Camera not good enough

[Radim]

I think that Bill wanted to say that it is not enough just to exchange camera.

As has been said many times here, Alamy is a very competitive market place and space for photographers who know how to work with this medium.

It's great that you enjoy photography, but even with 10,000 similar photos do not have much chance of selling.

The idea that if I have a camera so I'm a photographer is poor.

It is necessary to know something about

composition, light, depth of field and ....

a thousand other things.

 

I think Bob,

that you're a classic example

of the incompetence of some newly arriving photographers.

That's why so many red arrows.

 

The sooner you understand

the well-intentioned advice here in this forum, the better for you.

 

Make a good photo is not an easy job

and I would like to have from you in the future to see

quality images

 

Good luck

Radim

[M.Chapman]

The irony of this debate is that iPhone photos (with image quality levels that wouldn't pass regular QC) can be uploaded via Stockimo, and appear within the same Alamy library. I've never understood this. To my mind it makes a complete mockery of Alamy QC standards.

 

Anyway, if you're looking for a lowest cost route into Alamy, you could buy a decent secondhand iPhone for about £70 and submit via Stockimo, providing that you can take photos which are deemed marketable by Alamy's Stockimo team (from an image content rather than IQ perspective).

 

You may not get the benefit of a portfolio critique from the forum that way though, as Alamy have been quite swift to remove any discussions about Stockimo from here of late.

[M.Chapman]

I think Bob,

that you're a classic example

of the incompetence of some newly arriving photographers.

That's why so many red arrows.

 

 

Oh good grief!

 

That's a bit "below the belt" if you ask me.

 

There are quite a few "hobbyists" here on Alamy, I count myself as one of them. Although my portfolio is nowhere near as good as your truly excellent collection (I'm very envious), I am now making regular sales and learning as I go.

[Radim]

To M.Chapman

 

If you are counted among the "hobbyists" and I'd like I was, too, in this good company.

No wonder that you are selling, your portfolio reflects, "I know and I can"

Radim

[spacecadet]

I've got a headache already.

 

After coming out of hospital the other day and feeling pretty much like a zombie, Bob's first thread was the first I read. It wasn't a very good welcome home gift. I decided to bite my tongue as anything I wrote would have been rude and unhelpful, which isn't who I really am.

 

Then I read this thread. I'm often one of the few here who help newbies without a sarcastic attitude, and I'm happy to, but once they get this fowl attitude where they spread hatred, I give up.

 

For what it's worth, you cannot expect to pass images for the professional market with a point and shoot camera. Do some research first before playing with the adults. You need to learn how to take photographs and understand at least the basics of the industry. If you use a sensor that's so small, you cannot possibly expect to pass QC. Your images may look good in YOUR eyes, but maybe you need to take a step back and take another look, but try to shut off the arrogant "I'm better than all of you because I say I am and I spell 'the' as 'da'" attitude.

 

I know this sounds harsh and it isn't in my nature, but you've rustled a lot of feathers in here. This is a professional forum, you're not on Facebook.

 

Geoff.

To be fair to Bob he has toned it down a good deal since the first time.

OP, you attracted attention to yourself with the now locked thread so there's another lesson there, but then again every submission you made would have been in danger of failure so it's as well you know about the problem now.

Don't be tempted to take a chance and submit again because you can be excluded altogether for numerous failures.

The advice to use what you have to sharpen up your photography before upgrading is good advice.

Long zooms are not a panacea- 85% of my sales are under 55mm- and they will always magnify, literally, any errors of technique.

My second-hand Sony A55, with kit lens, cost me less than £250 a couple of years ago. You can probably do better now. You don't need the latest model. Or as stated you could try Stockimo, but that is edited for content and not QC.

 

PS funkyworm has it right. This isn't the place to make money anymore, or not nearly as much as you expect, at least.

[John Mitchell]

With so many new contributors signing up who are new to stock photography, perhaps it would be a good idea if Alamy brought back its unsuitable camera list. It might help put an end to threads like these.

[MDM]

With so many new contributors signing up who are new new to stock photography, perhaps it would be a good idea if Alamy brought back its unsuitable camera list. It might help put an end to threads like these.

 

Sure or at least state what exactly is wrong with the images rather than saying that the camera is not good enough which should clear up the confusion. That said, the OP's original post about Alamy that got locked could not have helped in this case.

[John Mitchell]

 

With so many new contributors signing up who are new new to stock photography, perhaps it would be a good idea if Alamy brought back its unsuitable camera list. It might help put an end to threads like these.

 

Sure or at least state what exactly is wrong with the images rather than saying that the camera is not good enough which should clear up the confusion. That said, the OP's original post about Alamy that got locked could not have helped in this case.

 

 

Perhaps the OP's submitted images are fine technically, rather it's the camera that is the problem -- i.e. his camera (which I'm not familiar with ) might produce acceptable images in good lighting at low ISO's, but the results won't be dependable enough in the long term for stock photography, which often involves shooting in less than ideal conditions.

[Alamy]

With so many new contributors signing up who are new to stock photography, perhaps it would be a good idea if Alamy brought back its unsuitable camera list. It might help put an end to threads like these.

 

We're afraid it's impossible for us to always keep a fully up to date definitive list due to the volume of cameras on the market.

 

The difficulty then comes by having a list that some assume is definitive, when it isn't.

 

What we're saying with the "unsuitable camera" failure reason is, that particular camera being used will never produce results that are suitable for Alamy stock images. The range of issues will be varied.

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

[MDM]

 

With so many new contributors signing up who are new to stock photography, perhaps it would be a good idea if Alamy brought back its unsuitable camera list. It might help put an end to threads like these.

 

We're afraid it's impossible for us to always keep a fully up to date definitive list due to the volume of cameras on the market.

 

The difficulty then comes by having a list that some assume is definitive, when it isn't.

 

What we're saying with the "unsuitable camera" failure reason is, that particular camera being used will never produce results that are suitable for Alamy stock images. The range of issues will be varied.

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

 

 

Understandable that it is very difficult to keep up but the problem is that "unsuitable camera" does not appear in the list of failure reasons: http://www.alamy.com/contributors/alamy-qc-failure-reasons.pdf nor in the contributor info as far as I can see, resulting in confusion for some new contributors. As it's also not a requirement to include camera EXIF info in submitted files, it would be difficult to do a preliminary QC check on camera suitability. A new explanation from Alamy in lieu of the old list would be helpful, either in the contributor info, a sticky thread here or a blog post.

[Alamy]

 

 

With so many new contributors signing up who are new to stock photography, perhaps it would be a good idea if Alamy brought back its unsuitable camera list. It might help put an end to threads like these.

 

We're afraid it's impossible for us to always keep a fully up to date definitive list due to the volume of cameras on the market.

 

The difficulty then comes by having a list that some assume is definitive, when it isn't.

 

What we're saying with the "unsuitable camera" failure reason is, that particular camera being used will never produce results that are suitable for Alamy stock images. The range of issues will be varied.

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

 

 

Understandable that it is very difficult to keep up but the problem is that "unsuitable camera" does not appear in the list of failure reasons: http://www.alamy.com/contributors/alamy-qc-failure-reasons.pdf nor in the contributor info as far as I can see, resulting in confusion for some new contributors. As it's also not a requirement to include camera EXIF info in submitted files, it would be difficult to do a preliminary QC check on camera suitability. A new explanation from Alamy in lieu of the old list would be helpful, either in the contributor info, a sticky thread here or a blog post.

 

 

Hi MDM,

 

It does appear as a failure reason in the pdf you've linked to.

 

However, we don't want the failure reason to be just attached to the camera being used. The image is not failed simply on the camera used, the image is failed due to technical problems with the image, of which we usually list as well when giving the failure.

 

When we inform a user that the camera isn't suitable it's supposed to be helpful information in the sense that there is no point continuing to submit from that camera, it will never produce strong enough results.

 

Thanks for your suggestion for a blog post on this, we'll add it to the future list.

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

[MDM]

 

 

 

With so many new contributors signing up who are new to stock photography, perhaps it would be a good idea if Alamy brought back its unsuitable camera list. It might help put an end to threads like these.

 

We're afraid it's impossible for us to always keep a fully up to date definitive list due to the volume of cameras on the market.

 

The difficulty then comes by having a list that some assume is definitive, when it isn't.

 

What we're saying with the "unsuitable camera" failure reason is, that particular camera being used will never produce results that are suitable for Alamy stock images. The range of issues will be varied.

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

 

 

Understandable that it is very difficult to keep up but the problem is that "unsuitable camera" does not appear in the list of failure reasons: http://www.alamy.com/contributors/alamy-qc-failure-reasons.pdf nor in the contributor info as far as I can see, resulting in confusion for some new contributors. As it's also not a requirement to include camera EXIF info in submitted files, it would be difficult to do a preliminary QC check on camera suitability. A new explanation from Alamy in lieu of the old list would be helpful, either in the contributor info, a sticky thread here or a blog post.

 

 

Hi MDM,

 

It does appear as a failure reason in the pdf you've linked to.

 

However, we don't want the failure reason to be just attached to the camera being used. The image is not failed simply on the camera used, the image is failed due to technical problems with the image, of which we usually list as well when giving the failure.

 

When we inform a user that the camera isn't suitable it's supposed to be helpful information in the sense that there is no point continuing to submit from that camera, it will never produce strong enough results.

 

Thanks for your suggestion for a blog post on this, we'll add it to the future list.

 

Cheers

 

Alamy

 

You're right, My apologies. I searched for the word "unsuitable" and didn't find it. It actually says "camera not suitable". I should have been more thorough - I usually am.

[bobdabiulder]

GS-Images, you act like this whole thread is some kind of bad, cancerous growth on the otherwise immaculate forum that this is. "Playing with adults" are you assuming I'm 5? Funny how you instantly decide that because I am wondering why Alamy removed images from an unsuitable camera, you quickly go into superior mode and make yourself look "big". I understand my first thread was not very good, but that's done now. So when you say I should learn the basics, as if I don't have any photography experience, and have taken no clases, it's insulting. But then you go into politician mode, doing a more personal attack, criticizing my username and my supposed arrogance. You say I'm spreading hatred? This thread was peaceful, and you (try to) make it a war zone. If my reply sounds rude to you, please understand your replies to my threads have been sporadic and not always helpful, as opposed to MDM, for example, who seems to be everywhere.

 

Wow Radim, I appreciate that you replied, however, the second malformed attempt at a paragraph used a lot of negative assuming. Let's put it this way: if my camera were not blacklisted, I would still have photos for sale. They passed QC initially, and would've stayed if it weren't for the spot check. Your assumption that I'm a complete novice, that I simply picked up a camera, and took random low quality pictures, is sad and untrue.

 

Not planing on submitting anymore with my camera spacecadet.

 

Thanks funkyworm, M.Chapman, Jill Morgan, spacecadet, you guys are very helpful. I can't find the +1 on my phone, otherwise I would.

[Brian Yarvin]

Alamy, thank you for explaining this point. For the many contributors who use more than one camera or camera system, this information can make a big difference. I appreciate that it can be hard for newcomers (to Alamy) to digest this. 

[bobdabiulder]

Thanks everyone. This thread can be closed.

[Gogo]

Apologies if this has been already answered - I shoot Canon normally but have a Ricoh GR camera I use when travelling lite - I this camera good enough for Alamy ?