My 7th submission was STILL rejected - help me understand QC terms!

[aully1]

I've tried seven different times to upload images to try and be approved as a contributor.  I am rejected every time.

I keep getting the "Soft or lacking definition Marked difference in definition between low-res comp & when viewed at 100%" term.

 

I literally have no idea what that means and have no technical understanding even when I'm looking at their .pdf on rejection terms.  The example is a girl with pink hair standing beside a blue wall.  Should I not take pictures with pink and blue next to each other in the shot?  I'm not trying to be obtuse here - I honestly don't get what I'm doing wrong.  Can it be explained to me in VERY simple terms??

 

I use a Canon PowerShot ELPH 190 IS to take pictures.  It's not an extremely expensive camera, but I know how to focus a shot.  Am I missing something?  Does Alamy only approve you if you use expensive equipment?  Is there some minimum that they require when it comes to cameras?  I'm just trying to understand if I'm ever going to be cleared to be a contributor.  I can't learn what I'm doing wrong if I don't ask.

 

Thank you!! 

[Reimar]

Is that camera on the list of approved cameras?  If not, I suppose all your submissions will fail.

You are competing against photographers spending 10 times as much for a camera, and who have a firm grip on best practices for post-processing.

You might consider investing a bit more in your photography.

[kimba]

When you process your images, always look at them at 100% before submitting. What they are saying is that, when your images are looked at at 100% they are soft - or maybe fuzzy - ie: not sharp or in focus. 

 

Also, have you looked on the approved camera list to see if your camera will take acceptable images? I haven't looked in a long time, so I don't know, but last time I looked there weren't any point and shoots on the list - that may have changed. 

[spacecadet]

There's no longer a list, but that camera wouldn't be on it. Iisn't capable of acceptable results. It has a tiny, noisy sensor and a fixed long zoom. It's a consumer camera.

Some contributors here are using certain fixed-lens cameras but they are experienced photographers who can make a judgment, but the only sure route to acceptance is a DSLR with a sensor of at least  APS-C size and a separate lens.

If you don't know what these terms mean you'll need to do some reading. Stock is a professional market with corresponding standards.

My partner got a 20MP camera for Christmas- mine is also 20MP but there's no comparison. It's fine for her purposes but they are chalk and cheese.

Sorry to be blunt but it's best to be truthful- images from that camera will not pass QC even if sharply focussed. You are wasting your time here with it. That's not the same thing, of course, as wasting your time. But you will have to upgrade your kit. You won't necessarily have to spend 10 times as much, but probably 5. You could go second-hand- my latest cost under £250.

[Matt Ashmore]

Guys.,.. what approved camera list? I didn't think Alamy published one anymore because new cameras keep coming out quicker than they can update it.

 

It is clear that some cameras are not good enough though. I think the general census is that if the camera's sensor is much smaller than 1 inch, it's unlikely to produce images that will pass QC.

 

Edit: Spacecadet beat me to it! ;-)

[Allan Bell]

You will never pass Alamy's QC with that camera. It only has a 1/2.3 sensor. Far too small for the quality Alamy is looking for.

 

The minimum size sensor Alamy generally accepts images from is 4/3 rds.

 

The next size up is 1" sensor and a lot of contributors have and use these cameras for images to Alamy.

 

Look at Sony RX100 mk1, If you can find one for sale from a supplier it might cost around £350 or so.

 

Then submit from that camera following alamy guide lines as to post processing image to their requirements.

 

Good luck.

 

Allan

[NYCat]

The Sony RX100 is good enough. Allan beat me to it.

 

Paulette

[Betty LaRue]

I'm sorry for your difficulties. Bummer.

While Alamy hasn't said your camera is not professional enough (or have they?) it seems rather obvious that your camera is not up to the job. 7 rejections make that obvious.

It's possible your camera IS up for the job, but your not understanding the settings that need be used for a particular subject. For instance, if the camera or you are choosing too slow of a shutter speed, then camera shake, even in small amounts, can cause the image to appear soft.

 

Color has no bearing whether an image is accepted or not. You can put orange and purple together, and Alamy won't care. But if you have color fringing they will fail you. That's where you see red, magenta, green or whatever at the edges of a color that's supposed to be pure. It's often seen where foliage meets a bright sky, or white is next to a darker color. There is software that does a great job removing it. Like Lightroom and Photoshop.

 

Put your camera on a tripod and use the timer for shutter release. Shoot an inanimate object like a cup of coffee, a baby rattle, a pair of scissors. You get the picture here! Pun intended. Most likely if you do this, you'll pass.

 

But that doesn't really address future work, when you and your camera must work hand in hand to shoot well-exposed, flaw-free images that a buyer might want.

 

You need to think before you take the shot: How could this image be used by a buyer? Is it desirable for a textbook? A newspaper? A magazine? Usually our editorial images are used to illustrate a story.

 

Do you have a grasp of shutter speed and aperture, and how to use those settings to optimize your subject? If so, you're halfway there. If not, you need to study until you do understand. Just putting the camera on auto will get you some decent images, but also some bad ones.

Good luck.

Edited to add. It seems my compatriots here know your camera just isn't good enough. Sorry about that.

 

Betty

[TeeCee]

I've tried seven different times to upload images to try and be approved as a contributor.  I am rejected every time.

I keep getting the "Soft or lacking definition Marked difference in definition between low-res comp & when viewed at 100%" term.

 

I literally have no idea what that means and have no technical understanding even when I'm looking at their .pdf on rejection terms.  The example is a girl with pink hair standing beside a blue wall.  Should I not take pictures with pink and blue next to each other in the shot?  I'm not trying to be obtuse here - I honestly don't get what I'm doing wrong.  Can it be explained to me in VERY simple terms??

 

I use a Canon PowerShot ELPH 190 IS to take pictures.  It's not an extremely expensive camera, but I know how to focus a shot.  Am I missing something?  Does Alamy only approve you if you use expensive equipment?  Is there some minimum that they require when it comes to cameras?  I'm just trying to understand if I'm ever going to be cleared to be a contributor.  I can't learn what I'm doing wrong if I don't ask.

 

Thank you!! 

Sorry, Aully1, but as others have stated, the problem lies in the fact that your camera won't produce the quality of file expected here. Whilst I'm sure it'll provide fine prints, here photos are often used on billboards, and you'll need to upgrade before you can match that quality and submit to Alamy.

I hope we see you soon, with top quality images uploaded!

Tony

[TeeCee]

 

 

 

Deleted

[aully1]

If Alamy does have some approved camera list or at least specifications a camera must have in order to be 'good enough' that SURE would be helpful to those outsiders trying to get qualified to be a contributor.  

Because I've been stupidly wasting MONTHS of time trying to do something I'm too poor to do, basically.  I don't have  hundreds of dollars to spend.  I thought that a focused picture was a focused picture.  Shows what I know!

 

Thank you to all who spent precious time answering my ignorant question.  I don't understand "4/3 rds" or "one inch camera sensors" or "fixed long zoom" or "DSLR with a sensor of at least  APS-C size and a separate lens" so it's clear I'm too dumb to be a photographer.  I probably shouldn't even use my own shots on my own blog, for that matter - they must be horrible.  

 

I'll go back to watching my brother let his $1,000+ camera and lenses sit in his closet while I tear my hair out trying to use a crappy camera for a side hustle...

 

I deeply appreciate your time, NYCat, Allen Bell, Matt Ashmore, spacecadet, kimba and Reimar.  I'd tag you to thank you but I also don't know how to do that.  *sigh*

[aully1]

Thanks also to Betty LaRue and TeeCee for your comments.

Without funds, no, I won't be trying again and you won't see pictures from me on Alamy, unfortunately.  

Might as well hand the thing off to my aging mother and just stick to my day job, to be perfectly honest.

I've never heard of color fringing and I certainly can't afford Photoshop, so...

 

Thank you all for your help.

[Jill Morgan]

It doesn't mean your shots are crappy, Alamy does not judge you on content, only technical quality of the image.  You may have fabulously composed images from a content perspecitive, but if enlarged to a customer's needs, would end up looking fuzzy.

 

I use 2 cameras.  The majority of my shots were taken with a Canon consumer level DSLR, the t4i (640D).  Sometimes I have to downsize to keep them as sharp as I want, but have sold many.

 

If you have no extra funds, you will find it difficult to compete if you can't afford good post processing software.  But while you are short of funds, spend some time learning about the technical side of cameras, etc.  There are tons of videos online you can watch.  Then maybe when you do have a little more cash to buy a DSLR or a mirrorless such as the Sony RX100, you will be better prepared.

 

Perhaps your brother would lend you his equipment when you want to go out and shoot.  I borrow my son's Canon 7D periodically.

 

Have fun shooting for yourself if you aren't ready for the professional market.  And learn.

 

Jill

[M.Chapman]

If Alamy does have some approved camera list or at least specifications a camera must have in order to be 'good enough' that SURE would be helpful to those outsiders trying to get qualified to be a contributor.  

Because I've been stupidly wasting MONTHS of time trying to do something I'm too poor to do, basically.  I don't have  hundreds of dollars to spend.  I thought that a focused picture was a focused picture.  Shows what I know!

 

Thank you to all who spent precious time answering my ignorant question.  I don't understand "4/3 rds" or "one inch camera sensors" or "fixed long zoom" or "DSLR with a sensor of at least  APS-C size and a separate lens" so it's clear I'm too dumb to be a photographer.  I probably shouldn't even use my own shots on my own blog, for that matter - they must be horrible.  

 

I'll go back to watching my brother let his $1,000+ camera and lenses sit in his closet while I tear my hair out trying to use a crappy camera for a side hustle...

 

I deeply appreciate your time, NYCat, Allen Bell, Matt Ashmore, spacecadet, kimba and Reimar.  I'd tag you to thank you but I also don't know how to do that.  *sigh*

 

Do you have an iPhone? If so, Alamy will accept images from an iPhone using their Stockimo app. If submitting via Stockimo they will accept images of lower resolution and higher noise, but they do select/reject images based on content. If you want to find out more look here www.stockimo.com. But don't ask questions about Stockimo on this forum because, for some bizarre reason, we aren't supposed to talk about Stockimo here, even though Stockimo images appear alongside regular Alamy images on line.

[kimba]

After I mentioned the list, I went looking for it and I realize that it indeed, it no longer exists. Sorry. 

 

I think my current rig is right on the edge of acceptance and I've had it for ten years. Looking to upgrade next time I get a windfall. 

[Betty LaRue]

aully1, I'm so sorry you have to give it up. Maybe someday you'll manage to get the funds. I remember my first horse. I'd wanted one all my life since I was a wee girl, but couldn't afford one.

One day my husband and I were driving in the countryside. We came across a narrow dirt road and took it. At the dead end was a 3 year old blood sorrel mare staked in the ditch to graze near a house. It was instant love.

We bought her for a song because the old man said she was mean and wanted rid of her. She wasn't mean, she was abused, and fought back.

I sold my second hand electric guitar and amplifier to pay for her. She just needed love and a gentle hand. A great, great horse, very gentle if you didn't lie to her. (Be sure there's oats in the bucket to lure her to be caught.) I only tried the empty bucket gig once.

 

Someday you might be in a position to do something like that. Trade, sell something. There are some capable cameras available used. And Adobe Elements is fairly inexpensive and very capable for developing.

Keep it in mind. It's good to have a dream. It took me 22 years to have mine fulfilled. If I want something enough, I'm very persistent.

Betty

[Matt Ashmore]

And Adobe Elements is fairly inexpensive and very capable for developing.

 

 

Better still, there are tools like GIMP which are free!!!

[MizBrown]

If Alamy does have some approved camera list or at least specifications a camera must have in order to be 'good enough' that SURE would be helpful to those outsiders trying to get qualified to be a contributor.  

Because I've been stupidly wasting MONTHS of time trying to do something I'm too poor to do, basically.  I don't have  hundreds of dollars to spend.  I thought that a focused picture was a focused picture.  Shows what I know!

 

Thank you to all who spent precious time answering my ignorant question.  I don't understand "4/3 rds" or "one inch camera sensors" or "fixed long zoom" or "DSLR with a sensor of at least  APS-C size and a separate lens" so it's clear I'm too dumb to be a photographer.  I probably shouldn't even use my own shots on my own blog, for that matter - they must be horrible.  

 

I'll go back to watching my brother let his $1,000+ camera and lenses sit in his closet while I tear my hair out trying to use a crappy camera for a side hustle...

 

I deeply appreciate your time, NYCat, Allen Bell, Matt Ashmore, spacecadet, kimba and Reimar.  I'd tag you to thank you but I also don't know how to do that.  *sigh*

 

 

 

4/3rds is Micro 4/3rds -- half frame compared to a full frame (equivalent to a full 35 mm frame.  You can find cheaper models of this used.  Some of my frames taken with a GF1 (12 MP) weren't large enough when exported in LR (JPEGs require a minimum size of 6 MP to be accepted.  My other cameras that have taken acceptable shots are a D300 (roughly 2/3rds or 3/4rds the size of a full frame camera (35mm film frame size), a Sony a3000 (often available with a decent kit lens for not all that much and a funky camera that works though a bit clunky in the interface), a Sony a6000 (with a 24mm Sony/Zeiss most of the time, which is outside your budget), and a Sony a7 full frame which is also probably outside your budget.   Lens that have worked have ranged from a $49 Sony 16mm wide angle to the Sony/Zeiss for the APSC camera.  Look for a used a3000 with a 18-55mm kit zoom (in black and with ver. 02 software which will mean a fairly new build on the lens).   It's probably one of the cheapest way to get started.  Other option would be finding a good price on a Micro 43rds camera and kit lens, preferably 16 MP.  I gave away my a3000.  B&H sometimes has them.  With Sony cameras, you can get free Capture One Express for Sony, and for roughly $50, the full Sony Version.  It's not a particularly easy program to use, but there are tutorials on line.

 

Or try to talk your brother into letting you use his camera if it's a recent model digital.

 

Other option would be to look for a good price on a entry level Canon or Nikon that's a couple of years old with a 12 MP or better sensor.  

 

The other thing is that as people will tell you, this is a long game.   You aren't likely to make significant money without a portfolio of over 1,000 images, generally more.  If you don't enjoy the process, you might become frustrated.  

[Allan Bell]

 

If Alamy does have some approved camera list or at least specifications a camera must have in order to be 'good enough' that SURE would be helpful to those outsiders trying to get qualified to be a contributor.  

Because I've been stupidly wasting MONTHS of time trying to do something I'm too poor to do, basically.  I don't have  hundreds of dollars to spend.  I thought that a focused picture was a focused picture.  Shows what I know!

 

Thank you to all who spent precious time answering my ignorant question.  I don't understand "4/3 rds" or "one inch camera sensors" or "fixed long zoom" or "DSLR with a sensor of at least  APS-C size and a separate lens" so it's clear I'm too dumb to be a photographer.  I probably shouldn't even use my own shots on my own blog, for that matter - they must be horrible.  

 

I'll go back to watching my brother let his $1,000+ camera and lenses sit in his closet while I tear my hair out trying to use a crappy camera for a side hustle...

 

I deeply appreciate your time, NYCat, Allen Bell, Matt Ashmore, spacecadet, kimba and Reimar.  I'd tag you to thank you but I also don't know how to do that.  *sigh*

 

 

 

4/3rds is Micro 4/3rds -- half frame compared to a full frame (equivalent to a full 35 mm frame.  You can find cheaper models of this used.  Some of my frames taken with a GF1 (12 MP) weren't large enough when exported in LR (JPEGs require a minimum size of 6 MP to be accepted.  My other cameras that have taken acceptable shots are a D300 (roughly 2/3rds or 3/4rds the size of a full frame camera (35mm film frame size), a Sony a3000 (often available with a decent kit lens for not all that much and a funky camera that works though a bit clunky in the interface), a Sony a6000 (with a 24mm Sony/Zeiss most of the time, which is outside your budget), and a Sony a7 full frame which is also probably outside your budget.   Lens that have worked have ranged from a $49 Sony 16mm wide angle to the Sony/Zeiss for the APSC camera.  Look for a used a3000 with a 18-55mm kit zoom (in black and with ver. 02 software which will mean a fairly new build on the lens).   It's probably one of the cheapest way to get started.  Other option would be finding a good price on a Micro 43rds camera and kit lens, preferably 16 MP.  I gave away my a3000.  B&H sometimes has them.  With Sony cameras, you can get free Capture One Express for Sony, and for roughly $50, the full Sony Version.  It's not a particularly easy program to use, but there are tutorials on line.

 

Or try to talk your brother into letting you use his camera if it's a recent model digital.

 

Other option would be to look for a good price on a entry level Canon or Nikon that's a couple of years old with a 12 MP or better sensor.  

 

The other thing is that as people will tell you, this is a long game.   You aren't likely to make significant money without a portfolio of over 1,000 images, generally more.  If you don't enjoy the process, you might become frustrated.  

 

 

 

There is 4/3rds AND micro 4/3rds.

 

The micro part refers to the lens/camera mount.

 

The 4/3rds is the sensor size in both cases.

 

Sorry to be pedantic.

 

Allan

[Autumn Sky]

I'll add a vote for Sony Rx100

 

my main camera is canon full frame, but for black friday last yr I got a deal for Rx100 Mk1.   Image quality doesn't compare with canon slr, but with good light it is still acceptable.   I'll say Rx100 is perfect for outdoor enthusiasts who don't have space or luxury to haul bulky SLRs & lenses on multi-day backpack trips.

 

this is a pic made few months ago with Rx100;   on computer screen you can't really tell a difference & it is quite technically sound on pixel level too:

 

[Rubens Alarcon]

I'll add a vote for Sony Rx100

 

my main camera is canon full frame, but for black friday last yr I got a deal for Rx100 Mk1.   Image quality doesn't compare with canon slr, but with good light it is still acceptable.   I'll say Rx100 is perfect for outdoor enthusiasts who don't have space or luxury to haul bulky SLRs & lenses on multi-day backpack trips.

 

this is a pic made few months ago with Rx100;   on computer screen you can't really tell a difference & it is quite technically sound on pixel level too:

 

 

Are my eyes fooling me or there is a trout out of the water on top of the second chair?

[Autumn Sky]

 

I'll add a vote for Sony Rx100

 

my main camera is canon full frame, but for black friday last yr I got a deal for Rx100 Mk1.   Image quality doesn't compare with canon slr, but with good light it is still acceptable.   I'll say Rx100 is perfect for outdoor enthusiasts who don't have space or luxury to haul bulky SLRs & lenses on multi-day backpack trips.

 

this is a pic made few months ago with Rx100;   on computer screen you can't really tell a difference & it is quite technically sound on pixel level too:

 

 

Are my eyes fooling me or there is a trout out of the water on top of the second chair?

 

     

 

You just made my day! Thank you!

 

It is Parks Canada thing, kind of logo they put on all these Adirondacks they have throughout the park nowdays. 

[John Walker]

I started using a Sony RX100 M1  - (no QC rejections and regular sales) but later changed to an RX100 M3.  I am sure the image quality is even better than the amazing M1.

[MMiller]

Nice shot, Autumn Sky!

 

Aully, don't talk like that! No need to be discouraged or intimidated or whatever. If you have the passion, the 'bug', all those 'technicals' will come as you hone your photographic eye. The major camera manufacturers have been working the technical angle for the last hundred years to make operating a camera easier and easier. Oblige them and conquer this beast! 

 

Ultimately though, the 'artist' in you is what counts, not so much the technician. Know the fundamentals of course (f stop, ISO, shutter speed, proper exposure, learn what's sharp, and so forth), and use decent equipment (and try a tripod too), but spend more emphasis with your vision. Heck, I don't know what they are talking about with "4/3 rds" sensors, and though I could figure it out easily, I don't even care!

[MariaJ]

I found the list of approved cameras to be quite useful when it was around.  A few years ago when I was looking to buy my first stock-worthy pocket camera as a companion to my DSLR, I checked the list quite often to figure out which ones were suitable (or not). And of course reading the forums also helped (and I ended up buying a Sony rx100 because it was mentioned so often).

 

Maria