all new uploads failed without assessment

[ivanmaguire1]

I uploaded several photos on different days for approval. When QC finally assessed them, they were all rejected. the reason given was 'One or more images were rejected therefore all images were rejected without assessment'

While I know they all possibly may individually be rejected why were they not assessed on their own merit.

any help with would be greatly appreciated. Also, my last post on this topic disappeared suddenly.

Edited October 6, 2022 by ivanmaguire1

[Steve F]

 

Hi Ivan, this is all normal:

 

https://www.alamy.com/contributor/how-to-sell-images/alamy-quality-control/?section=5&_gl=1*1x5s339*_ga*MjMwOTc1NjQ2LjE2MDU4Njg5ODk.*_ga_M5V9H9N7G8*MTY2NTA0NjUyNS4xMjM2LjEuMTY2NTA1NzA1Ni4wLjAuMA..

 

"After your first submission has passed: 

• Check your submissions for technical faults before you submit 
• Send us as many images as you like as often as you like 
• We’ll just spot-check a few of your images per submission 
• If the images we check are ok, your whole submission will pass 
• If we find a problem with one image, your whole submission will fail 
• You’ll receive a pass or fail email and we’ll update the submission in AIM"

Alamy has QC standards and expects contributors to meet those by self checking their work before they submit. The reason for failing all images in a submission is to encourage contributors to self check their work. All submissions to Alamy QC made at different times count as a single submission until Alamy QC has undertaken a review. 

 

You haven't provided the actual reason for the single image failing. But you need to follow these guidelines. And also see the PDF guide.

https://www.alamy.com/contributor/how-to-sell-images/guidelines-for-submitting-images/?section=3

 

Steve

[Rebecca Ore]

If I have a photo that may fail QC (Violet saberwing flying toward a hummingbird feeder), I submit it as a single or in a small group.  Very important to check focus on main subject, check for noise in the shadows, and for dust bunnies.

[Allan Bell]

One of my images was recently failed for SoLD.

 

The main subject was sharp rest was not in focus due to depth of field.

 

I asked QC to look at it again and they agreed as the main subject was in focus the fail was overturned and submission went through.

 

Allan

 

[ivanmaguire1]

23 hours ago, ivanmaguire1 said:

I uploaded several photos on different days for approval. When QC finally assessed them, they were all rejected. the reason given was 'One or more images were rejected therefore all images were rejected without assessment'

While I know they all possibly may individually be rejected why were they not assessed on their own merit.

any help with would be greatly appreciated. Also, my last post on this topic disappeared suddenly.

Thank you Steve for your answer. I know now to upload in smaller batches and only when the last upload has been assessed

 

Ivan

[Steve F]

1 hour ago, ivanmaguire1 said:

Thank you Steve for your answer. I know now to upload in smaller batches and only when the last upload has been assessed

 

Ivan

 

Hi Ivan, no problem. Uploading smaller batch sizes is certainly a way of working with Alamy and lots of contributors do this. I would concentrate on not failing QC in the first place though; this guide is very useful:

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

 

Steve

[MDM]

17 hours ago, Allan Bell said:

One of my images was recently failed for SoLD.

 

The main subject was sharp rest was not in focus due to depth of field.

 

I asked QC to look at it again and they agreed as the main subject was in focus the fail was overturned and submission went through.

 

Allan

 

 

I suspect Alamy are using a robot for QC. 

 

[Allan Bell]

2 hours ago, MDM said:

 

I suspect Alamy are using a robot for QC. 

 

 

I do not think so as the reply indicated someone was over zealous in failing the image.

 

Allan

 

[Steve F]

2 hours ago, MDM said:

 

I suspect Alamy are using a robot for QC. 

 

I assume if it was a robot, they wouldn't be spot checking, they'd check all images.

[spacecadet]

Alamy did once say it was all done by eye. But that was a long time ago, at a time when they would actually contribute to a post to answer a question such as this. Also long ago.

[MDM]

35 minutes ago, Steve F said:

I assume if it was a robot, they wouldn't be spot checking, they'd check all images.

 

Not necessarily. There would be costs associated with employing a robot, not least the electricity 🤔

 

10 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

Alamy did once say it was all done by eye. But that was a long time ago, at a time when they would actually contribute to a post to answer a question such as this. Also long ago.

 

QC was a surprisingly small human operation according to James A when we met him for lunch in Feb 2020 but that was before Alamy changed ownership and pre-pandemic. My curiosity was aroused when there were a number of reports of experienced contributors failing with images that had out of focus backgrounds. I expect it would be a fairly standard thing to program nowadays - Photoshop can do very accurate selections of in-focus areas. 

Edited October 7, 2022 by MDM

[Martin L]

In focus areas are easy to pick out, working out if it is the right area in focus is another matter.

Robots have no idea of photographic intent.

Even more difficult, is it rain or noise? Soft focus or fog?

In my opinion there would be a lot more QC failures if robots were employed.

When I used to contribute to SS, they added a robot for assessing image quality and it caused a right mess. Loads and loads of decent images were rejected, you then had to resubmit again and the hypothesis was that on the resubmission it went to a human who could assess it properly.

Pain in the 'arris.

[meanderingemu]

On 07/10/2022 at 03:06, ivanmaguire1 said:

Thank you Steve for your answer. I know now to upload in smaller batches and only when the last upload has been assessed

 

Ivan

 

Actually, if the goal is to include substandard images within the uploads, uploading large batches would be optimal as there is then less chance they would go through QC, since Alamy only reviews a sample.  

[MDM]

If Alamy has a robot on QC, I wonder what its name might be. I'm going for AL (remember HAL in 2001).

[spacecadet]

39 minutes ago, MDM said:

If Alamy has a robot on QC, I wonder what its name might be. I'm going for AL (remember HAL in 2001).

How about PAL?😉

[Dave Richards]

49 minutes ago, MDM said:

If Alamy has a robot on QC, I wonder what its name might be. I'm going for AL (remember HAL in 2001).

Holly (Red Dwarf).

Spent 3 million years in isolation and became ‘computer senile’ or ‘a bit strange’.

[Rebecca Ore]

1 hour ago, meanderingemu said:

 

Actually, if the goal is to include substandard images within the uploads, uploading large batches would be optimal as there is then less chance they would go through QC, since Alamy only reviews a sample.  

 

I think they look for obvious problematic photos -- lots of dark shadows, check for noise;  lots of tree branches or something similar, check for chromatic aberrations; sky, check for dust bunnies; shallow depth of field, check that the subject is in focus.  I've been got for noise in shadows a couple of times.  Now these are what I check for before exporting.

[MDM]

4 hours ago, spacecadet said:

How about PAL?😉

 

Maybe but it sounds too friendly for a QC robot. What about PAAL?

Edited October 8, 2022 by MDM

[MDM]

 

4 hours ago, Dave Richards said:

Holly (Red Dwarf).

Spent 3 million years in isolation and became ‘computer senile’ or ‘a bit strange’.

 

"I'm sorry Dave, I’m afraid I can’t do that."

Edited October 8, 2022 by MDM

[meanderingemu]

8 hours ago, Rebecca Ore said:

 

I think they look for obvious problematic photos -- lots of dark shadows, check for noise;  lots of tree branches or something similar, check for chromatic aberrations; sky, check for dust bunnies; shallow depth of field, check that the subject is in focus.  I've been got for noise in shadows a couple of times.  Now these are what I check for before exporting.

 

still doesn't change fact that the best way to get substandard images through and not get a QC rejection is to bunch them in large up upload.  If you put them in only small batch you have way more chances of getting them reviewed.  Not saying it's the right thing, only uploading superior images would be better, but at this point with penny licences for some of us this is not really a partnership. 

[wilkopix]

On 09/10/2022 at 01:42, meanderingemu said:

still doesn't change fact that the best way to get substandard images through and not get a QC rejection is to bunch them in large up upload

Probably best not to submit anything that you feel might be substandard in the first place .. even if a substandard image gets through the QC it will likely be rejected by a purchaser which doesn't help Alamy's reputation or ours in the long run.

[meanderingemu]

12 minutes ago, wilkopix said:

Probably best not to submit anything that you feel might be substandard in the first place .. even if a substandard image gets through the QC it will likely be rejected by a purchaser which doesn't help Alamy's reputation or ours in the long run.

 

First this was Alamy's Image Team own recommendation. I wanted to have images with annotation that they contained imperfections since the images were taken in difficult condition and Alamy said to just upload them regularly so they wouldn't have the notice. So Alamy obviously does not really care in advising clients. So in the end this is what will happen following Alamy's own instructions. 

 

Secondly if someone is only uploading images that totally meet requirement then the size of the submission should be irrelevant and the small batch only is meaningless, which was what i was replying to. 

Edited October 10, 2022 by meanderingemu