I am absolutely furious

[Phillip]

I have just had 70 submissions rejected because of one so-called soft focus. 

 

Spider webs with the dew hanging off them and the sun making them glitter in a foggy landscape. this was only about 5 images and the rest were landscapes.

 

I am seriously thinking about telling Alamy to take a running jump off the nearest cliff.

 

I had thought about making this my primary site, but no longer if I am going to be treated like crap.

 

 

[John Morrison]

40 minutes ago, Phillip said:

I am seriously thinking about telling Alamy to take a running jump off the nearest cliff.

 

I feel your pain, Phillip. If Alamy doesn’t get your spiders’ web shots on-line, and sharpish, the whole Alamy enterprise may come crashing down.

 

On a more serious note… Some of the QC decisions can seem quixotic (and I started here with quite a few QC failures), but it’s the way that Alamy chooses to operate. I’ve ditched a lot of ‘creative’ pix, over the years, because I thought they might fail QC. So, once your anger subsides, you’ll have to re-think your uploading strategy (or tell Alamy to take that "running jump”)…

[Michael Ventura]

QC failures have/do happen to all of us.  You just need to either fix or eliminate the problem image and move on.  

[Steve F]

"Q. Why do you reject my whole submission if you find a problem with one of my images?
A. We receive over 100,000 images a day so it’s simply not possible for us to check every image. We check a small sample of your images and if all images in that sample are ok then we’ll pass the whole submission. If we find one failure then all images awaiting QC will fail.

We take the view that every image you submit should meet our QC standards so when we look at a random sample we expect it to represent the quality of all images submitted. Our top tip is to check all images at 100% (actual pixels) before you submit."

https://www.alamy.com/contributor/faqs/quality-control/?section=4

[Phillip]

I took shots of Talbingo Dam and they are much better quality than the images on this site

 

I also covered Tantangara Dam and Snowy Hydro 2.0

Ghost Gully camping Ground

Bullocks flat horse yards

Talbingo township

Batlow rocks

Blowering Dam spillway

and bush fire.

 

I will not be resubmitting these images to this site, they will be posted elsewhere.

[Phillip]

1 hour ago, John Morrison said:

 

I feel your pain, Phillip. If Alamy doesn’t get your spiders’ web shots on-line, and sharpish, the whole Alamy enterprise may come crashing down.

 

On a more serious note… Some of the QC decisions can seem quixotic (and I started here with quite a few QC failures), but it’s the way that Alamy chooses to operate. I’ve ditched a lot of ‘creative’ pix, over the years, because I thought they might fail QC. So, once your anger subsides, you’ll have to re-think your uploading strategy (or tell Alamy to take that "running jump”)…

 

None of the images that were rejected will ever be resubmitted to this site, and when I compare my shots of Talbingo with the ones on this site, mine are much better.

[Phillip]

19 minutes ago, Steve F said:

"Q. Why do you reject my whole submission if you find a problem with one of my images?
A. We receive over 100,000 images a day so it’s simply not possible for us to check every image. We check a small sample of your images and if all images in that sample are ok then we’ll pass the whole submission. If we find one failure then all images awaiting QC will fail.

We take the view that every image you submit should meet our QC standards so when we look at a random sample we expect it to represent the quality of all images submitted. Our top tip is to check all images at 100% (actual pixels) before you submit."

https://www.alamy.com/contributor/faqs/quality-control/?section=4

But to reject 100% of 80 images submitted is bloody stupid

[Mr Standfast]

Bye!

[Steve F]

4 minutes ago, Phillip said:

when I compare my shots of Talbingo with the ones on this site, mine are much better.

 

Alamy QC is not checking for the artistic merits or subject matter (other than glamour and illegal images) or how hard the shot was to take - it is purely the technical elements, see:

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

 

6 minutes ago, Phillip said:

But to reject 100% of 80 images submitted is bloody stupid

Maybe so, but they have high technical standards and it is quite possible to achieve them consistently, without getting rejections. I have only one QC failure (for soft focus) since my first images were accepted in 2015. The QC sin bin is an incentive to pass QC every time. 

 

+1 to what Michael and John said above.

[MDM]

Leaving aside the QC methodology of failing all if one fails which is definitely a valid way of doing things, I wonder if there is a problem with QC in some instances where the subject is small in the frame and the background is out of focus. There have been a number of reports over the last year or more of this happening. Allan Bell had a failure not too long ago for an image like this and it was rectified after he complained. I do wonder how many more of these happen. Unfortunately nobody posts the offending images at full size in order for a judgement to be made by other forum members. There is complete silence from Alamy on this as far as I am aware. I do wonder if there is a robot somewhere in the QC pipeline. 

 

Anyway if Phillip would like to post the full size failing image to Dropbox or similar then maybe forum members could advise and get a better idea of what is going on.

Edited April 24, 2023 by MDM

[wiskerke]

54 minutes ago, Phillip said:

I took shots of Talbingo Dam and they are much better quality than the images on this site

 

I also covered Tantangara Dam and Snowy Hydro 2.0

Ghost Gully camping Ground

Bullocks flat horse yards

Talbingo township

Batlow rocks

Blowering Dam spillway

and bush fire.

 

I will not be resubmitting these images to this site, they will be posted elsewhere.

Those images of Talbingo must be really good, because the 85 that are already there are not that bad. Will they ever sell? Images seldom sell because they are pretty pictures. Or even good pictures. Images sell because clients need them or want them.

 

AoA searches for the rolling year:

Talbingo: 0

Tantangara: 0

Ghost Gully: 0

Batlow: 0

Blowering: 0

 

These have been the searches for anything dam or containing dam in Australia in the last 13 months:

macadamia tree australia

storm damage australia

dampier peninsula western australia

macadamia nut australia

rabbits damage australia

damon hill australian jordan

macadamia farm australia

schumacher damon hill australia 1993

Aboriginal dam australia

Adam Asar australia

adam federici australia

storm damage australia houses

Adam Taggart australia

damaged water supplies australia

Aborigine dam australia

damon hill australian

schumacher damon hill australia 1994

damon hill australia

australia climate damage

Australian native Macadamia

mining truck australia olympic dam

South Australia, Frances Adamson at Buckingham Palace,

the australian tennis team at the award ceremony with the trophy davis cup france 1999 2G20DAM

Tinaroo, Queensland/Australia Nov 13, 2019: A danger sign beneath a dam warning of drowning hazard

 

All except the first have been single searches. The first was searched twice.

 

You get the idea.

 

Now bush fires must be so important that this must have been searched. And yes they have been searched

 

black summer bush fire australia: 4x

Australia bush fire: 2x

bush fire australia: 1x

bush fire australia road closed: 1x

Australia bush fire climate change: 1x

Australia Bush fires: 1x

 

There are 6,707 images of bush fires in Australia on Alamy and some are really good.

While some only depict a camper in the bush with a camp fire of course. That cannot be avoided.

(We recognise a certain Toyota Coaster Motorhome here 😁)

 

Again: you get the idea.

 

wim

 

 

edit: missed bullocks flat horse yard.

These have been the searches for just bullocks:

the bullocks: 1

bullocks false toad: 1

bullocks oriole: 1

 

Do clients actually search for anything Australian? Yes 99 pages @ 100.

 

wim

Edited April 24, 2023 by wiskerke

[wiskerke]

1 minute ago, MDM said:

Leaving aside the QC methodology of failing all if one fails which is definitely a valid way of doing things, I wonder if there is a problem with QC in some instances where the subject is small in the frame and the background is out of focus. There have been a number of reports over the last year or more of this happening. Allan Bell had a failure not too long ago for an image like this and it was rectified after he complained. I do wonder how many more of these happen. Unfortunately nobody posts the offending images at full size in order for a judgement to be made by other forum members. There is complete silence from Alamy on this as far as I am aware. I do wonder if there is a robot somewhere in the QC pipeline. 

 

Anyway if Philip would like to post the full size failing image to Dropbox or similar then maybe forum members could advise and get a better idea of what is going on.

+1 for posting the full size unaltered identical file somewhere for us to see. Maybe just put a watermark across it.

 

However this has been discussed here often and Alamy has repeatedly replied (no silence there at all) that the problem is the difference between the thumbnail and the full size image: the client must not get the wrong impression from the thumbnail or even the zoom size image.

However contributors (certainly those with a good QC standing) have been able to discuss a QC decision and get it reversed.

 

wim

[Allan Bell]

33 minutes ago, MDM said:

Leaving aside the QC methodology of failing all if one fails which is definitely a valid way of doing things, I wonder if there is a problem with QC in some instances where the subject is small in the frame and the background is out of focus. There have been a number of reports over the last year or more of this happening. Allan Bell had a failure not too long ago for an image like this and it was rectified after he complained. I do wonder how many more of these happen. Unfortunately nobody posts the offending images at full size in order for a judgement to be made by other forum members. There is complete silence from Alamy on this as far as I am aware. I do wonder if there is a robot somewhere in the QC pipeline. 

 

Anyway if Phillip would like to post the full size failing image to Dropbox or similar then maybe forum members could advise and get a better idea of what is going on.

 

Gosh! I know you have a good memory, but fancy remembering that.

 

Allan

 

[Phillip]

Who knows if the images will sell, but they are all part of the Snowy Mountains scheme and Snowy 2.0 is involved in the production of green Hydro electric energy. 

 

I also have a number of images of Brumbies that will never be submitted to this site. Brumbies are a contentious issue and I have images of the damage that they have done.

 

Take for example Batlow Rocks, I was in the process of obtaining their indigenous name as well as other areas. 

 

No, this site will not see me as I improve as a photographer and my best work. I simply do not trust, for example, if I uploaded 200 images and one failed QC but all were rejected. 

 

Next year I had hoped to get a media pass for the Man From Snowy River festival and if I succeed this site will miss out on the images because I am not put in the work to get a kick in the guts because one image is not up to QC.

[MDM]

45 minutes ago, wiskerke said:

 

 

 

However this has been discussed here often and Alamy has repeatedly replied (no silence there at all) that the problem is the difference between the thumbnail and the full size image: the client must not get the wrong impression from the thumbnail or even the zoom size image.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes I know that was the case years ago but I noticed a spate of these particular small subject in focus and background out of focus more recently (can't remember exactly when but in the last 18 months or so) and I wondered if there was someone new in QC or if they were using a robot for initial screening. I don't recall Alamy saying anything about that either way (maybe I missed it)

 

EDIT - just to be clear there must be many millions of images like that on Alamy where it would not be possible to determine if the subject is in focus from a thumbnail.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2023 by MDM

[MDM]

11 minutes ago, Allan Bell said:

 

Gosh! I know you have a good memory, but fancy remembering that.

 

Allan

 

 

Memory certainly not as good as it was Allan but still hanging in there. That failure I was talking about was not very long ago in any case.

[John Morrison]

5 minutes ago, Phillip said:

this site will not see me as I improve as a photographer

That's a shame. We will miss your righteous indignation...

[spacecadet]

OP, the offer has been made, the forum will offer opinions on the offending image if you post it full-size or even just a 100% crop.

Another answer is to make smaller submissions so that a fail wastes less effort- although uploading per se is hardly a chore these days.

What isn't an answer is to attack a QC system which is fully explained in advance and to which you have agreed.

[MDM]

2 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

OP, the offer has been made, the forum will offer opinions on the offending image if you post it full-size or even just a 100% crop.

Another answer is to make smaller submissions so that a fail wastes less effort- although uploading per se is hardly a chore these days.

What isn't an answer is to attack a QC system which is fully explained in advance and to which you have agreed.

 

Yes I agree and tt beats me why people don't take up these offers as many would improve as photographers if they take basic advice. They would certainly have a better chance of passing Alamy QC in any case.

[Alexander Hogg]

6 hours ago, MDM said:

Yes I agree and tt beats me why people don't take up these offers as many would improve as photographers if they take basic advice. They would certainly have a better chance of passing Alamy QC in any case.

I agree I just about left last year from Alamy but for different reasons but I did listen to the people that did comment 

Sales started coming 

I joined in 2020 and only had one QC fail for being soft an lacking definition and didn't resubmit for about 6 months later and never had a fail since so far touch wood

Edited April 24, 2023 by Alexander Hogg
Put in wrong date

[Brian Yarvin]

What I fear - and what I suspect will happen - is that Phillip will leave pro photography for good before he even learns the basics of client/agency relationships.  

[wiskerke]

1 minute ago, Brian Yarvin said:

What I fear - and what I suspect will happen - is that Phillip will leave pro photography for good before he even learns the basics of client/agency relationships.  

 

Nah.. shoot it and they will buy it!

Photographers have it easy and making tons of money without ever having to learn a thing nowadays.

We just never caught up with it. And then all that worthless stuff we had too learn. Had to teach even.

😂 👴 😂

 

wim

[spacecadet]

9 minutes ago, Brian Yarvin said:

What I fear - and what I suspect will happen - is that Phillip will leave pro photography for good before he even learns the basics of client/agency relationships.  

Yes, the best  thing you can do with a high horse is get down off it and submit a few pix of it.😉

[Phillip]

Tomorrow is Anzac Day in Australia and I took photos' and sadly submitted the images to Alamy of the Ernst Corey Memorial in Cooma. They are sculptures representing trench warfare during WW 1.  

[Phillip]

10 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

Yes, the best  thing you can do with a high horse is get down off it and submit a few pix of it.😉

 

Nah, I do have a job offer so sorry I have to disappoint you, I won't be leaving.