Stockimo now you can upload photos from your iPhone to sell on here

[Duncan_Andison]

Photography is dead, long live snapshots (not to mention dross)

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

The stupid thing is it doesn't have to be, Mobile Imagery could compliment the standard collection but here it is being lumped together. This makes it harder for those who want it, to find it, and those who don't, to exclude it. 

 

Most importantly, as they are all lumped together, it's going to turn into a bit of a QC lottery for the customer.... given they aren't carrying out the same quality checks for mobile images.

[Paulstw]

I uploaded a quick snap from my iPad mini last night to test it all. Your pics get a rating of 4, and if the average rating is over two you get through. I'm guessing this is decided by a few people seeing that its an average score. Your activity window just shows how long ago the picture was uploaded. That app doesn't do anything else but that it seems. 

 

I'll be embracing the change as soon as I get my iPhone (been moaning about getting one for ages) I'll treat the two mediums as totally separate entities and shoot for the clients I think will be interested in the images off both libraries. 

[Keith Douglas]

I think that it's good that Alamy are doing something in this area. However, I think that their implementation (yet again) is lacking, and diminishing the opportunity.

 

I'm a great believer in letting the customer decide, so what I'd like to see is much better and clearer, up front information being given about the technical quality of each image. Why not have a prominent 'Technical Quality Control' mark against images that have been through the QC process? If the customer needs the technical quality that the mark indicates then they will know to select pictures with that mark, and in doing so they will have the assurance that the image will meet a certain technical standard. Alternatively, they can select a non-quality checked image knowing that it may have some technical limitations, but it could be OK for their use.

 

I'd also have some way for the customer to select 'QC Mark', 'non QC Mark images' or both when searching.

 

I don't see that it is necessary to create this as an entirely seperate 'mobile' collection, so I support Alamy in that respect. In fact, creating a seperate  mobile collection would be very limiting, as advances in technology are only going to narrow the differences between what a mobile phone can achieve and what a DSLR can achieve.

 

Finally, I wouldn't limit this new category to iPhone only. Why not accept any images that meet a lower minimum in terms of size and inherent technical quality? But make it clear to the customer what they are getting with each image.  

  

PS: can we have an Android App as soon as possible.

[Duncan_Andison]

 

I think that it's good that Alamy are doing something in this area. However, I think that their implementation (yet again) is lacking, and diminishing the opportunity.

 

I'm a great believer in letting the customer decide, so what I'd like to see is much better and clearer, up front information being given about the technical quality of each image. Why not have a prominent 'Technical Quality Control' mark against images that have been through the QC process? If the customer needs the technical quality that the mark indicates then they will know to select pictures with that mark, and in doing so they will have the assurance that the image will meet a certain technical standard. Alternatively, they can select a non-quality checked image knowing that it may have some technical limitations, but it could be OK for their use.

 

I'd also have some way for the customer to select 'QC Mark', 'non QC Mark images' or both when searching.

 

I don't see that it is necessary to create this as an entirely seperate 'mobile' collection, so I support Alamy in that respect. In fact, creating a seperate  mobile collection would be very limiting, as advances in technology are only going to narrow the differences between what a mobile phone can achieve and what a DSLR can achieve.

 

Finally, I wouldn't limit this new category to iPhone only. Why not accept any images that meet a lower minimum in terms of size and inherent technical quality? But make it clear to the customer what they are getting with each image.  

  

PS: can we have an Android App as soon as possible.

 

 

+1 Well said. I'd settle with it not being separate provided there was a tick box to remove these images from a search, and make it clear to the customer. Then the customer doesn't have to wade through them all if they are not interested in them. You can't use file size as we are already seeing large file sizes for iPhone images.... somehow. This will only get worse once people now how to cheat the system.... and not being properly QC'd.

 

 

Edit.... and yes, Android app ASAP. Lets bring a bit of manufacturer equality back again rather than favouring one camera type 

[MDM]

You can't use file size as we are already seeing large file sizes for iPhone images.... somehow. This will only get worse once people now how to cheat the system.... and not being properly QC'd.

 

 

On a quick glance, I can't see anything against merging images as long as they were taken on an iPhone. There are several ways to do this. Firstly, there is a pano option while taking pictures. Secondly, I expect some of the iPhone apps will allow merging or even upsizing. Thirdly, I can't see anything against downloading iPhone images to a computer, merging them in Photoshop proper or the like and then reuploading them to the phone. I should add I've never tried any of these three - just pointing out the possibilities.

 

On the second point, it beats me why anybody would actually want to upload substandard images from a camera through an iPhone. The penalty for this should be severe sinbinning.

[Duncan_Andison]

 

You can't use file size as we are already seeing large file sizes for iPhone images.... somehow. This will only get worse once people now how to cheat the system.... and not being properly QC'd.

 

 

On a quick glance, I can't see anything against merging images as long as they were taken on an iPhone. There are several ways to do this. Firstly, there is a pano option while taking pictures. Secondly, I expect some of the iPhone apps will allow merging or even upsizing. Thirdly, I can't see anything against downloading iPhone images to a computer, merging them in Photoshop proper or the like and then reuploading them to the phone. I should add I've never tried any of these three - just pointing out the possibilities.

 

On the second point, it beats me why anybody would actually want to upload substandard images from a camera through an iPhone. The penalty for this should be severe sinbinning.

 

 

Your right,no problem merging images at all. What I was trying to get at, was you can't use file size to remove mobile images from search. And you're right, there should be the same sin-binning for substandard mobile phone images.... same checks for all.

[Mihai Popa]

 

You can't use file size as we are already seeing large file sizes for iPhone images.... somehow. This will only get worse once people now how to cheat the system.... and not being properly QC'd.

 

 

On a quick glance, I can't see anything against merging images as long as they were taken on an iPhone. There are several ways to do this. Firstly, there is a pano option while taking pictures. Secondly, I expect some of the iPhone apps will allow merging or even upsizing. Thirdly, I can't see anything against downloading iPhone images to a computer, merging them in Photoshop proper or the like and then reuploading them to the phone. I should add I've never tried any of these three - just pointing out the possibilities.

 

On the second point, it beats me why anybody would actually want to upload substandard images from a camera through an iPhone. The penalty for this should be severe sinbinning.

 

 

 

I read Stockimo guidelines and uploading camera photos can be considered contract infrigement. I don't know if Alamy can go after all infringers. They have to check each photo EXIF info (easy to trick), DOF, resolution etc.

[Alex Todd]

 

 

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

 

 

Sorry Linda, didn't mean to show you how to suck eggs

[PatrioticAlien]

Just reading the T&C's some interesting stuff about GPS

 

"Section 3.3

alamy reserves the right to auto assign certain information and data to the Image, including without limitation GPS location and number of people.

 

Section 11.1

You agree that the Stockimo App may collect geolocation data from your cell phone or other device. Alamy may use any such data obtained with any other data provider's data."

 

http://www.stockimo.com/terms.html

 

 

 

I ask myself how do we upload IPTC fields to each image?

 

-If I Have to copy them to a pc then insert the iptc fields and then copy them back to the "iPhone" cell with the iptc then upload.

Just sounds so much longer... Unless there is away on the app to do the fields for you every time?

 

DSLR

Take photo, copy to pc, insert fields and upload to alamy

 

Cell/moblie

Take photo, copy to pc, insert fields, copy back to phone and finally upload.

 

What about your phone data plan? Will most people who do this exceed their plan and be paying more per MB as a result of overuse?

 

 

 

Finally, I wouldn't limit this new category to iPhone only. Why not accept any images that meet a lower minimum in terms of size and inherent technical quality? But make it clear to the customer what they are getting with each image.  

  

PS: can we have an Android App as soon as possible.

+1

[Keith Douglas]

Don't make it unnecessarily complicated for customers. Just make another section for phone snapshots so that quality pictures don't become more and more buried in the quagmire they're creating right now.

Honestly, does Alamy really think customers will notice the "S" in the pictures' codes? Come on, be realistic! I bet most searches are simply done in the home page search box.

What's so hard about creating another tab on the homepage:  IMAGES | VIDEO | LIVE NEWS | STOCKIMO 

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

I think that having a seperate stockimo page misses the point. In existing, core Alamy does a customer know (or care) whether an image was taken with a Nikon D3100, a Canon 1D, a Sony RX100 or any other camera on the approved list? 

 

There's a danger that we focus too much on the technology used to take the picture and, as we have seen, technology developments are changing this space constantly. I don't see many customers thinking 'I *must* have an iPhone image'. iPhone image may be used in some customer's minds as a proxy for immediate, edgy, unusual, capturing the moment, opportunistic, real life etc. But there may be better images in the Alamy collection that meet those criteria taken with a DSLR or a compact camera.

 

BUT, the customer does need to know what the image is, whether the technical quality will meet their needs, and how much it's going to cost. It's no good purchasing a licence for a great iPhone photo if its just not up to the technical quality required for that use. And Technical QC is one thing that distinguishes the core Alamy Collection from Stockimo 

[Gervais Montacute]

Photography is dead, long live snapshots (not to mention dross)

 

 

Yep. That's the way it now looks to me too.

 

If I had a considerable amount of images on here now, I would be in more than discomfort mode.

 

Get an iPhone if you want to stay in the game is the message here.

 

I'm usually fairly upbeat and positive when I come on here, but not this time. I take onboard everyone's positive comments about iPhone photography but the cynic in me isn't letting  go of this one. 

[Duncan_Andison]

 

Photography is dead, long live snapshots (not to mention dross)

 

 

Yep. That's the way it now looks to me too.

 

If I had a considerable amount of images on here now, I would be in more than discomfort mode.

 

Get an iPhone if you want to stay in the game is the message here.

 

I'm usually fairly upbeat and positive when I come on here, but not this time. I take onboard everyone's positive comments about iPhone photography but the cynic in me isn't letting  go of this one. 

 

 

Don't be too down beat. Mobile photography can be positive provided it's controlled correctly. It only becomes a problem when they relax the QC to get more imagery in, as they are at the moment.

 

As technology improves, there should be no need to identify it as a mobile phone image but for now, they are not up to the same standard as the cameras on the Alamy Accepted list. As such, it needs to be clear on the zoomed image as to what they are getting/looking at. And, if they decide they don't want to look at this type of image, give them a tick box so they can remove them from the search.

[Gervais Montacute]

Customers will not know that. But more importantly, they won't care either. And they're not reading what photographers have to say.

 

It's Facebook world today.

 

Anyone with large portfolios, if they haven't already, are going to see a considerable income drop. And going down the iPhone route may not help that either when you consider how images will be up with the S prefix in next to no time.

[M.Chapman]

It may not be correct to assume there's no QC on mobile imagery. I just joined Stockimo and got the following welcome message by email.

 

Simply upload, tag and caption your photos. Our team will look at them and score each one out of 4. Photos with an average score higher than 2 will go on sale at www.alamy.com, the world’s largest website for picture buyers.

 

I also note the following on the Stockimo website.

 

When you upload your photos they're rated by our team of people from the photo industry, including buyers and sellers of photography.
Photos are rated out of 4. Photos are accepted if their average rating is above 2.
Photos that have inaccurate tags or illegal/offensive content will be rejected.
If your photos are accepted they go on sale right away. If one of your photos gets rejected, don’t be disheartened, shoot more photos and try again.
Photos with a rating of 2 or less out of 4 get rejected, we don't give an exact reason because more than one person rates your photos and we use your average score.
Please make sure you answer the questions about people and property correctly, because we'll also fail you for incorrect answers.
We don't currently tell you if this is why you've been rejected but we hope to introduce that in the future.

 

I haven't spotted what criteria they will use to score the images yet, or how they will handle at the volume of images that will come their way (they struggle to keep up with existing QC). Does this suggests that there will be some kind of "automated" scoring?

 

Most of the anguish on the forum relates to the concern that QC criteria being applied to mobile images will be lower than that applied usually and that all these images appear side by side in search results with little distinction or easy way to filter.

 

Perhaps Alamy could give us some reassurance here.

[Keith Douglas]

 

 

Don't make it unnecessarily complicated for customers. Just make another section for phone snapshots so that quality pictures don't become more and more buried in the quagmire they're creating right now.

Honestly, does Alamy really think customers will notice the "S" in the pictures' codes? Come on, be realistic! I bet most searches are simply done in the home page search box.

What's so hard about creating another tab on the homepage:  IMAGES | VIDEO | LIVE NEWS | STOCKIMO 

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

BUT, the customer does need to know what the image is, whether the technical quality will meet their needs, and how much it's going to cost. It's no good purchasing a licence for a great iPhone photo if its just not up to the technical quality required for that use. And Technical QC is one thing that distinguishes the core Alamy Collection from Stockimo 

 

 

You can't judge the quality from a LR thumbnail. As it is now, you have to look at the "S" in the image code to know you're looking at a phone shot. How many customers know that ....??????? Where's that information displayed for customers. Are they all reading this forum?

 

All it needs is a few very unhappy customers returning the dross they received to ruin Alamy's reputation. The word spreads quickly in those cases. Is that what Alamy wants? Again, it can be avoided if they place their snapshots in a separate section. Then, at least, you know what you might get (it may be sharp, or maybe not)

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

 

As I said in my earlier post:

 

Why not have a prominent 'Technical Quality Control' mark against images that have been through the QC process? If the customer needs the technical quality that the mark indicates then they will know to select pictures with that mark, and in doing so they will have the assurance that the image will meet a certain technical standard. Alternatively, they can select a non-quality checked image knowing that it may have some technical limitations, but it could be OK for their use.

[spacecadet]

When I work a location I carefully choose angle, light, lens; I consider a tripod, select shutter speed and aperture; breathe out before pressing the release, all that second-nature stuff, and I know it will eventually pass QC because I've worked for the shot.

Now all those clods holding out their phones like lollipops and getting in my way, taking 30 seconds where I take 3, can just go click, tap, bish, bosh and make me look like a sucker for doing it properly all these years.

 

 

Why not have a prominent 'Technical Quality Control' mark against images that have been through the QC process? If the customer needs the technical quality that the mark indicates then they will know to select pictures with that mark, and in doing so they will have the assurance that the image will meet a certain technical standard. Alternatively, they can select a non-quality checked image knowing that it may have some technical limitations, but it could be OK for their use.

 

That a  seasoned contributor even feels he has to suggest this possibility puts a bomb under years of careful work.

[Martyn]

I just hope Alamy will not loose more clients than they'll gain by going the mediocre route. I truly wonder what Alamy's archive will look like in two years time, now that every 10 year old apparently got the message on his facebook that they can earn a few dollars AND perhaps see their "piece of art" published.

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

I think that Alamy is going to be absolutely inundated with happy snaps. Having seen the samples yesterday that were swiftly removed, if they are examples of images that have been passed, I would hate to see the ones that have been rejected. The simple message here is put them under a separate search tab and everybody is happy.....but that will not happen until the major customers/clients start to kick off.

Time is money and clients will not want to start sifting through mountains of images to find the one that meets their requirements, whether that be for quality images or I-phone images....why make life difficult for them?

[PatrioticAlien]

I just hope Alamy will not loose more clients than they'll gain by going the mediocre route. I truly wonder what Alamy's archive will look like in two years time, now that every 10 year old apparently got the message on his facebook that they can earn a few dollars AND perhaps see their "piece of art" published. Well, I certainly would have liked the idea to be a "pro photog" at the age of ten

 

Cheers,

Philippe

+1

[Brian Lawrence]

Must buy an iPhone cos the administrator has told us ONE advertising client is buying a phone image.  WOW!  This the way forward boys and girls, it wouldn't surprise me if Alamy began a phone production line. Why not make the phone that  takes the picture. 

[David F]

I think that this confirms what has been obvious for some considerable time (years) and that is the services of pro photographers while still welcome are not really required anymore in the world of stock (yes I know there will be plenty of exceptions).

 

Crowd sourcing from snappy joe public is probably where the greatest profits lie in the future.  It's not rocket science really, but I think many of us who rely on photography as a business and who don't already have a large portfolio online here will not find salvation in using their phones alongside, or even instead of their expensive cameras.

 

Alamy can only grow its business/profit in two ways and that is either further increase sales revenue as it is hoping to do with Stockimo, or increase the amount it takes from photographers.

 

I think like Jeff Greenberg has said a reduction in the amount the contributor gets must be on the cards at some stage, which is also worth considering.  Oh I will just pre-empt the official response "we have no plans at present to reduce the split from 50/50"

 

On a more positive note I do try to look on the bright side of many situations and the headless chicken approach of folk with thousands of pounds worth of camera kit running out to get new phones or bemoaning the fact theirs is not covered has at least made me laugh.  (a few red arrows for that I bet)

 

If I continue to make some money I will upload a few pics, if that stops then I won't bother simple as that.

 

Right, time to make some real money, now where is that job application for a supermarket shelf stacker.  mmmm wonder if they will let me use my phone at work   

[Paulstw]

I just hope Alamy will not loose more clients than they'll gain by going the mediocre route. I truly wonder what Alamy's archive will look like in two years time, now that every 10 year old apparently got the message on his facebook that they can earn a few dollars AND perhaps see their "piece of art" published. Well, I certainly would have liked the idea to be a "pro photog" at the age of ten

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

See to be honest Philippe the photography snobbery and dividing it up into classes theme in this thread is actually embarrassing. Most people are assuming that all that's going to be uploaded to Stockimo is pure dross. That's probably thee most offensive mindset to have and not to mention that it shows real fear of the unknown and a stubbornness to go with the flow or accept it.

 

Why is it so difficult to absorb that someone with an iPhone can't be classed as a photographer, let alone a 10 year old one? My 14 year old daughter uses my camera sometimes. I embrace it, I let her do what she wants. With the theme of this thread I should be telling her to get better gear, take pics for over ten years and then come back to get your 'photographer' badge. 

 

There's a few that need to get off their high horse and come back down to earth. It's not the same world it was 10 years ago. It's starting to sound a lot like a gentleman's club in here where the women and children are retired to the colouring in room while the experience of man and his photography is glorified and no-one should be allowed in. 

[Robert Brook]

 

I just hope Alamy will not loose more clients than they'll gain by going the mediocre route. I truly wonder what Alamy's archive will look like in two years time, now that every 10 year old apparently got the message on his facebook that they can earn a few dollars AND perhaps see their "piece of art" published.

 

Cheers,

Philippe

 

I think that Alamy is going to be absolutely inundated with happy snaps. Having seen the samples yesterday that were swiftly removed, if they are examples of images that have been passed, I would hate to see the ones that have been rejected. The simple message here is put them under a separate search tab and everybody is happy.....but that will not happen until the major customers/clients start to kick off.

Time is money and clients will not want to start sifting through mountains of images to find the one that meets their requirements, whether that be for quality images or I-phone images....why make life difficult for them?

 

 

I thought Alamy was already inundated with happy snaps - more technical and staid, less emotive or creative than what we are seeing from the smartphones.

 

If contributors here can't produce work that sells, or anybody wants (and many can't), Alamy will go hunting for those who can.

[MDM]

 

 

You can't use file size as we are already seeing large file sizes for iPhone images.... somehow. This will only get worse once people now how to cheat the system.... and not being properly QC'd.

 

 

On a quick glance, I can't see anything against merging images as long as they were taken on an iPhone. There are several ways to do this. Firstly, there is a pano option while taking pictures. Secondly, I expect some of the iPhone apps will allow merging or even upsizing. Thirdly, I can't see anything against downloading iPhone images to a computer, merging them in Photoshop proper or the like and then reuploading them to the phone. I should add I've never tried any of these three - just pointing out the possibilities.

 

On the second point, it beats me why anybody would actually want to upload substandard images from a camera through an iPhone. The penalty for this should be severe sinbinning.

 

 

Your right,no problem merging images at all. What I was trying to get at, was you can't use file size to remove mobile images from search. And you're right, there should be the same sin-binning for substandard mobile phone images.... same checks for all.

 

 

Just to clarify I meant uploading substandard camera images by the iPhone route as some people have been suggesting. I don't know how Alamy will cope when they get floods of substandard iPhone images which will almost certainly happen. Having to rate vast numbers of individual iPhone images may prove uneconomic and maybe they will have to introduce some form of deterrent.   

[Gordon Scammell]

Do I like the idea of mobile phone photography?

[Guest]

 

 

 Having to rate vast numbers of individual iPhone images may prove uneconomic and maybe they will have to introduce some form of deterrent.   

 

I though they had already done that.... it's called 'Summary of tems Sold'