John Mitchell Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 The new AIM is telling me that I have 6656 images, which is almost 500 more than I actually have in my collection (as far as I know). Anyone else noticing this discrepancy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotoDogue Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 The new AIM counts all images you've submitted, including those rejected by QC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Failed submissions is not useful information. Total number of images correctly uploaded is. Also total number of images on sale. It is also not possible to bring up images that are not on sale. That was part of my work process before and now I can't call up anything I have not captioned. Can we have a facility to see total number of images on sale. And those not on sale (not the ones don't have enough spam tags). It's hard to believe that this was properly tested before it went live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 24, 2017 Author Share Posted February 24, 2017 The new AIM counts all images you've submitted, including those rejected by QC. Interesting. I wasn't aware of that. Don't failed images fall into the "alternative facts" category? P.S. Are you sure about this? I'm certain that I don't have almost 500 failed images. My QC record has been pretty good over the years. I guess this total must count every single image -- not just the specific ones that were rejected -- in the failed submissions. Still... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jill Morgan Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 The new AIM counts all images you've submitted, including those rejected by QC. Interesting. I wasn't aware of that. Don't failed images fall into the "alternative facts" category? P.S. Are you sure about this? I'm certain that I don't have almost 500 failed images. My QC record has been pretty good over the years. I guess this total must count every single image -- not just the specific ones that were rejected -- in the failed submissions. Still... It includes every image submitted, so those you have deleted from your port and any where you may have deleted in MI before they went on sale. I know I had a bunch of images at a time when our submissions weren't showing so I had re-uploaded images to find I had duplicate uploads. So I deleted all the duplicates. Jill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotoDogue Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 The new AIM counts all images you've submitted, including those rejected by QC. Interesting. I wasn't aware of that. Don't failed images fall into the "alternative facts" category? P.S. Are you sure about this? I'm certain that I don't have almost 500 failed images. My QC record has been pretty good over the years. I guess this total must count every single image -- not just the specific ones that were rejected -- in the failed submissions. Still... Maybe they're Alternate Images? Yes I also noticed AIM showed I have about 600 images more than the number I know I have on sale. When I scrolled back to 2009 I found all of my failed submissions. Maybe there are some deleted images too? AIM indicates I have 3922 images but when I click on the number in my profile I get 3377 which seems like a big difference. Did I really fail that many times? Either way, I agree with Marc. It's not useful information. I'd much rather see the total number of images I have on sale. fD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Mitchell Posted February 24, 2017 Author Share Posted February 24, 2017 Email from Alamy: "This is not something which we are currently looking to introduce to AIM however, we have forwarded this feedback onto the relevant colleague for any future updates." What was the question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Betty LaRue Posted February 24, 2017 Share Posted February 24, 2017 Email from Alamy: "This is not something which we are currently looking to introduce to AIM however, we have forwarded this feedback onto the relevant colleague for any future updates." What was the question? with you, John.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Robinson Posted March 5, 2017 Share Posted March 5, 2017 I've just noticed today that the total also included processing errors. A submission that didn't get as far as QC and had to be resubmitted counts twice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stokie Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 It's just a completely pointless thing to do - why would I want to know how many images have failed or been deleted? If they insist on telling us that figure then surely they should tell us how many images we have on sale as that is of far more interest to us. John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacecadet Posted March 7, 2017 Share Posted March 7, 2017 It's just a completely pointless thing to do - why would I want to know how many images have failed or been deleted? If they insist on telling us that figure then surely they should tell us how many images we have on sale as that is of far more interest to us. John. Just click on "passed QC". That number is the same as on your homepage Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stokie Posted March 10, 2017 Share Posted March 10, 2017 It's just a completely pointless thing to do - why would I want to know how many images have failed or been deleted? If they insist on telling us that figure then surely they should tell us how many images we have on sale as that is of far more interest to us. John. Just click on "passed QC". That number is the same as on your homepage Thanks Mark, but it would be good if the figure was still on the dashboard. John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.