Jump to content

My first QC failure.


Go to solution Solved by dustydingo,

Recommended Posts

  • Solution

No, your submission will be checked well before 28 days, and barring another failure you'll find out much sooner than 28 days . . . although if you've just had a failure some think you may have to wait just a tad longer than usual . . . then again, if it's your first ever failure, probably not.

 

dd

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

QC is still done promptly after a fail. It's just a matter of when you'll be told about a fail.

If your rolling pass rate ever dips below about 80% of subs you will be barred for a month and any fails thereafter will get you the same punishment until the rate gets back above 80% again.

In my experience.

Until this year my occasional fails were notified almost as quickly as passes. Now I find myself in the doghouse, for the full month, time and again.

Don't assume that unflagged images have passed. QC is a sampling process. This year, for the first time, I've had second and third fails on images from the same batch which weren't flagged as fails originally. After a few fails your subs are looked at much more closely.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

Up to this latest submission, I have had a total of 7 successful & 1 failed submission. This puts my failure percentage rate quite high, so I might be looking at a month on the naughty step?

 

I resubmitted the other 2 shots as they were specifically listed as passed QC.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think my post explains that.

 

Your post would suggest that if a second or third upload fails for a new contributor, he/she would be in the bin immediately.

 

Your 80% would that be amount of images or amount of uploads?

I understand the closer scrutiny, I think it's well reported, but could it also mean that after a couple of fails now it's 90%?

 

wim

Link to post
Share on other sites

My percentage is a rather rough calculation.

 

 

I resubmitted the other 2 shots as they were specifically listed as passed QC.

That's unusual. A failed batch usually lists them all as failed.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think my post explains that.

 

Your post would suggest that if a second or third upload fails for a new contributor, he/she would be in the bin immediately.

 

Your 80% would that be amount of images or amount of uploads?

I understand the closer scrutiny, I think it's well reported, but could it also mean that after a couple of fails now it's 90%?

 

wim

 

Number of uploads, not images.

I can't say because I had very few fails for a long time, so my pass rate was always very high. Then after a run of about 4 fails (3 notified in the usual QC time) in 14 subs, bang. A month out, over and over again. My pass rate is now back up over 60% but it's not enough.

Edited by spacecadet
Link to post
Share on other sites

My percentage is a rather rough calculation.

 

 

I resubmitted the other 2 shots as they were specifically listed as passed QC.

That's unusual. A failed batch usually lists them all as failed.

 

I've had the opposite: that 2 had been marked as failed, but the rest just passed.

(In 2014 not ancient Alamy history.)

 

wim

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not impossible that I misread the report:

 

11.20.2014-16.41.00.png

 

Was this your very first batch of 4? They are treated differently. Each one will be scrutinised and given a pass or fail.

 

Alan

Link to post
Share on other sites
Was this your very first batch of 4? They are treated differently. Each one will be scrutinised and given a pass or fail

 

 

 

 

No, it was my eighth batch. There was 3 images in the batch.

Edited by Orange Elephant
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just had two fails in a row after relatively few problems in the past couple of years. On the rare occasions that has happened it was stupid errors on my behalf like forgetting to turn the watermark off while uploading to several different sites at the same time or I didn't upload the final version. That's my fault entirely and I am always keen to rectify a problem immediately. But the only way I found out was to email members services asking if there was a delay in QC. They told me the batch was failed but couldn't say why.

And those QC delays are not unusual. I know they have an enormous amount of images to go through but I have seen people bragging on Twitter that their uploads are going through QC in a few hours while me and another contributor I know had been waiting more than two weeks. On that occasion it wasn't because the batch had failed or because my QC ranking was low. It was just some delay that no one could explain. Those batches eventually passed through.

 

The problem I have with the system is that the rules are not fairly and consistently applied. If they do not notify me of a problem and I keep uploading (not knowing what has happened) everything automatically goes into the failed list. I find this appalling and unacceptable.

 

After enquiring about delays again I just got an email reply telling me a batch had failed a few weeks ago and they said all 5 submissions are in the fail queue including the ones I just uploaded within the previous hour which couldn't have been looked at yet. A fellow contributor told me she had a batch fail earlier in the week and was notified within days, she re-uploaded the batch minus the failed item and they went straight through. All that within a week when I have been waiting for 3 weeks. This is what I mean by not applying rules fairly and consistently.

If a batch has failed they should notify contributors immediately - even if it is a simple form email - so we don't waste our time uploading any further ones and further damage our QC rating.

 

I wonder if they got a bad batch of copy paper would they would they throw all subsequent deliveries in the bin and not say why for a month?

 

I have emailed members services but I just get the rules quoted back at me - the rules that apply to some and not others.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"...so we don't waste our time uploading any further ones and further damage our QC rating."

 

I always wait for a submission to clear (hopefully) before uploading another one -- i.e. I never submit more than one batch at a time. That way I don't risk having multiple failures that could (?) adversely affect my QC record, which I've been attempting to improve (so far, so good). Have never experienced the kind of the long delays that you (Ray) mention, though.

Edited by John Mitchell
Link to post
Share on other sites

While I do not often put more than ten images in a submission and after almost ten years

contributing to Alamy, I have never had a submission fail, no that is not correct, back in the

days of mailing in CD's I did have a fail because I cropped an image and it was below 48MB.

 

I have a very low number of images online with Alamy and I am very careful with every image

that I submit.  Keeping in mind that 90% of the images that I have on Alamy are from very old

chromes or digital files shot on Kodak/Nikon DCS 460's and 620"s.  One repeat seller that I have

was shot on a Kodak/Nikon DCS 620 at 1600 ISO and it took me more than 40 hours of work in

both PS 7 and CS 5 to finish for upload to Alamy.

 

Chuck Nacke 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

While I do not often put more than ten images in a submission and after almost ten years

contributing to Alamy, I have never had a submission fail, no that is not correct, back in the

days of mailing in CD's I did have a fail because I cropped an image and it was below 48MB.

 

I have a very low number of images online with Alamy and I am very careful with every image

that I submit.  Keeping in mind that 90% of the images that I have on Alamy are from very old

chromes or digital files shot on Kodak/Nikon DCS 460's and 620"s.  One repeat seller that I have

was shot on a Kodak/Nikon DCS 620 at 1600 ISO and it took me more than 40 hours of work in

both PS 7 and CS 5 to finish for upload to Alamy.

 

Chuck Nacke 

 

Wow! Hope you paid yourself well for those 40 hours.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi John.. if I waited for every batch to clear QC before uploading more I wouldn't get much uploaded. I find I rarely get more than one QC a week.

I try to keep it to around ten or twenty per upload. But if I upload several lots over a period of a week QC sees them as one batch and that can mean 40 -60 images being tossed away if something goes wrong. And usually the way things work is I go out and shoot and will have 50 or 60 images to upload from that day.

I do not see the point in taking a month to notify contributors of a QC failure. It has to be done some time, why not right away? If they want to impose a waiting period after a failure it can be part of that email.

Because I upload to different sites for different purposes I often process the shots in different ways to suit the purposes of each site. Sometimes, but thankfully not often, I screw up and accidentally send Alamy a watermarked image or one that has been heavily process for the art market.

This latest failure was probably because I was tired after a 16 hour day and literally uploaded a test render instead of the final shot. I had actually picked that up when I was moving my files into an 'uploaded' folder but by then it was too late. I thought I'd just delete during keywording.

If nothing else it kills my enthusiasm to upload to Alamy. I have stopped uploading before after I couldn't get any response when I requested one of my pseudos be assessed for creative status.

I also responded to their email asking for more Australian images and they were less than helpful. I informed them that almost all of the top 100 shots of my city's river precinct were hopelessly out of date because of recent major redevelopments. But they are still there and all the new ones are buried.

It's hard to maintain enthusiasm when we are just treated like a resource and nothing more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The rules apply to everyone. The differences are a matter of degree, imo . . .

 

I've had submissions passed in a couple of hours, some in a couple of weeks. When you think of the volume going through, such variation is totally understandable.

 

The rule that if a submission fails, all queued submissions also fail is absolutely consistent, judged on the stated experiences of forum members for the past few years.

 

The time taken to be informed of a fail does seem to be dependent on the record of contributors: generally speaking, f you've had lots or subsequent fails, it seems you're more likely to have to wait 28 days to be informed, whereas if it's the first fail for ages, you're more likely (but not guaranteed) to have a shorter wait to be informed. Perhaps some further incentive to not fail? . . .

 

Not sure what other rules you think apply to some but not others . . .

 

dd

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.