Jump to content

Recommended Posts

hello there

 

my pics didnt get accepted. reason

 

lacking defenition

 

looked in guidelines,didnt find explenation.

 

what does it mean? out of interest.

 

greetings Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's soft or lacking definition. We call it SoLD for short.

It's not sharp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can this happen using noise reduction in LR?

 

trying to figure out what im doing wrong.

 

i can not upload any pictures......to catch the mistake.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excessive NR could certainly do it.

Put some samples on photobucket. They must be full size though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Peter, when submitting your 'test' 4 images, don't try to show off your ability as an artist -- upload 4 technically perfect images. Do NOT upload any image that needs noise reduction. 

 

Good luck.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Edo implied, it's a good idea to stick to noise-free, low-ISO images for your first sub. SoLD is probably the main reason given for failures. Ditto on the good luck.

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have 3000 odd pics on Alamy and just had a few QC failures for 'lack of definition' this year (If I do get a  failure it is usually sensor dust)

So either the 5d mk2 is as crap as everyone says or I need my eyes testing. 

Good luck with it anyway.

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have 3000 odd pics on Alamy and just had a few QC failures for 'lack of definition' this year (If I do get a  failure it is usually sensor dust)

So either the 5d mk2 is as crap as everyone says or I need my eyes testing. 

Good luck with it anyway.

 

I used the 5D mkII for a while before changing systems, again. The camera was OK but the lenses were not in my opinion.

 

Allan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to be back in jail for another month. Maybe I should try to follow my own advice. I'm always feeling that I should be more conservative in what I post . . . and then . . . and then. . . .   :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to be back in jail for another month. Maybe I should try to follow my own advice. I'm always feeling that I should be more conservative in what I post . . . and then . . . and then. . . .   :(

 

If that is true then welcome back you have plenty of company. I will be here till 11th November or thereabouts.

 

Allan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nov. 13 for me.  I'm amassing images to submit for another failure, that should put me in here until nearly Christmas.  Too bad we jailees can't review each other's images, maybe a pair of fresh eyes would spot something.  Maybe we should all post each submission to Dropbox, invite a few select people to take a quick review, and notify of suspect images.

 

We could call it the FOOC "Failures Offering Opinions Club".  Better name, anybody?

Edited by Betty LaRue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nov. 13 for me.  I'm amassing images to submit for another failure, that should put me in here until nearly Christmas.  Too bad we jailees can't review each other's images, maybe a pair of fresh eyes would spot something.  Maybe we should all post each submission to Dropbox, invite a few select people to take a quick review, and notify of suspect images.

 

We could call it the FOOC "Failures Offering Opinions Club".  Better name, anybody?

 

Not a bad idea.

Let's see if this works: Here is my rejected gallery on Google+:

https://plus.google.com/photos/103522848714965116139/albums/6071323254338008017

 

You have to click on an image; then click on the zoom tool and use the slider in the pop-up window. Because these are the original full size jpg 12 images, it may take a while before you will get the slider to 100%.

 

wim

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll be in QC Captivity for my birthday on Nov 10, so if you're not out yet, Betty, Allan, Peter and others, perhaps we might have a small celebration? Maybe one symbolic candle on a nice pie? (We couldn't fit all my candles on a normal sized pie.)  :huh:

 

FOOC, eh? Hmm. How about The Slammer? Maybe not. No offense to any of the helpful people here in the Forum, but the day I need assistance in judging the quality of an image is the day I hang up my cameras. Studio photography can sometimes be a group effort, but with street shooting, and PP, basically it's me and Alamy QC. And sometimes we disagree. 

 

I will accept my latest QC fail as a righteous call. The image that failed, and I'm sure which image it is, was, as I saw it, in a gray/grey area. It got a thumbs down. 

 

Betty, you asked me on my last QC fail in August if my newest camera, the RX10, was at fault. I think the (rather late) answer to that question is . . . not the camera as such, but maybe it contributed to the problem . . . because (even now) there are things about the RX10 that I'm not totally used to or comfortable with.

 

But QC fails are not about shooting problems--they are entirely about the decision we make deciding to submit or not submit an image after doing our 100% look-see. Last weekend I went out at night to try the Hand held Twilight scene mode on the RX10. I had used this mode successfully before for shooting in low-light in supermarkets and restaurants, but I had not done a night shoot in the street. I deleted lots of stuff from that shoot, but I submitted two images I should not have.

 

The rule should be this: if you have any misgivings about an image, don't submit it. No need for a second opinion. :)  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nov. 13 for me.  I'm amassing images to submit for another failure, that should put me in here until nearly Christmas.  Too bad we jailees can't review each other's images, maybe a pair of fresh eyes would spot something.  Maybe we should all post each submission to Dropbox, invite a few select people to take a quick review, and notify of suspect images.

 

We could call it the FOOC "Failures Offering Opinions Club".  Better name, anybody?

 

Not a bad idea.

Let's see if this works: Here is my rejected gallery on Google+:

https://plus.google.com/photos/103522848714965116139/albums/6071323254338008017

 

You have to click on an image; then click on the zoom tool and use the slider in the pop-up window. Because these are the original full size jpg 12 images, it may take a while before you will get the slider to 100%.

 

wim

 

 

Since you asked, wim.  ;)

 

Do I understand that this group of five failed because of one image . . . or did all five of these fail separately The sea creature has SoLD, with some sharp points but too much out of focus. I have this situation too often with food.

 

If I was working QC I'd fail the starfish, pass the terrace restaurant, maybe fail the two images of the trees with hot spots (maybe not--I'm not sure), and pass the water taxi. All nice images, and I can see your intent with each. You tend to like high-key images; I see many of them in your collection. 

 

Edo

 

PS: I had a second closer look at the starfish and I see very little out of focus area there. Hmm. What's happenin, wim? 

Edited by Ed Rooney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...

 

 

The rule should be this: if you have any misgivings about an image, don't submit it. No need for a second opinion. :)  

 

Exactly my approach, if I feel I have to ask my wife, or anyone else, I already know I should not submit. Doesn't always stop me asking though, but it does stop me submitting!

Edited by Martin P Wilson
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I find that the images I had minor misgivings about usually pass. More often than not, I'm totally blindsided by what QC discovers. It's almost never the image I thought it was. Second opinions (some would say post mortums) I've gotten on the forum have always been very helpful, and I've learned quite a bit from them.

 

Sorry to say that I'm hoping to miss Edo's birthday celebration at the Sin Bin Inn, but of course you never know. Fried pie is probably too fattening for me at the moment anyway as I'm trying shed a few kg. I'm sure it is decadent and delicious, though.

 

Buon compleanno in advance.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, John (more pie for me!) 

 

Let ,me ask you this: when the month passes, and you look at the failed image, do you then see and agree with the problem? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Nov. 13 for me.  I'm amassing images to submit for another failure, that should put me in here until nearly Christmas.  Too bad we jailees can't review each other's images, maybe a pair of fresh eyes would spot something.  Maybe we should all post each submission to Dropbox, invite a few select people to take a quick review, and notify of suspect images.

 

We could call it the FOOC "Failures Offering Opinions Club".  Better name, anybody?

 

Not a bad idea.

Let's see if this works: Here is my rejected gallery on Google+:

https://plus.google.com/photos/103522848714965116139/albums/6071323254338008017

 

You have to click on an image; then click on the zoom tool and use the slider in the pop-up window. Because these are the original full size jpg 12 images, it may take a while before you will get the slider to 100%.

 

wim

 

 

Since you asked, wim.  ;)

 

Do I understand that this group of five failed because of one image . . . or did all five of these fail separately The sea creature has SoLD, with some sharp points but too much out of focus. I have this situation too often with food.

 

If I was working QC I'd fail the starfish, pass the terrace restaurant, maybe fail the two images of the trees with hot spots (maybe not--I'm not sure), and pass the water taxi. All nice images, and I can see your intent with each. You tend to like high-key images; I see many of them in your collection. 

 

Edo

 

PS: I had a second closer look at the starfish and I see very little out of focus area there. Hmm. What's happenin, wim? 

 

 

Interesting, I would probably have passed the starfish (but would have downsized it myself) and failed the terrace (not enough depth of field). The water taxi looks fine to me. Not sure about the trees. I'm terrible at judging high-key images. However, all the ones that I've submitted have passed somehow. Glad I don't work for Alamy QC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, John (more pie for me!) 

 

Let ,me ask you this: when the month passes, and you look at the failed image, do you then see and agree with the problem? 

 

Sometimes I end up agreeing and sometimes I don't, unless of course it was something really obvious like a missed dust blob. Nevertheless, failing is always a learning experience one way or the other.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John, I see detail in the head of the person on the lower left and in every building in the distance in Paris. A case could be made for burned out areas. If I were doing the PP on these images, I would open the trees in NX2 and darken just the blue in the sky and add a llittle saturation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John, I see detail in the head of the person on the lower left and in every building in the distance in Paris. A case could be made for burned out areas. If I were doing the PP on these images, I would open the trees in NX2 and darken just the blue in the sky and add a llittle saturation. 

 

Personally, I think that clients would be perfectly happy with any of Wim's five rejected images, which is no doubt why I won't be offered a job in QC any time soon. B)

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Not a bad idea.

Let's see if this works: Here is my rejected gallery on Google+:

https://plus.google.com/photos/103522848714965116139/albums/6071323254338008017

 

You have to click on an image; then click on the zoom tool and use the slider in the pop-up window. Because these are the original full size jpg 12 images, it may take a while before you will get the slider to 100%.

 

wim

 

 

I love your port - the standard is something for me to aspire to.

 

Secondly, I don't feel qualified to critique anyone's work - I struggle to critique my own, but I will tell you what I can see.

 

The starfish is grainy / noisy at it centre.

 

The terrace one has noise in the dark clothing, particularly on the dark shirt and black vest top of the couple centre left near the railings.

 

Single tree has greenish noisy bits on lower branches, on the right hand side branches there are a couple of circular blobs of noise that could be taken for dust spots, but I think it is just noise on the light coming through the foliage.

 

The group of trees image has a lot of noise in the foreground, particularly the plant at bottom left corner.

 

Boat - possible cyan CA on the top rear of the boat - I know this is probably the different colour on the sides of the boat, but it is showing as a blue line which could be taken for CA.  There are parts of the image on the left which have noise on the water, the graininess is darker in laces, which gives the effects of dark stripes through the noisy area.

 

Oh, I am chewing my knuckles posting this, but it's encouraging that you are prepared to post the images and I can see it's not just me who has some noisy images to sort through. Thanks for sharing them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Nov. 13 for me.  I'm amassing images to submit for another failure, that should put me in here until nearly Christmas.  Too bad we jailees can't review each other's images, maybe a pair of fresh eyes would spot something.  Maybe we should all post each submission to Dropbox, invite a few select people to take a quick review, and notify of suspect images.

 

We could call it the FOOC "Failures Offering Opinions Club".  Better name, anybody?

 

Not a bad idea.

Let's see if this works: Here is my rejected gallery on Google+:

https://plus.google.com/photos/103522848714965116139/albums/6071323254338008017

 

You have to click on an image; then click on the zoom tool and use the slider in the pop-up window. Because these are the original full size jpg 12 images, it may take a while before you will get the slider to 100%.

 

wim

 

 

Since you asked, wim.  ;)

 

Do I understand that this group of five failed because of one image . . . or did all five of these fail separately The sea creature has SoLD, with some sharp points but too much out of focus. I have this situation too often with food.

 

If I was working QC I'd fail the starfish, pass the terrace restaurant, maybe fail the two images of the trees with hot spots (maybe not--I'm not sure), and pass the water taxi. All nice images, and I can see your intent with each. You tend to like high-key images; I see many of them in your collection. 

 

Edo

 

PS: I had a second closer look at the starfish and I see very little out of focus area there. Hmm. What's happenin, wim? 

 

 

 

All have failed some on the same batch like the trees.

 

The starfish was accepted at a smaller size and some additional pp. It's probably the way this creature looks. Maybe some movement as well.

Actually I had not planned to upload it, because I didn't think it would pass. Not because it was unsharp, but because it didn't look sharp enough. Only when I saw searches for this particular behaviour (search: starfish eating mollusc), I decided to develop and upload. So now I over-sharpened some details; probably used some clarity (normally a big no no) and reduced size. I don't know why the details do not show up on Google+; I think all the other do have their details intact. It's RX100 mkI and this does not have the IQ of a 1Ds3. At 4000 x 2667 pixels it is here: E13E49 on Alamy. And here on Google+. This one has camera details. At 100% the darker blue artefacts around the tentacles are really bad. That should have been the reason to reject it, even at a reduced size. It will probably never sell.

 

What do you all think about the Baltimore Water Taxi?

Is that slight blur in the corner (Canon L 70-200 IS at 1/640 - f/9 - 200mm ) a problem? Anything else?

Pity it's already in the rejected gallery, so you know it's been rejected all right.

 

wim

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.