Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On paper it doesn't look simple, but in practice it is. 

 

If you were to describe driving a car on paper, most would run the opposite direction!  :)

 

I didn't mean to put you off, but as a new contributor myself, it was a steep learning curve to reach the technical standards required for Alamy - Shutterstock is even tougher. You may work out your own workflow that sits better with you. The main thing is get to know your camera's limitations and work on shooting technique to achieve those tack sharp images when viewed at 100%. 

Edited by David Hewison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On paper it doesn't look simple, but in practice it is. 

 

If you were to describe driving a car on paper, most would run the opposite direction!  :)

 

I didn't mean to put you off, but as a new contributor myself, it was a steep learning curve to reach the technical standards required for Alamy - Shutterstock is even tougher. You may work out your own workflow that sits better with you. The main thing is get to know your camera's limitations and work on shooting technique to achieve those tack sharp images when viewed at 100%. 

You didn't put me off David, I was just having a bit of fun.

 

I did have a look at some scans of slides I took with my Pentax MX a few years ago and the quality is truly awful. So maybe this digital stuff isnt that bad ;-)

 

Indeed since reading this thread and the help that has been offered I have been very selective about the RAW files used and done a minimum of processing and the results, at least to me, are a great improvement.

 

Thanks again.

 

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a fact that many have problems with Alamy QC,  i also have my fair share,  however if a batch is failed i don't worry about it as the very same images are being accepted elsewhere and licensed, we must remember that Alamy try to have a 100% hit rate of technically high quality material that is how they work.

 

Personally i think they are over doing it as i am sure faults would only be noticed if the faulty images were published at 100%.

 

So for those who struggle just check a little closer before submitting,  and if a batch fails it is no train smash,  just get on with life, there is more to living than Alamy QC.

 

Paul.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

 

Just for the record I thought I would let you know that all of my second batch of pictures failed QC also for soft or lacking definition (same as last time).

 

I followed most of the relavent advice given here and spent one hell of a long time on it.

 

The bottom line for me is that it isn't worth the time spent on fideling around to get a few pictures on here.

 

I enjoy my photography and I enjoy making pictures that others like, I think I'll leave it at that.

 

Thanks again for all your help.

 

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi All

 

Just for the record I thought I would let you know that all of my second batch of pictures failed QC also for soft or lacking definition (same as last time).

 

I followed most of the relavent advice given here and spent one hell of a long time on it.

 

The bottom line for me is that it isn't worth the time spent on fideling around to get a few pictures on here.

 

I enjoy my photography and I enjoy making pictures that others like, I think I'll leave it at that.

 

Thanks again for all your help.

 

Robert

 

If you enjoy your photography then it's well worth learning how to get your technique up to the level required to pass Alamy QC which is not in fact a particularly high standard. It can be very satisfying to have your basic technique right. Alamy is a very simple taskmaster - it looks only for basic technique, not content - that is a whole other issue. But getting basic technique right is fundamental. If by chance you resubmitted the image you posted before, then it should be a definite fail as the foreground was out of focus and no amount of post-processing would fix that except for cropping it out altogether,

Edited by MDM
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rob, Sorry to hear that. I agree with MDM's comments so maybe after a break you will find it worth trying again. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That 'fiddling around' is part of your craft. Just like all the wet stuff we used to do. Not easy to master but a hill you have to climb.

The myth is that digital photography is easier than film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had that many images and got really upset I might stop uploading but continue to profit from the images that are already there. Two rejections hurt that much?  :( I tend to look at rejections from stock agencies as them telling me "we don't think we can sell this photo" then I move on.

 

As far as stock agencies this is one of the friendliest one in my opinion. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert, sorry you are having trouble.  You could always consider going mirrorless.  I bought a Fuji XT1 more than a year ago, and was astounded at how much sharper the raw files were right out of the camera over my Nikon cameras.  The mirrorless and I wrestled mightily over who would come out on top as far as learning how to use the very different camera.  I have never got a 100% grasp of it, but know enough to get great images with it, so I guess I came out on top.

 

I have fallen afoul of QC more times than I want to admit to.  This is what finally got me over the hump.  Everyone else has their own hump climbers, but this was mine.

 

1. mirrorless

 

2.quit falling in love with a shot to the point I ignore its faults. This means those one of a kind, never get again shots.  If it has uncorrectable faults, dump it.

 

3.Go over each image after development with a fine toothed comb at 100%. Don't get in a hurry and forget this step. This is where you notice soft issues, CA, and dust bunnies.

 

4. Be sure the subject is what's sharp.  If you shoot a child playing, and the child is soft but the trees behind him is sharp, dump it.  Look for your focal point at 100% and see if it is where it should be. QC notices this.

 

My method is when I develop an image, right before putting it in my upload folder, I check it at 100%. This involves scrolling and checking the enlarged top left to right, the middle, then the bottom.  Then I save to my upload folder. Once the folder is ready, on my Mac I use the picture viewer which I think shows them again at 100% and go over each image again.  I occasionally catch something I missed the first time around.  A bird that is too far away to easily tell it is a bird....clone it out.  A tiny bit of CA in a corner.  Go back and redevelop to get rid of it, or crop it out. One that looks a tiny bit soft. If I have to study it to make up my mind, then it is best to just get rid of it.  I usually have one of those in every upload folder.  It's hard to be brutal, but brutal wins the day.

Edited by Betty LaRue
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the OP,

 

Hi Mark, I have not noticed any recent change in QC. I do have the occasional fail, but inevitably this is for SoLD, because I do a lot of work handheld either at twilight or indoors, and I tend to push the limits a bit! When I do get a fail, to be honest many of my other images which passed could have failed on another day. 

 

I accept this - it's the sort of images I like to produce so I accept the risk

 

kumar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To the OP,

 

Hi Mark, I have not noticed any recent change in QC. I do have the occasional fail, but inevitably this is for SoLD, because I do a lot of work handheld either at twilight or indoors, and I tend to push the limits a bit! When I do get a fail, to be honest many of my other images which passed could have failed on another day. 

 

I accept this - it's the sort of images I like to produce so I accept the risk

 

kumar

Doc, I see you made a trip to New England this autumn. What wonderful images you captured!

 

I was there a few years ago and toured Connecticut, N. Hampshire, New Jersey, upper N. York, Maine, and Vermont. Back to Oklahoma through Pennsylvania, W. Virginia and Tennessee. We hit it perfect for the leaves. It looks like you did, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

have not yet had a fail using my sony rx100 but i had plenty using canon full frame without downsizing the image! Shoot with sony mostly now. Way less hassel! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the benefit of all those who have given advice I am uploading another batch. Let's see how we get on this time :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the benefit of all those who have given advice I am uploading another batch. Let's see how we get on this time :)

Well, well. They passed! :D

  • Upvote 1

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.