot of digital cameras were still at 12MP or lower. This meant a lot of borderline images in terms of sharpness, moreover because no sharpening whatsoever was allowed. A few early QC failures taught me to be very overcautious. 

 

 

Thanks for the insight. 

[geogphotos]

36 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

 

What ????????????

 

OK. I realise I just made the mistake of responding to one of your posts in an attempt to have a rational discussion. My mistake. Apologies to my more sensible self. Never again. 

 

Nope, just that people do make mistakes and therefore can fail QC. 

 

Edit: One of the most irrational things anybody can do is always state that their opinion is rational whereas those of others are irrational. 

Edited January 4, 2021 by geogphotos

[geogphotos]

Going back to the OP and comments made in response. Really it is fairly easy to get to know the standard expected to pass QC. It is also easy to fail through carelessness and making mistakes. 

 

Through error I recently sent an old cruddy copy of a 1950s slide by ftp to Stock instead of Archive. No surprise what happened next. But I will certainly take more care next time.

 

I had been on 5 stars for a long time since the system came in so did not have to go through QC apart from occasional random checks. But then one of those random checks picked up a problem and I had a series of other QC fails - all for different reasons I might add. Yes, it is annoying,  even patronising, to be punished for mistakes. But that is the way the Alamy system works and you do have to take it on the chin and cut out these careless mistakes. 

 

I have never had my account 'frozen' but my understanding is that this happens when there are repeated failures and the contributor does not appear to be taking notice or learning the lesson. My apologies if that is not the case in your situation.  Whether the same images have been accepted elsewhere is totally irrelevant.

 

As others have suggested if the reasons for failure escape you then upload some 100% crops for forum members to comment and help.

 

I am on 3 stars hoping to get back to 5 stars by re-building my track record of QC passes. Latest ones submitted yesterday have just passed so not too long to wait. 

Edited January 5, 2021 by geogphotos