Jump to content

Recommended Posts

DD

Bang on, when photographers have to supply images directly to a client( instead of through the QC that Alamy offers) they have to adopt a high standard.

I am very sure of an images quality before I send to a client in exchange for their money, the same applies to sending images to Alamy.

 

Rejected images are not an opportunity to learn they are duff images which if not caught by QC could end up with a buyer, not good for any of us.

 

I will get my flameproof suit :-)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Rejected images are not an opportunity to learn they are duff images which if not caught by QC could end up with a buyer, not good for any of us.

 

 

Could you explain that?

 

wim

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The opportunity to learn is when you edit your images for quality. Alamy does not edit images. Alamy rejects images that are below Alamy's quality line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The opportunity to learn is when you edit your images for quality. Alamy does not edit images. Alamy rejects images that are below Alamy's quality line.

 

With 4 weeks until the next feedback that'll be a long process ;-)

 

wim

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wim

 

 

Rejected images are not an opportunity to learn they are duff images which if not caught by QC could end up with a buyer, not good for any of us.
 

 

Could you explain that?

 

wim

 

I will try,

 

A technically duff image should not leave a photographer either for a client or alamy.

The photographer should be able to spot the rejects and not send them, to me that is being professional.

 

If people cannot do that with confidence they should get some training before putting their images into the market place.
The market place is not the place to learn, especially at cost to the buyers.

If a duff image slips by QC and gets to a client who is then unhappy with the quality he/she may then assume

all alamy images are suspect and then buy elswhere.

I supply clients with image and if I sent them duff images I would lose the client and part of my income.

Or to sum it up if you are selling photographs make sure they are of salable quality.

 

BTW, I am not aiming this at anyone in particular.
 

I hope that clarifies?


 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... weren't we discussing what Alamy QC considers to be "soft and lacking definition"? Too bad threads like this one so often turn into sermons. Up until that point, they are usually quite instructive. 

  • Upvote 2
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi John

The OP said..

 

" my pics didnt get accepted. reason lacking defenition looked in guidelines,didnt find explenation.

what does it mean? out of interest. greetings Peter"

 

If I miss-understood what that means please accept my apologies

ATB

Mark

Edited by Mark Baigent
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

A technically duff image should not leave a photographer either for a client or alamy.

The photographer should be able to spot the rejects and not send them, to me that is being professional.

 

 

 

Exactly Mark. The best advice possible. If every Alamy photographer could edit their images to a professional technical standard, there would be no sin bin.

 

I think the entire discussion is valuable, and I think you make a valuable contribution.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Wim

 

 

Rejected images are not an opportunity to learn they are duff images which if not caught by QC could end up with a buyer, not good for any of us.

 

 

Could you explain that?

 

wim

 

I will try,

 

A technically duff image should not leave a photographer either for a client or alamy.

The photographer should be able to spot the rejects and not send them, to me that is being professional.

 

If people cannot do that with confidence they should get some training before putting their images into the market place.

The market place is not the place to learn, especially at cost to the buyers.

If a duff image slips by QC and gets to a client who is then unhappy with the quality he/she may then assume

all alamy images are suspect and then buy elswhere.

 

I supply clients with image and if I sent them duff images I would lose the client and part of my income.

 

Or to sum it up if you are selling photographs make sure they are of salable quality.

 

BTW, I am not aiming this at anyone in particular.

 

I hope that clarifies?

 

 

Thank you! Yes it does.

And I feel the same.

 

However some (maybe even a lot) contributors pick up a camera and start submitting. And are learning in public.

(Some even get really successful in a short time. Remember Monaco?)

 

And then there's the old hands, all the greybeards who have always submitted perfect images to all their clients, who, oh shock, find themselves caught out once in a while here. And start arguing.

 

To cut the sermon short ;-)

It's not a bad idea at all to have a place to show and discuss image quality.

As a teacher I liked very much to talk about an image without having it on the table. Something I learned from my teachers.

You know why? Because photographers (not just students) always talk about technical aspects of the image. They cannot help it.

So in a sense it's a pity we need to show images.

Showing full scale images cannot be done here. But linking here to 100% images somewhere else seem to work.

Why not have a recurring monthly thread: show and discuss images on technical quality (or something like that).

It's a lot less threatening to most, to show images in an ongoing regular process, than initiating a discussion about one's own work.

 

wim

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whim, as you are one of the most helpful people on this forum I am going to agree with all you say :-)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, having a place to show and discuss image quality (by way of example as Wim did) is a great idea, especially since Alamy has its own take on what makes a technically acceptable image, a take that even some greybeards don't always see eye-to-eye with but have to learn how to adapt to nonetheless. Perhaps we should also have an advice column for the unconverted. B)

Edited by John Mitchell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greybeards lead the way Mark ;-)

The problem: I'm a total newby at Google+ and all other social media.

(Oops see: a real greybeard.)

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greybeards lead the way Mark ;-)

The problem: I'm a total newby at Google+ and all other social media.

(Oops see: a real greybeard.)

 

wim

 

Aren't we forgetting all those women contributors, who hopefully don't have and never will have grey beards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Greybeards lead the way Mark ;-)

The problem: I'm a total newby at Google+ and all other social media.

(Oops see: a real greybeard.)

 

wim

 

Aren't we forgetting all those women contributors, who hopefully don't have and never will have grey beards.

 

There may be reasons they do not need a place to discuss technical issues that may fail an image ;-)

 

wim

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.

 

How did you get the web address to your photos on Google+ to post?  I uploaded 3 photos there, but I can't figure out what the web address is to post here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was Wim who posted on google +.

 

I just posted mine on photobucket - partly because photobucket give you the web address easily!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/jQYRQTp8SXTPlEZPm4ttk9QoRh65hVn59BnPIOGkrxk=w140-h93-p

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/AxRMlzjlzsFef-ejgXSDtxFDst8_xS69n0fRg4tA2Wk=w140-h100-p

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/o7bJxgk4-L-oXu--6_3OR07iKMO5GT6Za6mWgVWpvug=w140-h93-p

 

I don't have a clue if I did this right.  In the file name, I have put in a word to let you know my concern.  Two images it is where the focal point is, and if they are OK.  One image has noise, is it too much?  These are the worst I have to submit when I get out of jail, the others are better.  If these are OK, then the others should pass.

 

The one with noise was taken with available light, Fuji, ISO 3200.  Yeah, I know. Next time I'll put it in the light box or bounce a flash.  The other two are with the Nikon. 

 

These aren't failures, these are "possible" failures.

 

OK, I clicked on one of the links and all I got was a tiny thumbnail.  This stuff is beyond me.  Sorry.

Edited by Betty LaRue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/jQYRQTp8SXTPlEZPm4ttk9QoRh65hVn59BnPIOGkrxk=w140-h93-p

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/AxRMlzjlzsFef-ejgXSDtxFDst8_xS69n0fRg4tA2Wk=w140-h100-p

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/o7bJxgk4-L-oXu--6_3OR07iKMO5GT6Za6mWgVWpvug=w140-h93-p

 

I don't have a clue if I did this right.  In the file name, I have put in a word to let you know my concern.  Two images it is where the focal point is, and if they are OK.  One image has noise, is it too much?  These are the worst I have to submit when I get out of jail, the others are better.  If these are OK, then the others should pass.

 

The one with noise was taken with available light, Fuji, ISO 3200.  Yeah, I know. Next time I'll put it in the light box or bounce a flash.  The other two are with the Nikon. 

 

These aren't failures, these are "possible" failures.

 

OK, I clicked on one of the links and all I got was a tiny thumbnail.  This stuff is beyond me.  Sorry.

 

Betty,

 

Get to see them at 100%, or in some page that you can click on them to get to 100%.

Then copy all that is in the address line of your browser.

If it's not too long just paste it here, like the thumbnails you did.

If the line is really long, paste it as a link using the tiny chain icon in the toolbar of the reply box.

Say you have 3 images. Then have

image 1

image 2

image 3

(or their names or whatever)

Now select or highlight one and click on the chain icon; a dialog box will open; now paste your line into that box where the cursor is blinking.

Do this for all 3.

Then you will have:

image 1

image 2

image 3

(These only with your thumbnails, because I have no idea where you and Google have hidden these images.)

 

If you go to mine, you will see they are in an album. It's not the most elegant, but it works and is quite easy.

If you click on the more, the last item is: take a tour. This is the closest to a help file I have found so far.

 

wim

 

edit: typo

Edited by wiskerke
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.dropbox.com/lightbox/home/Public

https://www.dropbox.com/lightbox/home/Public

https://www.dropbox.com/lightbox/home/Public

 

I don't know if this will work, it's from dropbox.  Thank you, wim. A greenie for you. If I fail here, it's not your fauilt, but my lack of smarts.

 

OK, this is a failure on my part. I tried to make these public on dropbox, but apparently it isn't happening.  Back to the drawing board.

Edited by Betty LaRue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58264026/focal%20point-7385.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58264026/focal%20point-7408.jpg

https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/58264026/noise-2606-AL.jpg

 

Third time is a charm, I deleted 2nd try.

 

OH MY WORD...I think I did it.  The first image I'm concerned with where the focal point is.

The 2nd, focal point.

The 3rd, is it too noisy?

Edited by Betty LaRue
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Handing Wim a pair of angel wings.  There is a supply of them hanging on hooks in a corner here in the sin bin, because we neeeeed them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Betty, it still requires a password. I set up a free photobucket account last night on the spot. They just need an email address. If you decide it would be easier to do that, then once you have the account logged in, make a ne album. Change the settings on the album to public. Upload your pics to that album and then open the album.

 

Under each image there are text boxes. One is labelled 'Direct'. Copy the contents of that text box and just paste into your post here.

 

Just ignore if you don't fancy photobucket, but I thought it was worth a few minutes to set up the account to show photos to Alamy forum and keep it separate from my paid for photobucket account.

 

Although, despite specifically saying I was uploading my example of a fail for others' reference, I have left myself open to a lecture about not being professional. Still, I got some great advice which I will be following up.

 

I'd recommend a free photobucket account as in the longer term, it is quite useful to have and perhaps easier than faffing around with permissions on Dropbox folders.

 

Edit: looks like you triumphed with Dropbox while I was posting.

Edited by Lastrega

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/jQYRQTp8SXTPlEZPm4ttk9QoRh65hVn59BnPIOGkrxk=w140-h93-p

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/AxRMlzjlzsFef-ejgXSDtxFDst8_xS69n0fRg4tA2Wk=w140-h100-p

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/o7bJxgk4-L-oXu--6_3OR07iKMO5GT6Za6mWgVWpvug=w140-h93-p

 

I don't have a clue if I did this right.  In the file name, I have put in a word to let you know my concern.  Two images it is where the focal point is, and if they are OK.  One image has noise, is it too much?  These are the worst I have to submit when I get out of jail, the others are better.  If these are OK, then the others should pass.

 

The one with noise was taken with available light, Fuji, ISO 3200.  Yeah, I know. Next time I'll put it in the light box or bounce a flash.  The other two are with the Nikon. 

 

These aren't failures, these are "possible" failures.

 

OK, I clicked on one of the links and all I got was a tiny thumbnail.  This stuff is beyond me.  Sorry.

 

Betty, that must be the famous fried apple pie. Correct?

 

IMO the first two could indeed have perceived point-of-focus issues:

 

#1 -- I would have focused on the pie, trying to get the fork in focus as well.

#2 -- I would have focused on the fork and pie morsel

 

It's all very subjective, of course, and the QC inspector could easily have different opinions.

 

#3 -- noise-recognition is not my forte, so I won't comment (it will be interesting to hear what others say, though)

Edited by John Mitchell

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.