John Mitchell Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 I don't think buyers care about actual quality as much as they do about content. I've seen all this before within stock sites of a different nature. This is doom. This is a very good point. Way back in the 90's (that would be the 1990's), the travel editor of a major newspaper contacted me asking if I had a particular photo to illustrate an article I had written. I said I did but camera shake made it unsuitable for publication. He told me to send it along anyway. The paper ended up using it as the lead photo, shakiness and all. It actually didn't look too bad. Moral of story: there will probably be plenty of takers for shaky iPhone snaps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotoDogue Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 I'm not a power cell phone user. My cell phone contract expired in July and I got on the 'Pay as you go' plan for my iPhone 4 and it saves me appx $50 a month from the regular contracted plan. Not getting an iPhone 5 or better until I lose or break my phone. I don't think this APP will work on the older iPhones. L I replaced my old iPhone 3Gs with a 4s last October that's Pre-Paid via Virgin Mobile. It's running iOS 7.0.4 and the app seems to work just fine... though I won't know for sure until I've uploaded some images. One of the things that troubles me is, I have several thousand iPhone images on my hard drive, in Lightroom, but it looks like I'll have to transfer them back to my iPhone to submit them. It's almost impossible to check an image for sharpness on the phone and who wants to store gigabites of images on a 16gb phone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 You don't have to check for sharpness. There's no QC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Coombs Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Good idea to add mobile imagery, but it may need a more easy/obvious way for the user to segregate results according to quality. If a mobile image passes the same QC requirements as the main collection, no problem. But if mobile imagery isn't subject to the same QC requirements and is added to the same collection, it makes a complete nonsense of the acceptable camera list and existing QC. One of Alamy's selling points (presumably) is that the majority of the images that appear in the search results are of high technical quality, so the buyer needn't worry too much about this and can download images safe in the knowledge that when they see the image at 100% they won't be disappointed from a technical viewpoint. If lower quality mobile imagery appears in the same search results as the images which had to pass exiting QC, without a clear way to distinguish them (selecting the MP level just doesn't do this) it will quickly devalue the existing collection. A collection which your valued contributors have carefully prepared in line with your stringent QC requirements. Alamy, PLEASE consider adding another tab on the search results page e.g. Add "Mobile" to the "New", "Creative", "Relevant", tabs. Or add or some other button to allow this. I don't think the idea that the the user will spot that the image ref starts with an S or will set the megapixel limit will work. Alternatively put a red frame, or something obvious, around the thumbnails of images that are lower res or haven't been through QC, with a suitable "popup" when the mouse is hovered over the thumbnail. Yep, I'll echo that. Well said! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gervais Montacute Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 I don't think buyers care about actual quality as much as they do about content. I've seen all this before within stock sites of a different nature. This is doom. This is a very good point. Way back in the 90's (that would be the 1990's), the travel editor of a major newspaper contacted me asking if I had a particular photo to illustrate an article I had written. I said I did but camera shake made it unsuitable for publication. He told me to send it along anyway. The paper ended up using it as the lead photo, shakiness and all. It actually didn't look too bad. Moral of story: there will probably be plenty of takers for shaky iPhone snaps. If I take a photo of the only Martian landing that happens to be at the bottom of my garden on a crappy phone camera, and the shot is shaking all over the place, is every newspaper in the world going to turn it down because it's SALD and next time they say use your D800? I'm telling you, this is doom for present day high quality camera equipment vis a vi stock photography. Get an iPhone 5 is the message I take from this. I have an ancient Nokia I keep for emergency break downs and never turn it on. It's a pay as you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 I don't think buyers care about actual quality as much as they do about content. I've seen all this before within stock sites of a different nature. This is doom. This is a very good point. Way back in the 90's (that would be the 1990's), the travel editor of a major newspaper contacted me asking if I had a particular photo to illustrate an article I had written. I said I did but camera shake made it unsuitable for publication. He told me to send it along anyway. The paper ended up using it as the lead photo, shakiness and all. It actually didn't look too bad. Moral of story: there will probably be plenty of takers for shaky iPhone snaps. If I take a photo of the only Martian landing that happens to be at the bottom of my garden on a crappy phone camera, and the shot is shaking all over the place, is every newspaper in the world going to turn it down because it's SALD and next time they say use your D800? That has always been the case (and about the only time I would use a mobile phone camera!) I'm telling you, this is doom for present day high quality camera equipment vis a vi stock photography. Exactly what I was saying a couple of weeks ago, and get several reddies for it! Get an iPhone 5 is the message I take from this. I have an ancient Nokia I keep for emergency break downs and never turn it on. It's a pay as you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pierre rochon Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 If lower quality mobile imagery appears in the same search results as the images which had to pass exiting QC, without a clear way to distinguish them (selecting the MP level just doesn't do this) it will quickly devalue the existing collection. A collection which your valued contributors have carefully prepared in line with your stringent QC requirements. Alamy, PLEASE consider adding another tab on the search results page e.g. Add "Mobile" to the "New", "Creative", "Relevant", tabs. Or add or some other button to allow this. I don't think the idea that the the user will spot that the image ref starts with an S or will set the megapixel limit will work. Alternatively put a red frame, or something obvious, around the thumbnails of images that are lower res or haven't been through QC, with a suitable "popup" when the mouse is hovered over the thumbnail. Alamy, could you comment Mr Chapman's post? Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Sadly we are now living with the mindset that some people do not realize that an image taken with a cell phone is NOT the same quality as an image taken with high quality photo equipment. "A photo is a photo" seems to be the consensus of many under qualified humans working in the photo research field. After all,most of them do have phones and the APPS that manipulate photos and some think they are the next Annie Leibovitz. I notice when someone posts a photo on Facebook that is total garbage 500 people will swoon like it's the first time they've ever seen a photo. I had a boyfriend that was a known singer and I took tons of photos of him. Fans would post their far away out of focus unflattering pictures on the fan site and forums and the comments would be,'nice photo,you should be a photographer' even when the photo was from the balcony or with eyes closed,mouth open bad frozen dance move....The photos and the snappers would get tons of compliments. And of course I'd view them as,u"h-oh,career killer "in regards to *his* image. Have people lost their minds or rational ability when it comes to viewing? L Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin P Wilson Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Linda, not sure they (many) ever had it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Linda, not sure they (many) ever had it! LOL,I think you are right! L Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 And wouldn't it be nice if Photoshop was just as quick and easy as the phone APPS to add textures,do composites,filters,adding text,removing and replacing people,etc?How many hours do we spend perfecting an image in Photoshop and then an APP can do it on the fly in 2 minutes. Like PRO cameras and lenses getting bigger and bigger so photogs look like pros and then have to hire the best chiropractors in the business? I think the industry and the general public need to be educated on the differences along with what copyright is.Sorry,had to throw that in. :-) L Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 If lower quality mobile imagery appears in the same search results as the images which had to pass exiting QC, without a clear way to distinguish them (selecting the MP level just doesn't do this) it will quickly devalue the existing collection. A collection which your valued contributors have carefully prepared in line with your stringent QC requirements. Alamy, PLEASE consider adding another tab on the search results page e.g. Add "Mobile" to the "New", "Creative", "Relevant", tabs. Or add or some other button to allow this. I don't think the idea that the the user will spot that the image ref starts with an S or will set the megapixel limit will work. Alternatively put a red frame, or something obvious, around the thumbnails of images that are lower res or haven't been through QC, with a suitable "popup" when the mouse is hovered over the thumbnail. Alamy, could you comment Mr Chapman's post? Thank you. Alamy has been closed for business for a couple of hours so we will have to wait until tomorrow for any other comments from them I would assume. Jill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 And wouldn't it be nice if Photoshop was just as quick and easy as the phone APPS to add textures,do composites,filters,adding text,removing and replacing people,etc? How many hours do we spend perfecting an image in Photoshop and then an APP can do it on the fly in 2 minutes. Like PRO cameras and lenses getting bigger and bigger so photogs look like pros and hire the best chiropractors in the business? I think the industry and the general public need to be educated on the differences along with what copyright is.Sorry,had to throw that in. :-) L Actually, in-camera settings are getting so good that post-processing may soon be largely a thing of the past. I now shoot JPEG most of the time and try to get everything right before I push the shutter, leaving RAW for difficult subjects only. The results are looking better than my processed RAW files. With downloadable camera apps, it's probably only a matter of time before we can even do PhotoShop manipulations right in the camera. As cellphones get more like real cameras, real cameras are getting more like cellphones, it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 And wouldn't it be nice if Photoshop was just as quick and easy as the phone APPS to add textures,do composites,filters,adding text,removing and replacing people,etc? How many hours do we spend perfecting an image in Photoshop and then an APP can do it on the fly in 2 minutes. Like PRO cameras and lenses getting bigger and bigger so photogs look like pros and hire the best chiropractors in the business? I think the industry and the general public need to be educated on the differences along with what copyright is.Sorry,had to throw that in. :-) L Actually, in-camera settings are getting so good that post-processing may soon be largely a thing of the past. I now shoot JPEG most of the time and try to get everything right before I push the shutter, leaving RAW for difficult subjects only. The results are looking better than my processed RAW files. With downloadable camera apps, it's probably only a matter of time before we can even do PhotoShop manipulations right in the camera. As cellphones get more like real cameras, real cameras are getting more like cellphones, it seems. Yes but in camera processing can't add textures,remove people,do composites,add filtering,change background. I have some clients I shoot for that now want all of this because,'their phones can do it.' Perhaps I should return the $2000 Canon 85mm 1.2 lens I just bought? :-( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gervais Montacute Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 John good points all round. I will start using the D800 set to JPEG in future. After this thread, I'd like to set the thing to stun actually. I already use the RX100 in JPEG format and looking at this thread, can no longer see the point of shooting in RAW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyMelbourne Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Being just a dumb guy with a dumb phone, I'm really confused. It sounds as if iPhone images are being integrated into the general collection. Will there at least be a clickable "Stockimo" (or whatever) tab at the top of the search results pages so that potential buyers can separate phone shots from existing stock? No.... this is one of my main complaints. The customer has to see them all and if you try to use image size to get rid of them, you will find there are plenty of iPhone shots with resolutions greater than the resolution of the iPhone camera.... very clever stuff! Hmmm... Maybe iDumb but this doesn't sound like a good idea. I can understand (sort of) Alamy's embracing the inevitable, but I think that they should rethink mixing phone shots with regular stock images. This will just hasten the proverbial "race to the bottom" as others have pointed out. Better to separate the iPhone images and woo a different type of buyer IMHO.Oh, that'll soon sort itself out. After customers return numerous pictures because they are out of focus and / or full of noise, Alamy will quickly place them apart. Cheers, Philippe Or just move to another agency with standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mihai Popa Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 And wouldn't it be nice if Photoshop was just as quick and easy as the phone APPS to add textures,do composites,filters,adding text,removing and replacing people,etc? How many hours do we spend perfecting an image in Photoshop and then an APP can do it on the fly in 2 minutes. Like PRO cameras and lenses getting bigger and bigger so photogs look like pros and then have to hire the best chiropractors in the business? I think the industry and the general public need to be educated on the differences along with what copyright is.Sorry,had to throw that in. :-) L There is a Photoshop app for IPhone. Happy snapping! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 And wouldn't it be nice if Photoshop was just as quick and easy as the phone APPS to add textures,do composites,filters,adding text,removing and replacing people,etc? How many hours do we spend perfecting an image in Photoshop and then an APP can do it on the fly in 2 minutes. Like PRO cameras and lenses getting bigger and bigger so photogs look like pros and then have to hire the best chiropractors in the business? I think the industry and the general public need to be educated on the differences along with what copyright is.Sorry,had to throw that in. :-) L There is a Photoshop app for IPhone. Happy snapping! Yes I know Photoshop is for iPhones,I have over 300 APPS on my phone that do everything in 30 seconds or less. I have APPS that are quicker and more elegant than Photoshop on my phone too. I was referring to APPS in iPhones doing things much quicker than traditional photography on a desktop computer using Photoshop especially when shooting raw which my own specific clients insist on as well as some magazines I shoot for. L Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Edwards Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 From Page 3! We’ll introduce a filter for Stockimo shots in the future. For now, to see them, search ‘Stockimo’ under contributor name in advanced search Just a thought - but the person that is licensing a iPhone image, who is looking for an iPhone image is NOT looking for a standard run-of-the mill stock image but looking for something a bit different (filters & all)? I am not sure wether it is a good or bad thing (at the moment I cannot see any good) the images being in the main library and appearing in main searches - I would expect the filter to be there from day one. I have tried to email James about this but it has bounced... I am pro an iPhone/Mobile collection but there NEEDs to be filters from the outset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Todd Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 And wouldn't it be nice if Photoshop was just as quick and easy as the phone APPS to add textures,do composites,filters,adding text,removing and replacing people,etc? How many hours do we spend perfecting an image in Photoshop and then an APP can do it on the fly in 2 minutes. Like PRO cameras and lenses getting bigger and bigger so photogs look like pros and then have to hire the best chiropractors in the business? I think the industry and the general public need to be educated on the differences along with what copyright is.Sorry,had to throw that in. :-) L You can do a lot of that with actions. You can either set them up yourself or buy them ready made. I've used Totally Rad in the past http://www.gettotallyrad.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thyrsis Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 You don't have to check for sharpness. There's no QC. I've just uploaded a few images to test the water. Some were accepted and some were rejected so there is a selection process of sorts. Not sure how it works because the image I thought was the best one was rejected. Ironically it was used in my local paper last week! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Crean Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 I don't think buyers care about actual quality as much as they do about content. I've seen all this before within stock sites of a different nature. This is doom. Expand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losdemas Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 From Page 3! We’ll introduce a filter for Stockimo shots in the future. For now, to see them, search ‘Stockimo’ under contributor name in advanced search Just a thought - but the person that is licensing a iPhone image, who is looking for an iPhone image is NOT looking for a standard run-of-the mill stock image but looking for something a bit different (filters & all)? I am not sure wether it is a good or bad thing (at the moment I cannot see any good) the images being in the main library and appearing in main searches - I would expect the filter to be there from day one. I have tried to email James about this but it has bounced... I am pro an iPhone/Mobile collection but there NEEDs to be filters from the outset. Wonder which will come first: the filter or the implementation of keyword quotes/brackets [""] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 John good points all round. I will start using the D800 set to JPEG in future. After this thread, I'd like to set the thing to stun actually. I already use the RX100 in JPEG format and looking at this thread, can no longer see the point of shooting in RAW. I'm actually enjoying the switch to JPEG shooting. It's more like film days, when I had to think carefully about settings before pressing the button. I found that I was getting quite lazy with RAW, realizing that I could often fix exposure problems, etc. in post-processing. Also, the camera I'm now using has excellent CA and distortion correction, which means I don't have to worry about that later on either. I haven't found the "stun" setting yet, but no doubt it's hidden away in one of the menus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Linda Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 And wouldn't it be nice if Photoshop was just as quick and easy as the phone APPS to add textures,do composites,filters,adding text,removing and replacing people,etc? How many hours do we spend perfecting an image in Photoshop and then an APP can do it on the fly in 2 minutes. Like PRO cameras and lenses getting bigger and bigger so photogs look like pros and then have to hire the best chiropractors in the business? I think the industry and the general public need to be educated on the differences along with what copyright is.Sorry,had to throw that in. :-) L You can do a lot of that with actions. You can either set them up yourself or buy them ready made. I've used Totally Rad in the past http://www.gettotallyrad.com/ I 've used Photoshop for more than 20 years,,I know how to do things quickly and write actions and have sold my sets I've created thru the years,ditto for Lighroom presets . But when you are working with people pictures,there is still time and skill involved to make it look correct and professional. I still have some Fortune 500 clients and major magazines I shoot for and when someone is shooting behind me with their cell phone and working 'magic' in 30 seconds that passes as 'acceptable' for small use....it doesn't bode well for our industry. L Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.