Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Now that Alamy no longer has an approved camera list online, does this mean we can use any camera, as long as the technical quality is up to QC standards? They mentioned this in another thread awhile ago (can't find it) but their wording of "not online" leaves me wondering if there is still a list, they just don't post it.

 

Jill

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think any camera. New contributors don't know that there was a list. So they only look at the guidelines and based to that they will submit without looking what camera they have as long they meet the technical requirements. Otherwise it would be not fair for them to get a fail because of camera.

 

Mirco

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a minimum of 6 megapixels images as they say in the guidelines. But most cameras will create images larger than that - even the cameras that really aren't up to the required standards.

Edited by Niels Quist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I agree with what has already been said... I would assume any camera which creates a large enough image could potentially be used so long as the quality is good enough.. presumably you would continue to check the images in the same way you presumably always have done!

 

After all, if the camera on an iPhone 4s is good enough (albeit with pictures submitted through the Stockimo app) then surely a lot of dedicated cameras which were previous not allowed should be OK to use?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the words that bothered me were that they didn't have a list online.  Why qualify with the word "online". Why not just say there is no approved camera list/

 

Jill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can still find the lists in Google cache, but obviously they won't update.

Presumably contributors' QC knowledge is now mature enough that they don't need to be told what not to use. That and the fact that there are clearly plenty of fixed-lens cameras which are good enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Online is where you're communicating with Alamy, Jill. I wouldn't read too much into it. It would be pointless to have a list in a secret place somewhere. 

 

The camera list never did make any real sense, since sometimes we can get a bad sample of a good camera or a good sample of a "bad" camera. It's always the image at 100% that counts with QC. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the words that bothered me were that they didn't have a list online.  Why qualify with the word "online". Why not just say there is no approved camera list/

 

Jill

 

I agree, it would have been clearer to say that there is no longer an approved camera list -- online or offline. That said, it sounds as if the emphasis is now on approved images rather than on approved cameras, which makes more sense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Online is where you're communicating with Alamy, Jill. I wouldn't read too much into it. It would be pointless to have a list in a secret place somewhere. 

 

The camera list never did make any real sense, since sometimes we can get a bad sample of a good camera or a good sample of a "bad" camera. It's always the image at 100% that counts with QC.

 

And there were some cameras which weren't on either the banned or approved lists. I have some images from a Canon G12 I've been meaning to upload for a while. MS told me they should be OK, as as they were sharp and otherwise QC acceptable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Online is where you're communicating with Alamy, Jill. I wouldn't read too much into it. It would be pointless to have a list in a secret place somewhere. 

 

The camera list never did make any real sense, since sometimes we can get a bad sample of a good camera or a good sample of a "bad" camera. It's always the image at 100% that counts with QC.

And there were some cameras which weren't on either the banned or approved lists. I have some images from a Canon G12 I've been meaning to upload for a while. MS told me they should be OK, as as they were sharp and otherwise QC acceptable.

 

 

The proof will be in the pudding, as the old saying goes. Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I see it - why take the chance of ending up on suspend for a month.  I've seen the results of some cameras at 100% that match the image size criteria. 

 

At first glance they looked ok but a more intense inspection showed flaws that would stand a good chance of rejection. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just uploaded a photo today from my iPhone 6 along with a group of older reworked photos.  I haven't had a fail in a while so I thought I would test out what Alamy is saying.  Its a nice sharp colorful photo and was rejected by Stockimo.  I should know by Tuesday next week and I will post my results here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked MS about this as I am considering purchasing a new point-and-shoot. This was their reply:

 

"We've removed both the lists (approved and not approved) from our guidelines as basically what we need are photos from a camera that has a minimum of 6 Megapixels and can produce images with an uncompressed size over 17Mb."

 

So there you go ...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked MS about this as I am considering purchasing a new point-and-shoot. This was their reply:

 

"We've removed both the lists (approved and not approved) from our guidelines as basically what we need are photos from a camera that has a minimum of 6 Megapixels and can produce images with an uncompressed size over 17Mb."

 

So there you go ...

:o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I asked MS about this as I am considering purchasing a new point-and-shoot. This was their reply:

 

"We've removed both the lists (approved and not approved) from our guidelines as basically what we need are photos from a camera that has a minimum of 6 Megapixels and can produce images with an uncompressed size over 17Mb."

 

So there you go ...

:o

 

 

:o  :o

 

Allan

 

 

Edit: All that time (and money) spent selecting a good enough camera from the approved list and I could have been using my box Brownie all along. Sheesh! :wacko:

 

Allan

Edited by Allan Bell
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I asked MS about this as I am considering purchasing a new point-and-shoot. This was their reply:

 

"We've removed both the lists (approved and not approved) from our guidelines as basically what we need are photos from a camera that has a minimum of 6 Megapixels and can produce images with an uncompressed size over 17Mb."

 

So there you go ...

:o

 

 

:o  :o

 

Allan

 

 

Edit: All that time (and money) spent selecting a good enough camera from the approved list and I could have been using my box Brownie all along. Sheesh! :wacko:

 

Allan

 

 

I haven't bought a point-and-shoot camera for years, but I imagine that some of them now produce excellent images. This is an interesting shift in Alamy's policy, one that will probably cause their collection to swell considerably. Not sure I want to speculate where it might be heading, though.

 

Allan, have you thought of taping a digital back to your box Brownie? B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure that this is a new policy. Back in December 2014, I queried member services about some images of mine that were missing camera info. Long story, but a few years ago now, I needed to get images off a card and onto a CD. The photo lab, in a small town, made a bit of a mess of it - and while in the end they got the images burned to disk, they didn't extract most of the metadata including camera info. I was reluctant to upload these because the camera info was missing, so sent a query to member services asking if they would fail QC. Here was there response:

 

"We don’t review cameras, we make our decision by looking at the images we’ve seen from them. If all images meet our guidelines http://www.alamy.com/contributor/help/prepare-images.asp and are free from technical errors when viewed at 100%, we’ll pass the submission."

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So my iPhone submission was rejected as a camera not suitable for alamy.  Maybe that establishes a baseline of a sort.  Here is a link to the photo just to give you an idea of the quality.    I have actually had worse looking photos pass QC.  http://1drv.ms/1PmxEeR

Edited by Johnnie5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too bad. Looks good to me, but I'm sure Alamy doesn't want to undermine Stockimo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So there is a hidden list. 

 

If they aren't going to post the list, they should at least state which cameras will never be accepted, such as phone shots. For new people coming to Alamy, they could waste a lot of time taking shots with cameras that will never be approved, do all their PP plus keywording just to be told their camera is no good. Or if they will only reject phone images.

 

Jill

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So my iPhone submission was rejected as a camera not suitable for alamy.  Maybe that establishes a baseline of a sort.  Here is a link to the photo just to give you an idea of the quality.    I have actually had worse looking photos pass QC.  http://1drv.ms/1PmxEeR

 

When was this? Was it recently or before they supposedly removed the 'approved camera' list?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So my iPhone submission was rejected as a camera not suitable for alamy.  Maybe that establishes a baseline of a sort.  Here is a link to the photo just to give you an idea of the quality.    I have actually had worse looking photos pass QC.  http://1drv.ms/1PmxEeR

 

Thanks for doing this. I have an iPhone photo that I suspect was rejected because it is more suitable for the main collection. Now I know not to try it.

 

Paulette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So my iPhone submission was rejected as a camera not suitable for alamy.  Maybe that establishes a baseline of a sort.  Here is a link to the photo just to give you an idea of the quality.    I have actually had worse looking photos pass QC.  http://1drv.ms/1PmxEeR

 

When was this? Was it recently or before they supposedly removed the 'approved camera' list?

 

It was this morning that I was notified.  I guess there isn't a list, BUT there is a list, regardless of the quality of the photo.  I think Alamy should clarify.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sensors with a small pixel pitch can produce decent images in sufficient light but are noisy in low light.

 

Perhaps they want to review images on a case-by-case basis rather than rule them in or out based on the equipment used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So my iPhone submission was rejected as a camera not suitable for alamy.  Maybe that establishes a baseline of a sort.  Here is a link to the photo just to give you an idea of the quality.    I have actually had worse looking photos pass QC.  http://1drv.ms/1PmxEeR

 

When was this? Was it recently or before they supposedly removed the 'approved camera' list?

 

It was this morning that I was notified.  I guess there isn't a list, BUT there is a list, regardless of the quality of the photo.  I think Alamy should clarify.

 

 

I think I'd be tempted to email Member Services about that and point out that the official line from Alamy appears to be that they no longer have an approved camera list. So rejecting a photo because the camera was on a list which no longer exists isn't a very good reason... and ask them what's wrong with photo itself. If they then still maintain that an iPhone is not an approved camera then I might suggest to them that they need to revisit the guidelines on their website as it's misleading and confusing!

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.