Digital camera not suitable for Alamy

[Walrus]

I have a Nikon D850 but don't always carry it with me, so shot some stock on my iPhone 15 Pro which I nearly always do carry with me. I  shot in the Raw format, processed in Adobe Camera Raw. All files rejected! Huh?

 

This is the latest iPhone. IMO, quality is overkill for Alamy sales (IAC, at $1.50, what quality do buyers expect?). Feature films have been shot with older models, as have pop-videos, commercials, etc.

 

The other reason given is "Soft or lacking definition." I pointed and shot. Nothin in view to skew focus, which I would see when processing, just wide shots bar a couple, which look in focus to me.

 

Has anyone else had their iPhone photos rejected?

 

[spacecadet]

Phone cameras aren't acceptable, full stop. They never have been.

Edited June 6 by spacecadet

[Michael Ventura]

No need to RED arrow, it was honest question and Walrus is getting the appropriate answer.

[Harry Harrison]

There used until recently be an App which we weren't allowed to talk about ('S') specifically for images uploaded by Iphone. When it was withdrawn I seem to remember them talking about new developments in the future but there has been radio silence since then.

[John Mitchell]

My cheap phone has a crappy camera, so I only use it for snaps. However, I think that Alamy needs to review its policy regarding accepting images taken with phones. The cameras embedded in the more expensive ones are obviously now very good, plus there is some really interesting work being done by phone photographers. I've seen photo books in which all the images were taken with phone cameras, and the technical quality is just fine -- no "soft and lacking definition" that I could see.

 

Just sayin'... 🙊

[MDM]

 

1 hour ago, Walrus said:

I have a Nikon D850 but don't always carry it with me, so shot some stock on my iPhone 15 Pro which I nearly always do carry with me. I  shot in the Raw format, processed in Adobe Camera Raw. All files rejected! Huh?

 

This is the latest iPhone. IMO, quality is overkill for Alamy sales (IAC, at $1.50, what quality do buyers expect?). Feature films have been shot with older models, as have pop-videos, commercials, etc.

 

The other reason given is "Soft or lacking definition." I pointed and shot. Nothin in view to skew focus, which I would see when processing, just wide shots bar a couple, which look in focus to me.

 

Has anyone else had their iPhone photos rejected?

 

 

This is a topic that comes up every so often and you will get the usual stock answers, mostly derived from a time before iPhones and other brands were capable of shooting images that are easily as good or better than a lot of so-called real cameras, especially with recent developments where it is possible to shoot raw. There was a thread about this not so long ago.

 

I would guess that there are almost certainly loads of iPhone pictures on Alamy uploaded through normal QC but without including EXIF data which identify the camera. This is only required for the initial QC process. I've never uploaded a phone picture (I don't have a suitable iPhone that shoots raw in any case). However,  I am thinking of investing maybe in the next generation of iPhone mainly for the video features but it would also be nice to be able to shoot stock with it which I am pretty certain would be easily up to Alamy QC standards. 

 

So it remains a mystery as to why Alamy doesn't allow quality phone photos. Originally the thinking was presumably to separate real photographers with real cameras from the casual snapshooter with a phone but that argument is wearing very thin now. Lots of real photographers including a lot of professionals carry iPhones capable of shooting raw. 

 

Anyway, how about you upload the failed image to Dropbox or similar to get opinions from the forum? It is always interesting to see why images have failed. 

 

 

Edited June 6 by MDM

[Harry Harrison]

3 hours ago, Walrus said:

I  shot in the Raw format, processed in Adobe Camera Raw. All files rejected! Huh?

Just out of interest did you leave the EXIF data?

[Harry Harrison]

Not easy for Alamy to decide what to do about the phones, there must have been some reason why they put a stop to 'S' but those images often appeared in their new 'Ultimate' & 'Vital' collections. Which phones will they permit, and which lenses on those phones, and which sensors? Still, from what they said back on January 29th they are working on it.

 

https://discussion.alamy.com/topic/17435-alamy-no-longer-accepting-images-through-the-stockimo-app/#comment-355360

 

https://www.alamy.com/help/stockimo/

 

"We believe there’s a bright future for mobile phone photography on Alamy and we’re currently exploring alternative options for uploading this content."

[MDM]

1 hour ago, Harry Harrison said:

Just out of interest did you leave the EXIF data?

 

From the title of the thread, he must have or there would be no way of knowing that the camera was unsuitable by Alamy criteria.

 

1 hour ago, Harry Harrison said:

Not easy for Alamy to decide what to do about the phones,

 

"We believe there’s a bright future for mobile phone photography on Alamy and we’re currently exploring alternative options for uploading this content."

 

Producing a list of suitable phones would be one way but they would have to require EXIF data to be preserved with every upload and check that for all uploads. The exception would be images that don't have EXIF metadata - scanned film comes to mind. However, they could allow use of the archival route for that - no doubt a lot of scans go that way already.

 

In fact I wonder if they have an automatic system to determine the camera used anyway as there have been a number of reports over the last while of unsuitable camera failures for cameras that would actually be fine (some Sony cameras I recall including pretty expensive ones with interchangeable lenses). This is despite the fact that they say they do not have an unsuitable camera list anymore. Otherwise how are they spottting good quality images from phones or other so-called unsuitable cameras? Something here doesn't add up.

 

Really the big issue is that they are rejecting images from certain phones that are easily as good as or probably a lot better in terms of image quality than a lot of older cameras that are on the permitted list. It is in Alamy's interest to allow quality phone images. Modernisation is needed for sure. As I have said before, James A mentioned at our meeting just before the pandemic in Feb 2020 that they were considering allowing phones at that time but nothing happened. 

Edited June 6 by MDM

[Harry Harrison]

10 hours ago, MDM said:

As I have said before, James A mentioned at our meeting just before the pandemic in Feb 2020 that they were considering allowing phones at that time but nothing happened. 

Yes, see my post above and the quote from the "Future plans for our Stockimo app" page. I was perfectly aware of implications of the title but as you go on to describe the reasons given for QC failure have not always seemed entirely logical and I sometimes wonder if they are picked out of a hat. In this case if their system (?) correctly identified these images from the EXIF as Iphone 15 why look at them at all, which they must have done in order to fail some for "Soft and lacking definition".

Edited June 7 by Harry Harrison

[MDM]

5 hours ago, Harry Harrison said:

Yes, see my post above and the quote from the "Future plans for our Stockimo app" page. I was perfectly aware of implications of the title but as you go on to describe the reasons given for QC failure have not always seemed entirely logical and I sometimes wonder if they are picked out of a hat. In this case if their system (?) correctly identified these images from the EXIF as Iphone 15 why look at them at all, which they must have done in order to fail some for "Soft and lacking definition".

 

Yes sure. An alternative possibility is that one or more images were identified initially as SoLD, QC then checked the EXIF data and added the unsuitable camera reason for emphasis - bang your're dead, bang bang now you're really dead. The OP is not at all clear about what happened. It would be really interesting to see his SoLD image(s) as uploaded if he ever comes back. The OP is an experienced Alamy contributor who normally shoots with a D850 so ths is different from the classic case of newbies getting unsuitable camera as a reason for failure. 

 

I don't think this has a lot to do with the S-word though. That was niche, early Instagram funky phone pictures. Here the issue is about using high end phone cameras for normal QC. 

Edited June 7 by MDM

[Betty LaRue]

I have an iPhone 15 pro max, which does shoot raw if I choose. I take quite a few pics with it, send a few to a family member or friend mainly to illustrate what I’m doing, cooking or growing, then delete most of them. Also family gatherings, mainly children. I don’t shoot them in RAW normally. Some of the shots would make really good stock submissions.
Should I transfer them into a folder on my computer rather than delete them just in case Alamy will allow them in the future?

[Harry Harrison]

55 minutes ago, Betty LaRue said:

Should I transfer them into a folder on my computer rather than delete them just in case Alamy will allow them in the future?

I think that you should definitely keep them, something is promised to be coming down the line for them and as Michael says, if you are happy with the quality you could maybe upload them now without the EXIF (obviously I cannot recommend that you do that!).

[MDM]

50 minutes ago, Harry Harrison said:

I think that you should definitely keep them, something is promised to be coming down the line for them and as Michael says, if you are happy with the quality you could maybe upload them now without the EXIF (obviously I cannot recommend that you do that!).

 

Just to be clear, I'm not recommending that either. I would recommend waiting until Alamy sorts this out which they must do or they will lose potentially saleable images, if not contributors, to other stock companies. 

 

These new iPhones (and presumably other brands of which I know nada) are the new Sony RX100s - everyday carry anywhere cameras. 

Edited June 7 by MDM

[Julie Edwards]

I shoot RAW often on my iPhone 15 Max..

Even running it through the latest processing  techniques, sharpening & noise reduction, IMHO it is still not as high a quality as many "proper" cameras. It is 100% fine for web and social media but the largest I have managed to print an image as a decent enough quality is A3. Therefore it is not suitable for general stock.

The reason for this is obvious. Take the 3/4 vs APS vs Full Frame debate on image quality. The iPhone has a sensor that is 8mm x 6mm ! Think what that does for noise and sharpness. The brilliance of the iPhone images is totally down to the software in the iPhone.

Maybe if there were a way of filtering results on the site based on size / quality maybe but atm, no.

Dont be taken in by the marketing...

[Jose Decio Molaro]

I practically don't take photos with my cell phone, I don't like it, but I believe we think like photographers...but if you think like a buyer...I think that if you increase the size of photos taken with your cell phone, you lose quality.
As I said, I don't understand cell phones, but they say the size of the sensor is very small... unless another technology comes along, the cell phone will always be below a camera, whatever it may be.

[Gervais Montacute]

iPhone photos are basically snapshots. Handy if you’re looking for something quick as a kind of remembrance or memory for a day out and don’t really care about image quality on a nerd level. Other than that they’re crap.

 

OP THE Nikon D850 is a great camera. SOLD? What lenses or lens do you use with that camera. Or do you mean your iPhone images are SOLD? That would not be surprising.

 

 

Edited June 8 by Gervais Montacute

[MDM]

8 hours ago, Julie Edwards said:

I shoot RAW often on my iPhone 15 Max..

Even running it through the latest processing  techniques, sharpening & noise reduction, IMHO it is still not as high a quality as many "proper" cameras. It is 100% fine for web and social media but the largest I have managed to print an image as a decent enough quality is A3. Therefore it is not suitable for general stock.

The reason for this is obvious. Take the 3/4 vs APS vs Full Frame debate on image quality. The iPhone has a sensor that is 8mm x 6mm ! Think what that does for noise and sharpness. The brilliance of the iPhone images is totally down to the software in the iPhone.

Maybe if there were a way of filtering results on the site based on size / quality maybe but atm, no.

Dont be taken in by the marketing...

No doubt that is an accurate and pragmatic appraisal of iPhone 15 capabilities and no doubt you know what you are talking about in terms of image quality. Most of the other posts about iPhone 15 image quality are based on ideas rather than actual experience including mine as I don’t have one and I’m not buying one just to check this out. 

 

However, the minimum file size (pixel dimensions) for Alamy is slightly less than a mere 6MP or around 3000 pixels long edge in a 3x2 aspect ratio which would give a print size of just over A4 at 240ppi. In other words, if the iPhone 15 can give a reasonable A3 print as you say, it easily exceeds current Alamy size standards.So I don’t think that not being suitable for making prints larger than A3 should be a disqualifying factor in itself. There are ancient 6 and 8MP cameras that were on the original list that would probably still qualify in fact and I would guess that the image quality from these cameras would not be any better than a new iPhone. Certainly images that I shot years ago on a 6MP camera with tripod and decent lens would be really pushing it at A3. 

Anyway a real issue here in this thread is the question about the unsuitable camera list which supposedly no longer exists yet images fail on the basis of the camera being unsuitable. It makes no sense when trying to answer queries from contributors here so some real clarity from Alamy would be great. It would also be great if people would post examples of their failed images. 

[M.Chapman]

10 hours ago, MDM said:

However, the minimum file size (pixel dimensions) for Alamy is slightly less than a mere 6MP or around 3000 pixels long edge in a 3x2 aspect ratio which would give a print size of just over A4 at 240ppi. In other words, if the iPhone 15 can give a reasonable A3 print as you say, it easily exceeds current Alamy size standards.So I don’t think that not being suitable for making prints larger than A3 should be a disqualifying factor in itself.

I agree. In my opinion, images taken with my 2020 iPhone SE 12MP f1.8 camera under the right conditions with the right post-processing (e.g. downsize to 6MP and don’t try to lift shadows) would meet regular Alamy QC standards. Alamy presumably think iPhone images are adequate quality for their customers too, or why would they mix (St****mo) images in amongst Alamy search results with no warning to customers that images were taken with a mobile phone and so may have lower quality (and many [all?] of the images aren’t downsized). Most customers won’t notice the “S” prefix.

 

Even so, images from my iPhoneSE are no match for images from my RX100 (1” sensor) which can meet Alamy QC standards under a much wider range of shooting conditions and without downsizing.

 

Mark

[Julie Edwards]

13 hours ago, MDM said:

No doubt that is an accurate and pragmatic appraisal of iPhone 15 capabilities and no doubt you know what you are talking about in terms of image quality. Most of the other posts about iPhone 15 image quality are based on ideas rather than actual experience including mine as I don’t have one and I’m not buying one just to check this out. 

 

Thank you

 

13 hours ago, MDM said:

 

However, the minimum file size (pixel dimensions) for Alamy is slightly less than a mere 6MP or around 3000 pixels long edge in a 3x2 aspect ratio which would give a print size of just over A4 at 240ppi. In other words, if the iPhone 15 can give a reasonable A3 print as you say, it easily exceeds current Alamy size standards.So I don’t think that not being suitable for making prints larger than A3 should be a disqualifying factor in itself. There are ancient 6 and 8MP cameras that were on the original list that would probably still qualify in fact and I would guess that the image quality from these cameras would not be any better than a new iPhone. Certainly images that I shot years ago on a 6MP camera with tripod and decent lens would be really pushing it at A3. 

 

In terms of pixel count - absolutely. As we  know though, not all pixels are created equal (Which I know you know 😉  ) 

 

13 hours ago, MDM said:

Anyway a real issue here in this thread is the question about the unsuitable camera list which supposedly no longer exists yet images fail on the basis of the camera being unsuitable. It makes no sense when trying to answer queries from contributors here so some real clarity from Alamy would be great. It would also be great if people would post examples of their failed images. 

 

I  agree  - I think there should be some clarification on this issue.

I wonder on the question ... there is  a quality  filter such as "reportage" / "May include inperfections" why iPhone images could not take this route...

[MDM]

On 09/06/2024 at 08:33, M.Chapman said:

I agree. In my opinion, images taken with my 2020 iPhone SE 12MP f1.8 camera under the right conditions with the right post-processing (e.g. downsize to 6MP and don’t try to lift shadows) would meet regular Alamy QC standards. Alamy presumably think iPhone images are adequate quality for their customers too, or why would they mix (St****mo) images in amongst Alamy search results with no warning to customers that images were taken with a mobile phone and so may have lower quality (and many [all?] of the images aren’t downsized). Most customers won’t notice the “S” prefix.

 

Even so, images from my iPhoneSE are no match for images from my RX100 (1” sensor) which can meet Alamy QC standards under a much wider range of shooting conditions and without downsizing.

 

Mark

 

Yes I agree with all of that. It's been said before but I guess it's a case of separating photographers (whether pro, semi-pro, enthusiast etc) from casual snapshooters, the assumption being that the former category uses real cameras. However, as many photographers are also using phones with results easily good enough for many Alamy uses, something is not quite right. 

Edited June 10 by MDM

[MDM]

On 09/06/2024 at 11:43, Julie Edwards said:

I wonder on the question ... there is  a quality  filter such as "reportage" / "May include inperfections" why iPhone images could not take this route...

 

That is a category for images that don't go through normal QC though and would automatically mark phone images second tier which is probably undesirable. I guess they could label phone images as such by introducing a new category. That would presumably be a lot of work in development but may be ultimately necessary if they are to ever allow phone images. I wonder if that is even necessary though. There is no way of telling the provenance of an image anyway in terms of the camera used and there must be enormous variation. 

Edited June 10 by MDM

[Rebecca Ore]

On 06/06/2024 at 15:25, MDM said:

 

From the title of the thread, he must have or there would be no way of knowing that the camera was unsuitable by Alamy criteria.

 

 

Producing a list of suitable phones would be one way but they would have to require EXIF data to be preserved with every upload and check that for all uploads. The exception would be images that don't have EXIF metadata - scanned film comes to mind. However, they could allow use of the archival route for that - no doubt a lot of scans go that way already.

 

In fact I wonder if they have an automatic system to determine the camera used anyway as there have been a number of reports over the last while of unsuitable camera failures for cameras that would actually be fine (some Sony cameras I recall including pretty expensive ones with interchangeable lenses). This is despite the fact that they say they do not have an unsuitable camera list anymore. Otherwise how are they spottting good quality images from phones or other so-called unsuitable cameras? Something here doesn't add up.

 

Really the big issue is that they are rejecting images from certain phones that are easily as good as or probably a lot better in terms of image quality than a lot of older cameras that are on the permitted list. It is in Alamy's interest to allow quality phone images. Modernisation is needed for sure. As I have said before, James A mentioned at our meeting just before the pandemic in Feb 2020 that they were considering allowing phones at that time but nothing happened. 

 

One problem with this is that a lot of iPhone owners are not primarily photographers or even advanced amateurs.  Alamy has to consider what QC would be like if those photographers were in the QC stream.   Same problems as with any small sensored camera -- need good natural light, flash, or a tripod.   Phone cameras are not designed for a good steady grip nor do they tend to have remote shutter releases.  I can throw my a6000 on a tripod and use a wired release and possibly a wireless release.  I can put a phone on a tripod with the appropriate adapter, but I'm not sure how many people who buy a late model iPhone or higher end Android phone will invest in anything more than a selfie stick.

 

I use my phone for quick snaps of things around the house and have used it for street events where a regular camera could be problematic.   But not for Alamy.  

[Matt Ashmore]

Yeah, I definitely think Alamy need to make some decisions about mobile phone photos since the sun-setting of Stockimo. I always though it a little odd that mobile phone shots were good enough to be sold on Alamy if accepted via the Stockimo route but not if uploaded through Alamy Image Manager. I did (and still do) make sales via Stockimo and also upload mobile phone shots to other agencies where they do sell. Indeed you can capture some things with a mobile phone which are a little more difficult to capture with an actual camera.. and they also say that the best camera is the one that you have with you (so your phone in many cases). So I think Alamy are missing a trick if they don't start accepting them, at least from newer phones.

[Harry Harrison]

4 hours ago, Matt Ashmore said:

So I think Alamy are missing a trick if they don't start accepting them, at least from newer phones.

I think there's a conundrum there, EXIF is only necessary for the first 3 trial submissions, how will Alamy establish the origins, mobile phone or otherwise, unless they insist on EXIF for every upload? More importantly will they have the capability to check? Will AI step into the breach here I wonder.