Betty LaRue Posted August 29, 2015 Share Posted August 29, 2015 I almost posted this in the thread about a long-time contributor talking about a couple of fails. That would have been a digression and a hijack. Caught myself, slapped my hand. So here it is, below. I also have understood the "why" of most of my fails. You note the word "most." The reason being, if you take a picture of your big toe, and it meets all the criteria for sharpness, no CA, no dust bunnies or noise, etc., you are good to go. Not that it will ever have a market. But if you dare step off the path of reality..after all, that unvarnished toe is real, you are in trouble. Let's leave the you out of it, I'm in trouble. I am a creative person, and once in a while I come up with a good idea. One where I take a photo and do creative things to it. No, no, not POD wall art, but something that could be used for advertising or products. My most recent fail was a floral, sharp, but I took an expensive software and went creative with it. I've seen images like this used on tissue boxes, or school folders, you get the picture. Artistic work that could have a market but one needs to throw the usual QC criteria out of the window. Some of these works are deliberately made soft, and are a beautiful blend of color but the subject, ie flowers, are still identifiable. Keyworded "background" QC cannot, or won't see the potential in these kinds of images. By golly, if it's not sharp, it fails, or it fails for too much manipulation or something similar. So while I think QC does a good job most of the time, I wish they would develop a creative section so that when these creative images come in, they would be kicked to someone who has a creative background and a dose of imagination to evaluate. The other image, also creative, I added a two-toned wash of color to the BG and added grain. The image gave off a Victorian feel to it. I actually "saw" this image in a glossy, in my mind. Oh, well. That one failed for noise. Darn that added grain. And no, I won't post them. They should be judged only by another Creative. I love Alamy. I just think they need to expand a narrow way of thinking. This has to start at the top. I think Alamy could make some money from these kinds of images. Yes, I know you are thinking Stockimo. Sure. But why not taken with a higher end camera, developed with higher end software, and offered in the regular collection? Or...a wild and crazy idea, let these images be in ....drumroll...Creative! Oh, boy, that would thrill me to no end. Does this classify as a rant? Betty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.