Jump to content

Are we too picky?


Recommended Posts

maligne lake - Search (bing.com)

 

The current background image for Windows. Lovely lovely image. But... very noisy for some reason and a lot of chromatic aberration on the edges of the mountains.

 

This leapt out at me straight away. But maybe the average viewer wouldn't even notice and we're too picky after living with Alamy QC. Any thoughts...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The standard we work to allows this:-

 

 

Country: New Zealand ; Usage: Advertising and promotion ;  Media: Outdoor display – billboard/transit ad ;  Industry Sector: Media, design & publishing ;  Print run: up to 5 ;  Start: 20-October-2016 ; End: 20-January-2017

 

 

Occaisionaly...Sometimes...Oh all right....Once!

 

😉

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow that CA; the sharpening and those smear marks from cleaning the sensor in the upper right hand corner. It would never pass QC with this. And what's that round bubble on the slope just left of the trees on the island?

 

Oops TinEye says it is available on Alamy.

But somehow it does not show up when I click on the link from TinEye.

With 4,179 images of Maligne Lake I cannot find it by hand.

 

On Firefox searching from the Alamy front page I get:  The page isn’t redirecting properly.  No results at all. Just a blank page with that warning.

No such thing on Chrome. Could be a cookie problem. I have not changed my settings though. It must be at the other end.

Let's hope there are no clients using Firefox.

 

Aha now Chrome too says:

 

This page isn’t working

www.alamy.com redirected you too many times.

wim

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're being picky because we've been trained to be picky (and some of us are pickier by nature than others). Most people don't know anything about -- or even notice -- CA, over-sharpening, noise and the like. They just respond to the content of the image, which is understandable.

 

P.S. Could the round bubble be a UFO? 🛸

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the image.

I do not think that a lock-screen image that lives a couple of days must be ideal.

I used to see unsharp, noisy etc images in this place, and this never bothered me.

One my friend had his image in this Windows lock screen, it was purchased by  Microsoft from a microstock site for peanuts, as always..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, wiskerke said:

Wow that CA; the sharpening and those smear marks from cleaning the sensor in the upper right hand corner. It would never pass QC with this. And what's that round bubble on the slope just left of the trees on the island?

 

Didn't see the green bubble, lot of faults with the image!

 

2 hours ago, IKuzmin said:

I like the image.

 

Ditto!

 

2 hours ago, Jeffrey Isaac Greenberg said:
IMO, the correct issues are:
"Were Alamy's previously queried customers too picky when QC was established?"
& then
"Do Alamy's QC determinants evolve as customers' tastes evolve?"

 

It wasn't so much a reflection on Alamy's processes, so much as, can we still enjoy images that we spot a lot of 'QC errors' in?

 

Not sure about Alamy's QC evolving, it's been the same since 2014 when I joined (I originally failed QC bc I didn't know what I was doing so I read up on editing etc. for a year and then passed a year later). Alamy's original clients being too picky? Well, if you're used to dealing with professional photographers, then probably not too picky. I've always thought Alamy's QC let too many images through that don't match their QC requirements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting question. My OCD hasn't progressed to the point where I can't still enjoy images that have some technical issues. Frankly, I doubt that that most stock photo clients are all that picky about technical errors unless they are so glaring that they make an image unusable. Publishers, especially editorial ones, are more interested in finding images that meet their needs than in technical perfection.

 

 

Edited by John Mitchell
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's likely the average viewer wouldn't notice. Most of the time when I point out technical flaws like this to my non-photographer friends they think it's either a non-issue or just can't see what I'm talking about like a trained eye can. I have been known to "go off" a photo I previously quite liked when I spot a flaw in it, which annoys me. Regarding the photo in the OP, I know I could show that to 20 people and they'd have nothing but positive things to say. The CA, noise, fact that it's over processed and the dust spots would either go unnoticed or be a non-issue.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/04/2024 at 17:58, Steve F said:

maligne lake - Search (bing.com)

 

The current background image for Windows. Lovely lovely image. But... very noisy for some reason and a lot of chromatic aberration on the edges of the mountains.

 

This leapt out at me straight away. But maybe the average viewer wouldn't even notice and we're too picky after living with Alamy QC. Any thoughts...?

Alamy database contains a lot of technically worse images than this, some of which were sold for $, $$, $$$, and $$$$. It's not about the quality, it's about the editorial needs...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most non-photo people will view the image at the 'normal' distance where technical flaws are less visible or not noticeable, they don't get a magnifying glass to look at an A2 poster.

I'm a bit schizophrenic in this regard.

Picky for images I send to Alamy because they have certain standards that need to be met.

Totally non-picky for non-Alamy images. If I like the photo and it illustrates the concept I want I don't really care about minimal technical errors like SOLD, motion blur etc

 

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
×
×
  • 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.