Jump to content

Weird QC fail - no reply from Submissions


Recommended Posts

My first QC fail for ages has left me puzzled. The fail reason is noise, but the shot was taken with an approved DSLR, ISO 200, bright sunshine... everything optimum. And for the life of me, I can't see what they're objecting to. I replied to Submissions for clarification more than two weeks ago, but they haven't replied. 

 

Is the QC team refusing to get into this sort of discussion? I have suspended uploads until I hear from them because I'm concerned that they've raised the QC bar.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Responses will be slow or non existent until around Jan. 6th, I think they said. 
A question…by any chance, was your image underexposed and you brightened it in post? That can introduce noise. I’ve done it.

Otherwise, I’m hard pressed to imagine enough noise in a 200 ISO image if exposed properly.

Although 200 ISO on my Fuji X-T4 and the same on my approved Sony RX100-3 aren’t the same. There will be more noise with the Sony than the Fuji. End result, if the Sony is underexposed at 200 ISO, and I lift in LR or PS, I’ll introduce enough noise that I carefully have to reduce with the sliders just enough to not introduce a plastic look. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/12/2021 at 10:46, Astronautilus said:

My first QC fail for ages has left me puzzled. The fail reason is noise, but the shot was taken with an approved DSLR, ISO 200, bright sunshine... everything optimum. And for the life of me, I can't see what they're objecting to. I replied to Submissions for clarification more than two weeks ago, but they haven't replied. 

 

Is the QC team refusing to get into this sort of discussion? I have suspended uploads until I hear from them because I'm concerned that they've raised the QC bar.

 

 

 

The last time I queried a QC fail they said they did not discuss failure reasons but that was in late 2009. There have been occasional posts in the forum suggesting that they do sometimes communicate back but I don't think that is the norm so don't hold your breath.

 

Another very experienced contributor (Ed Rooney) posted recently about unexpectedly failing QC due to noise - not sure what the outcome of this was. Maybe they have someone new on QC or are using a robot which is perhaps mistaking other image features for noise. In any case, if you want an informed opinion I would suggest uploading a full size version of the image to a site such as Dropbox and posting a link here. Provide a bit of info - did you shoot RAW, how did you process the image (sharpening etc). 

Edited by MDM
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 21/12/2021 at 10:46, Astronautilus said:

My first QC fail for ages has left me puzzled. The fail reason is noise, but the shot was taken with an approved DSLR, ISO 200, bright sunshine... everything optimum. And for the life of me, I can't see what they're objecting to. I replied to Submissions for clarification more than two weeks ago, but they haven't replied. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Winter sunshine?

 

You need to show us the image. 

Edited by geogphotos
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 23/12/2021 at 18:03, Betty LaRue said:

Responses will be slow or non existent until around Jan. 6th, I think they said. 
A question…by any chance, was your image underexposed and you brightened it in post? That can introduce noise. I’ve done it.

Otherwise, I’m hard pressed to imagine enough noise in a 200 ISO image if exposed properly.

Although 200 ISO on my Fuji X-T4 and the same on my approved Sony RX100-3 aren’t the same. There will be more noise with the Sony than the Fuji. End result, if the Sony is underexposed at 200 ISO, and I lift in LR or PS, I’ll introduce enough noise that I carefully have to reduce with the sliders just enough to not introduce a plastic look. 

 

I had a failure a number of years ago for the same reason. I adjusted the brightness/contrast too much on an underexposed image shot at 200 ISO, and it introduced some sky noise. Personally, I didn't think it was a big deal, but obviously someone in QC did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s why most RX100 users here say it’s an excellent pocket camera, but needs to be used with care. You need exposure to be pretty much dead on or be experienced with PP.  

I’ve shot mine inside an eye exam room in dimmed light, then carefully used noise reduction selectively. They were somewhat underexposed.  They passed. I just learned how to work with the camera and images. Careful PP. I’ve sold a lot of images from that camera. It’s my go-to always inside shops because it’s seldom noticed. Stealth camera! 😊

I have to admit, though, that i about drove the lady ophthalmologist crazy. The little focus light would briefly flash from behind her as she examined my sister’s eyes. She’d look around, and find me sitting like a statue. 😂 at least 3 times!

The room was much dimmer than this. I lifted quite a bit.

DA28KY.jpg

Edited by Betty LaRue
  • Love 1
Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • 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.