Shocking practice

[Paulstw]

I've had 8 submissions sitting waiting for Alamy QC in the month of August. My first submission at the start of the month had one image in it that failed QC. Alamy QC then failed every one of my submissions there after without even giving it a thought. I think this is totally out of order and a terrible way to run a business. 

 

Now I suspect If I re-submit my 100 odd images, it's going to sit in a queue for another month before I see them QC'd. 

 

I actually cannot describe how furious I am with this, and to say that its fair to fail all of my submissions because of one image is beyond a joke. It's bad enough that you fail a batch of pics for one picture but to fail the whole lot of submissions I have spent all month gathering together has boiled my blood. 

 

Some of the images I had were a direct result of images needed based on search criteria that I identified were missing from my portfolio. That time has passed now so how are you meant to keep tabs on trends, guesswork? 

 

I'm a very small cog in a huge machine but it doesn't stop you feeling punched in the gut. Poor show Alamy. 

 

Paul 

[spacecadet]

It's in the guidance notes and its in the agreement you signed. Everyone else accepts it. Consequently we don't have many QC fails because the consequences, as you now know, are quite serious. You take a risk when you submit with batches pending. For most of us, it's a very small risk. I lost three small batches earlier this year for the first time in 3 years, but it's what I expected, so I deleted the offending image and resubmitted for a same-day pass on the rest. It's not difficult.

Alamy does no content editing. All it does is ask that images meet a consistent standard. If one does not, it's likely that others don't so it rejects all pending images.

[Paulstw]

It's in the guidance notes and its in the agreement you signed. Everyone else accepts it. Consequently we don't have many QC fails because the consequences, as you now know, are quite serious. You take a risk when you submit with batches pending. For most of us, it's a very small risk. I lost three small batches earlier this year for the first time in 3 years, but it's what I expected, so I deleted the offending image and resubmitted for a same-day pass on the rest. It's not difficult.

Alamy does no content editing. All it does is ask that images meet a consistent standard. If one does not, it's likely that others don't so it rejects all pending images.

 

Appreciate they have a lot to do and my images are a little drop in the ocean but it makes you wonder why having a queue is a good idea. 

 

I'll re-submit cause I'm a stubborn git but I'll be treading lightly from now on. *fingers burned* 

[Craig Yates]

If you make your workflow  watertight and as consistent as possible you will rarely fail Q.C.

 

Regards

Craig

[Paulstw]

If you make your workflow  watertight and as consistent as possible you will rarely fail Q.C.

 

Regards

Craig

 

It usually is, and this is a first in 700 odd images, but I think I'm more annoyed at myself. A low light shot of a toaster doing its thing was probably the thin end of the wedge. 

 

Never mind, I shall learn, move forward and do better. 

[Allan Bell]

Learned that lesson early. Now I only submit one batch at a time and wait till it has passed (or not) before submitting another batch.

 

Allan

[Nick Jenkins]

Like Allan Bell, I too submit smaller batches and await clearance before sending more. It doesn't bother Alamy not getting your work quicker, not with over 38 Mn pics already!!. 

 

IF (and it has to be IF, as we aren't deliberately seeking to fail QC!!) there is a fail at least the attrition is less - albeit the 28 days is galling. (don't get me started!)

I recently had a batch fail  - my fault - spots on sensor - and I am now embroiled with Nikon about it. Long story and wrong thread.

 

I did struggle at first with QC but with advice from the forum and patience it is now not the issue it once was.

 

NJ

[OneWay]

It usually is, and this is a first in 700 odd images, but I think I'm more annoyed at myself. A low light shot of a toaster doing its thing was probably the thin end of the wedge. 

 

Never mind, I shall learn, move forward and do better. 

Make sure that you recheck every image before resubmitting the others. Alamy only does a spot check of images and stops if it finds any offending image; you don't want the QC inspector to find another one in your re-submitted batch.

 

Dave

[Brian Yarvin]

Nothing has taught me more about the mechanics of digital photography than the QC processes of Alamy and Getty. They're a resounding reminder that there's room for improvement. In fact, it's QC that can step out and remind me of how complacent I'm becoming.

 

Indeed, I'm greatful that they think my work is worth examining that closely.

[Ed Rooney]

You know Alamy's approach to QC reminds me of the drive-and-drink laws in the UK when I lived in Oxfordshire in the 1980s: if you were found "drunk" and driving you would lose your permit for six months on a first offense. On the second offense, you lose your right to drive . . . forever. If Alamy had a lesser punishment, would it be as effective? I think not. Is your workflow designed more for speed than for quality? Think about it. 

[colin paterson]

Paul.

We ALL fell your pain but that's the way it is !!

I upload around 4 To 5 at a time checked  at 400 % a bit over the top I know but after a fail last month I am a wee bit paranoid.

NEVER upload until your last lot has cleared!

Colin.

[Paulstw]

Wise words people and noted. Also noted are the -5 reputation points out of no-where. Must have stood on a few piggies with this one. Ah well, its the internet, you can't please everyone.  

[Ed Rooney]

Five red tickets? Now that is harsh. Here, I'll give you a green one. 

[Brian Yarvin]

Ed, I never thought of QC fails as punishment. For me, that's a bit too personal. I always saw it as back to the drawing board. Nothing less and nothing more.

[Duncan_Andison]

Nothing has taught me more about the mechanics of digital photography than the QC processes of Alamy and Getty. They're a resounding reminder that there's room for improvement. In fact, it's QC that can step out and remind me of how complacent I'm becoming.

 

Indeed, I'm greatful that they think my work is worth examining that closely.

 

I agree, it made me revisit my workflow and as a result, the way I manage images and assess what is acceptable has improved greatly, along with my technique so as to avoid having to  "rescue" files during processing. I just bin the ones that seem questionable.

[Ed Rooney]

28 days in the sin bin is not a punishment? I've not yet had a QC rejection, but if and when it happens I hope I will not taken it badly.

[Lynn Palmer]

The QC process can at times feel frustrating but I don't think you said anything to warrant being slammed with 5 red arrows (I logged in just to give you a green arrow).  Your situation reminds me to be even more vigilant in checking my images before submission so I thank you for posting this discussion.

[Allan Bell]

 

If you make your workflow  watertight and as consistent as possible you will rarely fail Q.C.

 

Regards

Craig

 

It usually is, and this is a first in 700 odd images, but I think I'm more annoyed at myself. A low light shot of a toaster doing its thing was probably the thin end of the wedge. 

 

Never mind, I shall learn, move forward and do better. 

 

Nice one Paul. Picture of a toaster. "Thin end of the wedge."   {As in bread.}

 

Allan

 

Sorry, just trying to cheer you up a bit.

 

 

[Phil Robinson]

I've never understood this idea of not uploading more submission while one is waiting to clear. I would have a backlog of thousands of images if I did that. 

If your images pass, so do all the other submissions awaiting QC at the time so they can all be keyworded.

If one fails, you just resubmit the other ones (assuming you are confident they will pass) - it can take a while but it's a good excuse to watch TV while they upload.

Can anyone explain the advantage of uploading one sub and waiting for it to pass?

[John Mitchell]

I've never understood this idea of not uploading more submission while one is waiting to clear. I would have a backlog of thousands of images if I did that. 

If your images pass, so do all the other submissions awaiting QC at the time so they can all be keyworded.

If one fails, you just resubmit the other ones (assuming you are confident they will pass) - it can take a while but it's a good excuse to watch TV while they upload.

Can anyone explain the advantage of uploading one sub and waiting for it to pass?

 

If you have a slowish Internet connection like me, it means that you don't have to waste time uploading multiple batches again if there is a failure in one of them. If you have a lightening-speed connection, then I guess this logic is debatable since re-uploading would not be as time-consuming. I suppose there is also a psychological component to this -- i.e. it's less frustrating to see one batch rejected than a "pile" of them. No logic there, of course.

[OneWay]

I've never understood this idea of not uploading more submission while one is waiting to clear. I would have a backlog of thousands of images if I did that. 

If your images pass, so do all the other submissions awaiting QC at the time so they can all be keyworded.

If one fails, you just resubmit the other ones (assuming you are confident they will pass) - it can take a while but it's a good excuse to watch TV while they upload.

Can anyone explain the advantage of uploading one sub and waiting for it to pass?

I'm with you on this Phil. I just take a lot of time to make absolutely sure my images meet QC standards, then submit batches as they are ready. I must say, not having to interpolate has made getting through QC much easier. The important thing is forcing myself to bin any iffy pics no matter how wonderful I think the subject...or submit them somewhere else.

 

I like John's comment "I suppose there is also a psychological component to this -- i.e. it's less frustrating to see one batch rejected than a "pile" of them. No logic there, of course." 

 

Dave

[Gervais Montacute]

I have 60 odd photos in QC at the moment and would not be altogether surprised if they get a QC fail. I don't want that to happen but if it does then that's life. They are mostly ariel shots and its difficult to get everything 100% sharp ect at all times. But then again I can check them first so its down to me in the end.

[John Morrison]

Alamy's QC has been a great help to me in establishing a benchmark for my pix. I had a few failures when I started here, which was frustrating, but I decided that my workflow needed to be tightened up... before pressing the shutter and after. It worked: no QC failures in the past couple of years (I know, I know... pride comes before a fall).

 

QC may only check for technical criteria, but I'm sure it's helped me to set higher standards in other aspects of photography. Maybe not in a purely creative sense, but rather in the making of images that other people might want (rather than images which please me). And I can now recognise the 'snap' of an in-focus shot, when viewed at 100%, as well as the slight 'ghosting' when the focus isn't quite right. And when I'm not sure... that's a reject too.

 

Alamy have had many opportunities to change the way they assess new imagery... and they haven't. It must meet their particular needs. Tough love, I'd call it...

[Nick Jenkins]

Five minuses - is a bit churlish. I would 'red' someone for rudeness, being a general "p in the a" etc but not for simply stating a view. There is plenty of room in my view, for lots of opinions. It's how you present/respond to them that may incur greeies (yuk) or reddies??

 

nj (expecting lots of greenies for being so damn nice)

[dov makabaw]

Hi Paul - don't despair. We have all been through this learning curve, well at least I have, and have learned our lessons. Having improved on my glass, taken more care and improved on my own QC my images all sail through in days. For what it's worth I often submit large batches and multiple batches and take the view that, if anything, this gives me a better chance of getting through. 

 

dov