John Mitchell Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 You're not a client, you're a supplier. Still tough though. True, but without contributors, there would be no clients. Just sayin'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 You're not a client, you're a supplier. Still tough though. True, but without contributors, there would be no clients. Just sayin'... I would think that strictly speaking we are Alamy's cllients. The buyers are our clients and Alamy is our agent selling on our behalf, same as an actor would have an agent negotiating on their behalf with film producers. If we were a supplier, then Alamy would be buying our images outright and trying to resell them. Jill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niels Quist Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 deleted - Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted April 1, 2014 Share Posted April 1, 2014 You're not a client, you're a supplier. Still tough though. True, but without contributors, there would be no clients. Just sayin'... I would think that strictly speaking we are Alamy's cllients. The buyers are our clients and Alamy is our agent selling on our behalf, same as an actor would have an agent negotiating on their behalf with film producers. If we were a supplier, then Alamy would be buying our images outright and trying to resell them. Jill Good analysis. I would say we are really contributor/clients to/of Alamy's collection/services -- i.e. we wear two hats at once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dustydingo Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 the second I upgraded my gear it all started going wrong. Doesn't make a shred of sense to me. It may make sense if you subscribe to the widely-held belief that as camera gear gets better (esp increases in resolution), shooting technique becomes increasingly important. Many a new D800 user found this to be the case, as I think David K has commented on here previously (sorry if it wasn't you David ) dd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulstw Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 the second I upgraded my gear it all started going wrong. Doesn't make a shred of sense to me. It may make sense if you subscribe to the widely-held belief that as camera gear gets better (esp increases in resolution), shooting technique becomes increasingly important. Many a new D800 user found this to be the case, as I think David K has commented on here previously (sorry if it wasn't you David ) dd I actually went back the way. I had a 7D and went for a 1D MKIII. Performs far better than the 7D ever did, however, my main failing was to leave all my editing in sRGB mode. This could explain the recent fail waiting for me. It's the first upload since getting my 1D. Been concentrating on wildlife photography recently so Alamy has taken a back seat. A bit rusty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 editing in sRGB mode. This could explain the recent fail waiting for me. It's not that. I've never used anything else but sRGB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dyn Llun Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 I hesitate to add to this discussion as it does seem to be a touchy topic for many. I have been around photography for a very long time and although stock is a tiny proportion of my total output, I do understand what customers who buy my prints and clients who have commissioned me require in terms of technical standards. Of course clients vary and some may be more forgiving than others. I have rarely worked or sold to anything other than very - rightly - demanding clients. Alamy's QC requirements are just the basic minimum anyone would expect from a - fully professional - photographer. Images must be sharp, correct exposure, colour balance, free from dust and blemishes etc. etc. None of us are perfect and sometimes things slip through. However, the onus is on us to ensure that our images stand scrutiny. I have to watch prospective buyers of my prints, some Type C colour prints of over a metre wide, examine them from a distance of a few inches. Ditto my B&W silver prints albeit smaller in size. When a gallery customer may be considering spending a few thousand on a print, they have a right to have a good look. Alamy's requirements are basic in comparison and they don't even check all the images. Of course, they are not perfect either and maybe there is the odd quibble. However, anyone failing Alamy's QC more than very, very occasionally does need to examine their technique. 99% of the problems will not be this or that camera or lens, or it shouldn't be. Alamy gives a list of 'approved' equipment but really, a professional photographer should not need this. They should know what is required and be using the best or close to it. Many here think of Alamy's QC as some sort of gold standard that they aspire to. It's not, it's basic professional standard. OK, I know I will get a few brickbats but hey, I can duck. A bit slower nowadays maybe so lob the bricks underhand to give me a chance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin paterson Posted April 2, 2014 Share Posted April 2, 2014 28 Days & counting !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DerekVallintine Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 29 days and counting from March 4th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 April is income tax return month here in Canada, so I guess that's I'll have plenty of time to concentrate on that detestable annual chore. Last minute as usual... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulstw Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 I hesitate to add to this discussion as it does seem to be a touchy topic for many. I have been around photography for a very long time and although stock is a tiny proportion of my total output, I do understand what customers who buy my prints and clients who have commissioned me require in terms of technical standards. Of course clients vary and some may be more forgiving than others. I have rarely worked or sold to anything other than very - rightly - demanding clients. Alamy's QC requirements are just the basic minimum anyone would expect from a - fully professional - photographer. Images must be sharp, correct exposure, colour balance, free from dust and blemishes etc. etc. None of us are perfect and sometimes things slip through. However, the onus is on us to ensure that our images stand scrutiny. I have to watch prospective buyers of my prints, some Type C colour prints of over a metre wide, examine them from a distance of a few inches. Ditto my B&W silver prints albeit smaller in size. When a gallery customer may be considering spending a few thousand on a print, they have a right to have a good look. Alamy's requirements are basic in comparison and they don't even check all the images. Of course, they are not perfect either and maybe there is the odd quibble. However, anyone failing Alamy's QC more than very, very occasionally does need to examine their technique. 99% of the problems will not be this or that camera or lens, or it shouldn't be. Alamy gives a list of 'approved' equipment but really, a professional photographer should not need this. They should know what is required and be using the best or close to it. Many here think of Alamy's QC as some sort of gold standard that they aspire to. It's not, it's basic professional standard. OK, I know I will get a few brickbats but hey, I can duck. A bit slower nowadays maybe so lob the bricks underhand to give me a chance! No bricks being thrown here. It's a very well laid out 'reminder' for folk like me who haven't been round long. I supposed we can't expect $$$.$$ for images if some are failing QC a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Hi there, Just curious if anyone else is experiencing long lines at the QC window after the holiday weekend. Waiting on several batches, oldest being from April 18. Hope I didn't register a failure! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabbro Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 I've a batch submitted on April 18 still waiting for QC. This "Time-out" rule is giving us heart-burn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Yates Posted April 23, 2014 Author Share Posted April 23, 2014 Slightly longer QC time over Easter. Uploaded on the 17th of April and passed on the 22nd. Regards Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Robinson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Submissions going back to the 17th went through today for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted April 23, 2014 Share Posted April 23, 2014 Submissions going back to the 17th went through today for me. Me too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Hi there, Just curious if anyone else is experiencing long lines at the QC window after the holiday weekend. Waiting on several batches, oldest being from April 18. Hope I didn't register a failure! Spoke a day too soon. Batches from the 18th just cleared! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanW Posted April 24, 2014 Share Posted April 24, 2014 Batch of 30 submitted on the 21st and cleared this morning, the 24th. Seems fairly typical of the batches I've submitted in the last month or two. Alan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolf Richardson Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 QC Conundrum. Any clues anyone? I now have a 100% failure rate since February (4 out of 4), with a likely 5th, languishing since 21st. Serves him right, you'll say. Useless beginner, should learn his trade. OK, so let's look at the plus side. Been earning money from stock since the early 1970s, Alamy since 2001, told I'm in the "top 500" of Alamy sellers, which puts me in about the top 2%. March sales $1211 gross, April to date $1353 gross. But now in danger of having my "account terminated for 6 months", as the agreement says, for inability to pass QC. So what's happened? Well, the problems started when I bought a new Canon 7D. Until then I'd got some 8,000 images through with barely a quibble. When the 7D started showing up the reds, I sent it back to Canon for calibration. Still the reds came creeping in. And got worse. Now the QC microscope is so focussed I can't see where the fault lies. All they say is "Image soft...soft...soft". So I went back to my tried and trusted 5D, which has NEVER had a failiure. Again no good. Once you have a criminal record, there's no way out. So it looks like adios, folks. Seems a pity as it's people like me who keep Alamy in business. Rolf Richardson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Morrison Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 QC Conundrum. Any clues anyone? I now have a 100% failure rate since February (4 out of 4), with a likely 5th, languishing since 21st. Serves him right, you'll say. Useless beginner, should learn his trade. OK, so let's look at the plus side. Been earning money from stock since the early 1970s, Alamy since 2001, told I'm in the "top 500" of Alamy sellers, which puts me in about the top 2%. March sales $1211 gross, April to date $1353 gross. But now in danger of having my "account terminated for 6 months", as the agreement says, for inability to pass QC. So what's happened? Well, the problems started when I bought a new Canon 7D. Until then I'd got some 8,000 images through with barely a quibble. When the 7D started showing up the reds, I sent it back to Canon for calibration. Still the reds came creeping in. And got worse. Now the QC microscope is so focussed I can't see where the fault lies. All they say is "Image soft...soft...soft". So I went back to my tried and trusted 5D, which has NEVER had a failiure. Again no good. Once you have a criminal record, there's no way out. So it looks like adios, folks. Seems a pity as it's people like me who keep Alamy in business. Rolf Richardson Well, what difference can you see, when looking at your images at 100%? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allan Bell Posted April 25, 2014 Share Posted April 25, 2014 I have a small batch waiting QC since the 13th April. Should have known better than to load up images on the 13th of any month, Friday or not. Allan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losdemas Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 QC Conundrum. Any clues anyone? I now have a 100% failure rate since February (4 out of 4), with a likely 5th, languishing since 21st. Serves him right, you'll say. Useless beginner, should learn his trade. OK, so let's look at the plus side. Been earning money from stock since the early 1970s, Alamy since 2001, told I'm in the "top 500" of Alamy sellers, which puts me in about the top 2%. March sales $1211 gross, April to date $1353 gross. But now in danger of having my "account terminated for 6 months", as the agreement says, for inability to pass QC. So what's happened? Well, the problems started when I bought a new Canon 7D. Until then I'd got some 8,000 images through with barely a quibble. When the 7D started showing up the reds, I sent it back to Canon for calibration. Still the reds came creeping in. And got worse. Now the QC microscope is so focussed I can't see where the fault lies. All they say is "Image soft...soft...soft". So I went back to my tried and trusted 5D, which has NEVER had a failiure. Again no good. Once you have a criminal record, there's no way out. So it looks like adios, folks. Seems a pity as it's people like me who keep Alamy in business. Rolf Richardson That's certainly a cause for concern. You certainly have the pedigree, for which reason I'm loathe to offer advice, and I'm sure that you have already been through everything, but... You've tried the hardware - have you eliminated any software problems that may have inadvertently developed and (forgive me, don't mean to be personal, but it happens to all some of us!) what about your eyesight? My former 'reading' glasses are now my 'computer' glasses ! I do appreciate that this is unlikely to be a consideration, but just trying to rule out anything which may possibly be a contributing factor. Hope it all comes right for you. EDIT: Just another thought relating to software, after reading a little of the thread re: noise reduction. I don't know what your system is regarding PP, but have you set any defaults when importing images for processing? I often have to use NR in LR5 owing to my camera's poor handling of noise at anything beyond ISO100 (really!). But I have to be very careful not to let any resultant softening of the image become an issue. Just wondered if you might have set something to automate (even inadvertently) and not be aware of it, without reviewing everything with a fine tooth comb at 100%? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 ... EDIT: Just another thought relating to software, after reading a little of the thread re: noise reduction. I don't know what your system is regarding PP, but have you set any defaults when importing images for processing? I often have to use NR in LR5 owing to my camera's poor handling of noise at anything beyond ISO100 (really!). But I have to be very careful not to let any resultant softening of the image become an issue. Just wondered if you might have set something to automate (even inadvertently) and not be aware of it, without reviewing everything with a fine tooth comb at 100%? That's a good thought I recently got unexpected results when I updated some software and the defaults were different. In my case it did not cause a QC issue just strange variable sizing on raw conversions. It made me look at the other defaults especially around noise and sharpening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted April 26, 2014 Share Posted April 26, 2014 There have been some good technical suggestions for Rolf, but I hope Alamy doesn't just dismiss his concerns. I would think that it is important for a stock agency not to alienate successful, long-time contributors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.