Soft or lacking definition?

[Lars Espeter]

Hi everyone.

 

I have tried for the 6th time to get through the initial contributor QC.
For some odd reason, all my images except one get rejected for soft or lacking definition. Of course, I have read the guidelines and checked the images again.
The one image that got accepted was processed, saved, and uploaded the same way like all others.
The only exception to the rule was an image that had soft definition and noise. The noise was there, no doubt.
None of the images with soft or lacking definition were scaled up, low-res, and highest level quality JPeg saves. And they got accepted on other stock photo sites, as well.
The images are far sharper than the QC guides examples, by the way.
Can someone explain the reasons for the repeated rejection due to this issue, other than the image being soft?

 

The accepted and all other images were shot using the same set of camera bodies and lenses. Canon 7D, Canon Rebel T, Sony a7 II.

 

Thanks.

 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Lars Espeter
additional information added

[geogphotos]

Post a 100% crop.

[Steve F]

Lars,

Do what Ian says above, so we can see an actual photo. Are you saying that you resubmitted the same photos 6 times to QC?

Soft would normally refer to camera shake or no point of sharp focus - not normally something you can edit out after taking the picture.

[Lars Espeter]

19 minutes ago, Steve F said:

Lars,

Do what Ian says above, so we can see an actual photo. Are you saying that you resubmitted the same photos 6 times to QC?

Soft would normally refer to camera shake or no point of sharp focus - not normally something you can edit out after taking the picture.

Hey.
Camera shake and/or out of focus are also not an issue. I tried 2 different images plus the accepted one every new attempt.

 

 

[Lars Espeter]

Wait ... is there a way to post an image here other than the URL option?

 

[Steve F]

1 minute ago, Lars Espeter said:

Wait ... is there a way to post an image here other than the URL option?

 

 

You need to have it hosted on a website where it can be shared. Facebook doesn't work. Try:

https://imgbb.com/

[Lars Espeter]

Thanks, Steve.

If the image is blurry or has camera shake that would be obviously that. Soft or lacking definition according to the QC guide is a very different issue.
 

But my account has been frozen for uploads for 10 days now anyways. I guess 6x trying in one month to get accepted is too often. 🤣

I will stick to other stock photo pages that are more clear about their rejection reasons.

Thank you for your answers. I really appreciate it.
 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Lars Espeter
had to rewrite a sentence

[Steve F]

3 minutes ago, Lars Espeter said:

Thanks, Steve.

If the image is blurry or has camera shake that would be obviously that. Soft or lacking definition according to the QC guide is a very different issue.
 

But my account has now been frozen for uploads for 10 days now anyways. I guess 6x trying in one month to get accepted is too often. 🤣

I will stick to other stock photo pages that are more clear about their rejection reasons.

Thank you for your answers. I really appreciate it.
 

 

Hi Lars,

No problem. Alamy QC is a bit harder to pass than other agencies, but still not too hard, there's many tens of thousands of contributors. The QC team does make the occasional mistake, but if you've been rejected for the same reason multiple times, you're probably doing something wrong. The reasons are quite well defined:

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

Steve

[Lars Espeter]

1 minute ago, Steve F said:

 

Hi Lars,

No problem. Alamy QC is a bit harder to pass than other agencies, but still not too hard, there's many tens of thousands of contributors. The QC team does make the occasional mistake, but if you've been rejected for the same reason multiple times, you're probably doing something wrong. The reasons are quite well defined:

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

Steve

Hi Steve,

I have read the Alamy QC guide a couple of times now. I am also not a newbie when it comes to photography or editing software.
Soft or lacking definition is a different horse than camera shake or blur. When images get repeatedly rejected for one and the same reason that got accepted on other providers that is most likely not an issue with the photos. Especially not when one follows the requirements for images to a T when it comes to files etc.

Don't get me wrong. I like when images get rejected when they have problems. Sometimes one uploads the wrong version, does not spot noise, or some other mistakes happen. The rejection for noise I got once during the process here was on point. And QC teams make mistakes, no problem.

But still, out of 18 high res images getting 17 rejected for the same reason ... sorry, but something is wrong there. Some images were shot at pretty high shutter speeds, and under the same conditions as the single accepted one, and look the same quality wise.

Never mind. 

 

[Steve F]

2 minutes ago, Lars Espeter said:

Hi Steve,

I have read the Alamy QC guide a couple of times now. I am also not a newbie when it comes to photography or editing software.
Soft or lacking definition is a different horse than camera shake or blur. When images get repeatedly rejected for one and the same reason that got accepted on other providers that is most likely not an issue with the photos. Especially not when one follows the requirements for images to a T when it comes to files etc.

Don't get me wrong. I like when images get rejected when they have problems. Sometimes one uploads the wrong version, does not spot noise, or some other mistakes happen. The rejection for noise I got once during the process here was on point. And QC teams make mistakes, no problem.

But still, out of 18 high res images getting 17 rejected for the same reason ... sorry, but something is wrong there. Some images were shot at pretty high shutter speeds, and under the same conditions as the single accepted one, and look the same quality wise.

Never mind. 

 

 

Understood. But I think we could judge that with a 100% crop

[MDM]

19 minutes ago, Lars Espeter said:

Soft or lacking definition is a different horse than camera shake or blur.

 

Not by Alamy criteria - it is a catch all term for a range of imperfections as perceived by Alamy QC. If you want informed advice, then do what the man said - upload one or more of the failing images at full size and make them downloadable.

 

[wiskerke]

54 minutes ago, MDM said:

 

Not by Alamy criteria - it is a catch all term for a range of imperfections as perceived by Alamy QC. If you want informed advice, then do what the man said - upload one or more of the failing images at full size and make them downloadable.

 

 

I would like to add:

Preferably the exact same file(s) you have uploaded.

 

wim

 

[Betty LaRue]

1 hour ago, MDM said:

 

Not by Alamy criteria - it is a catch all term for a range of imperfections as perceived by Alamy QC. If you want informed advice, then do what the man said - upload one or more of the failing images at full size and make them downloadable.

 

Agreed. Back in the day when I had problems, I found “soft & lacking definition” covered several things. For instance, if you have an image, say a dog, that is deemed by QC to be the subject. A rock just barely in front of the dog is what the camera focused on and is sharp as a tack. The dog is only very slightly soft. QC will fail the image because they correctly identify the dog as the subject, and it isn’t tack sharp. They particularly will look at the dog’s eyes, which always needs to be the sharpest thing in the image.
Just having something very sharp in the image isn’t enough. It needs to be the right something.

[Betty LaRue]

To pass your first submission, I suggest you set up your camera on a tripod and shoot something very simple. A flower (not blown in wind), a box of tissues, a can of food. Pretty much fill the frame with your subject.

Be aware that because you have failed so many times, all of your future submissions will be scrutinized to the max. It happened to me, and I had a stretch of failures. I began discarding images that normally I thought was “good enough”. Gradually, I built up many successful submissions, and apparently QC decided I’d learned my lesson.

As far as other outlets, disregard what they accept. Each agency has their own criteria, and you must evaluate your images according to Alamy’s. It’s doable, and once you get in the groove, you’ll be fine.

Be careful about falling in love with a particular image. That rare opportunity you had. That astounding, beautiful light. Those things will do you in because you know they were special circumstances not often found again. You have to be as brutal with your culling as if you shot an ordinary subject.  I can’t tell you how many times I uploaded my “special” images that weren’t up to standard. It really hurts to discard those.

Another tip…often, if you have an image that you are wavering whether it is sharp enough, downsizing it to the minimum accepted by Alamy will make it sharp enough. A lot of us do that. It helps noise, too.

Edited September 7, 2021 by Betty LaRue

[TeeCee]

2 hours ago, Betty LaRue said:

To pass your first submission, I suggest you set up your camera on a tripod and shoot something very simple. A flower (not blown in wind), a box of tissues, a can of food. Pretty much fill the frame with your subject.

Be aware that because you have failed so many times, all of your future submissions will be scrutinized to the max. It happened to me, and I had a stretch of failures. I began discarding images that normally I thought was “good enough”. Gradually, I built up many successful submissions, and apparently QC decided I’d learned my lesson.

As far as other outlets, disregard what they accept. Each agency has their own criteria, and you must evaluate your images according to Alamy’s. It’s doable, and once you get in the groove, you’ll be fine.

Be careful about falling in love with a particular image. That rare opportunity you had. That astounding, beautiful light. Those things will do you in because you know they were special circumstances not often found again. You have to be as brutal with your culling as if you shot an ordinary subject.  I can’t tell you how many times I uploaded my “special” images that wasn’t up to standard. It really hurts to discard those.

Another tip…often, if you have an image that you are wavering whether it is sharp enough, downsizing it to the minimum accepted by Alamy will make it sharp enough. A lot of us do that. It helps noise, too.

Ditto to all that - and do not over process the images. No excessive saturation, no sharpening, keep it simple and clean. As Betty says, you'll now have to do a lot of this to convince QC that you're capable of doing this to their standards.

Tony