Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Perhaps Alamy pulled some regular reviewers off our normal image uploads and assigned them to the iPhone images?  Or did they hire extra help?  The former could cause a slowdown in reviews.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps Alamy pulled some regular reviewers off our normal image uploads and assigned them to the iPhone images?  Or did they hire extra help?  The former could cause a slowdown in reviews.

 

I saw that Saturday QC was at work. I noticed Stockimo rating is done in 24-48 hours and I read that it's done by other people: customers, photographers. I wish there were more guidelines about images and customer needs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I calculated there are three reviewers for each image from rating averages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 An interesting note.  I had a batch fail over a month ago.  When I emerged from the sin bin, I uploaded a new batch.  Again, I had a fail. Turned out to be the tiniest bit of CA in the upper far left of the image, a few fronds of a palm tree that supposedly had it.  My old eyes couldn't really see it, I just assume if the reviewer saw some, it must be there.  All the rest of the image the fronts were large enough I could see they had no CA, so the offense had to be that corner.

 

I was NOT placed in the sin bin for that tiny oversight.  I cropped out the offending corner, re-uploaded the batch and they passed the next day.  Somebody took pity on me.

 

And yes, QC is becoming so strict it's not funny.  (funny expression I used, it was never funny) I think it is a matter of controlling the rampant growth. We all know how bloated Alamy is, bearing witness that a smallish portfolio of 2600 images makes fewer sales than when I had 1500.

 

If the QCers knock you out for a ah-hem, perceived fault on images you aren't uploading willy-nilly without care, but have poured over them first, then they can probably find a pixel or two somewhere to justify a fail.

 

Is it possible that they are edited for content?  And content that is ho-hum or content that is already covered thousands of times is inspected more closely, failed more often?

 

Ramblings of a sleepy woman, think I'll take it to bed.

 

Betty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 An interesting note.  I had a batch fail over a month ago.  When I emerged from the sin bin, I uploaded a new batch.  Again, I had a fail. Turned out to be the tiniest bit of CA in the upper far left of the image, a few fronds of a palm tree that supposedly had it.  My old eyes couldn't really see it, I just assume if the reviewer saw some, it must be there.  All the rest of the image the fronts were large enough I could see they had no CA, so the offense had to be that corner.

 

I was NOT placed in the sin bin for that tiny oversight.  I cropped out the offending corner, re-uploaded the batch and they passed the next day.  Somebody took pity on me.

 

And yes, QC is becoming so strict it's not funny.  (funny expression I used, it was never funny) I think it is a matter of controlling the rampant growth. We all know how bloated Alamy is, bearing witness that a smallish portfolio of 2600 images makes fewer sales than when I had 1500.

 

If the QCers knock you out for a ah-hem, perceived fault on images you aren't uploading willy-nilly without care, but have poured over them first, then they can probably find a pixel or two somewhere to justify a fail.

 

Is it possible that they are edited for content?  And content that is ho-hum or content that is already covered thousands of times is inspected more closely, failed more often?

 

Ramblings of a sleepy woman, think I'll take it to bed.

 

Betty

It's encouraging to hear that QC does grant some leeway now and then. If Alamy is tightening up on QC standards in order to control rampant growth, you can't really blame them. Personally, I think that it is impossible to always edit for technical quality alone. Content is bound to sneak into the equation sometimes at some level. After all, the QC inspectors are human (we hope B)).

 

I do think, however, that if Alamy is changing its QC standards, it should supply some new examples of what it doesn't want in the contributor submission guidelines. Some of the current examples are very coarse (e.g. those for noise and CA) and not in line with today's camera technology IMO.

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I was NOT placed in the sin bin for that tiny oversight.  I cropped out the offending corner, re-uploaded the batch and they passed the next day.  Somebody took pity on me.

 

This has always been the case . . .once notified of a failed batch, there has been nothing, ever, to prevent you from uploading again immediately and having your new batch inspected.

 

dd

Edited by dustydingo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to stifle any conspiracy theories... 

 

Nothing has changed in QC. If any changes were to happen, we'd absolutely let everyone know - it wouldn't make any sense to keep it a secret!

 

QC pass rate is at an all time high and we're adding more images than ever. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to stifle any conspiracy theories... 

 

Nothing has changed in QC. If any changes were to happen, we'd absolutely let everyone know - it wouldn't make any sense to keep it a secret!

 

QC pass rate is at an all time high and we're adding more images than ever. :)

That's good to hear. Thanks for tuning in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 I was NOT placed in the sin bin for that tiny oversight.  I cropped out the offending corner, re-uploaded the batch and they passed the next day.  Somebody took pity on me.

 

This has always been the case . . .once notified of a failed batch, there has been nothing, ever, to prevent you from uploading again immediately and having your new batch inspected.

 

dd

 

 

 

Thank you, Alamy for easing my mind.  

 

Speaking of bloated...if every photographer culled their portfolio and got rid of too many similars and the really "not up to snuff" images from long ago, that never sell or get zoomed, it would ease the bloat.  I actually began doing that a couple of years ago.  I got rid of probably 10% of my portfolio until the last batch up for deletion gave me a sale.  What??  So I stopped that.  I wish I had a crystal ball, then I'd still do it.  Some of my early images definitely aren't up to snuff compared to what I'm doing now.

 

DD, maybe I didn't make myself clear.  The thing is usually when I have a fail, it is a full 30 days of waiting to be notified of the fail. This time I got the result of the fail immediately, like a day or two after uploading. That's what was different this time. No 30 days in the sin bin.

 

bl

Edited by Betty LaRue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 I was NOT placed in the sin bin for that tiny oversight.  I cropped out the offending corner, re-uploaded the batch and they passed the next day.  Somebody took pity on me.

 

This has always been the case . . .once notified of a failed batch, there has been nothing, ever, to prevent you from uploading again immediately and having your new batch inspected.

 

dd

 

 

 

Thank you, Alamy for easing my mind.  

 

Speaking of bloated...if every photographer culled their portfolio and got rid of too many similars and the really "not up to snuff" images from long ago, that never sell or get zoomed, it would ease the bloat.  I actually began doing that a couple of years ago.  I got rid of probably 10% of my portfolio until the last batch up for deletion gave me a sale.  What??  So I stopped that.  I wish I had a crystal ball, then I'd still do it.  Some of my early images definitely aren't up to snuff compared to what I'm doing now.

 

DD, maybe I didn't make myself clear.  The thing is usually when I have a fail, it is a full 30 days of waiting to be notified of the fail. This time I got the result of the fail immediately, like a day or two after uploading. That's what was different this time. No 30 days in the sin bin.

 

bl

 

 

ah, okay, gotcha :)

 

dd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm....anyone with any idea what this means?

 

I uploaded a series of photos (9 batches) from 24 to 27 Feb. Finally 2 batches passed QC; the 1st batch on 24 Feb and the last on 27 Feb. The batches in-between are still showing the Processing - Avg 24 hours sign. Is this an ominous sign? Are they heading to the sin bin? 

 

Thanks much!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm....anyone with any idea what this means?

 

I uploaded a series of photos (9 batches) from 24 to 27 Feb. Finally 2 batches passed QC; the 1st batch on 24 Feb and the last on 27 Feb. The batches in-between are still showing the Processing - Avg 24 hours sign. Is this an ominous sign? Are they heading to the sin bin? 

 

Thanks much!!!

 

It will probably be a processing upload error nothing to worry about it will come out in the wash after a few days.

 

Regards

Craig

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uploaded batches from the 25th and 27th of February passed this morning in the Saturday club.

 

 

Regards

Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The average time taken for my images to be processed through Alamy QC seems to have increased over the last month, because its taking about 5 - 6 days at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup Saturday club seems to be back in business, uploads from 26th, 27th and 28th all through this morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Craig! Yes....those batches have finally washed up, all "Unable to Process - resubmit media". Guess my time with the Sin is not due yet :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone passed in the Saturday club this morning? I have uploads from the 5th and 6th.

 

Regards

Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Saturday club result for me. Uploaded on the 2nd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waiting from the 2nd and 4th.  :unsure:

 

In the doldrums this month, one sale and one refund, gross return $1.28  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Submissions from 3rd to 7th still waiting. Always good to know I'm not the only one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing yet and don't think there will be today now. The Saturday club seems to meet early in the (UK) day or not at all.

 

Gareth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still waiting from the 25th February so not expecting to join the Saturday club (or any other club) for a few more weeks yet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Saturday club for me either this week. Waiting for submissions from 2nd, 4th and 6th March. This happened 3 weeks ago and my images passed on the Monday, so hopefully the same will happen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same boat here - 5 submissions ranging between 2nd to 5th March, all still awaiting QC. 

 

Nothing to do with QC, but zooms and sales seem to be down by about 50% from my running average in the later months of 2013.  Since around Christmas/New Year, things have been much quieter than I would have expected based on past performance - many a day now with no new zooms, which rarely happened last year, let alone on successive days as is now happening not infrequently.  I guess this is happening elsewhere, because I am not seeing a dramatic decrease in my CTR relative to the whole of Alamy average - indeed, it has increased since the end of last year, although it is still only about half its all time high.

Share this post


Link to post
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.