Quote from: Kone on July 21, 2010, 09:04

Hi,
I have to say that is not true, at least not in my case.
It used to be that way but lately Alamy changed it, if there is problem with the image in the batch they will only reject that image and accept rest.

That is also true. It does happen what you're talking about.

But it also depends on your track record. If you have been uploading shots that all got accepted in the past they might just reject one and accept the rest.

In other cases where people kept uploading inferior images, Alamy reserved the right to fail all uploaded batches if one images looked bad.

Thanks for clarification

Quote from: mtkang on July 20, 2010, 11:57

i read this somewhere that's their policy if 1 image isn't accepted, the whole batch will be rejected without reviewing the rest. I wonder is it true? doesn't sound logical to me.

This is true.

The only time they reject one image and pass the rest is "processing error" or system problems. One fail all fail is still the standard. If you have 200 images in one batch uploaded and upload 10 more photos in another batch, and one of those fails, while both batches are awaiting QC ALL WILL BE FAILED. It's not complicated and I don't know why people try to find exceptions to the rules, which may give someone false hope.

One fail all fail.

The logic is just was someone else wrote. They are not going to babysit and review. They don't judge for content, it's easy if someone only has to produce good quality images, and self evaluate. On the other hand you can send something very nice and well exposed to micro and get it rejected for some individual reviewers opinion "not suitable for stock" or "too many like this".

Please, check this out. Pay attention to June 11. 2010. (I just copy and paste this)

 11 June 2010 OL658544 Online upload 10 1 9 0 18 June 2010  Partially Failed

All the best
Kone

NOTE:
This post has been modified by Kone
Sorry, was my mistake

well all, does it has an official statement about their QC standards? or it is just based on contributors experience?

does it mean sending small batch by batch with good quality is a better way? instead of sending everything as a batch?

i think you would get all these answers on the alamy forum where there are many, many contributors there compared to here. there is a specific section that just answer qc questions, which is where i get a lot of my info.

"Partially Failed" usually means there was an image processing error on one of the images, not a QC failure.

In that case they will pass the rest, assuming they pass QC.  Click on the batch number (OL658544) to see the full results.

That's what I thought - check that batch and let us know what the "rejection" reason was. I had only partially failed ones because of processing errors and not inferior images.

Ups!
You have a right, it is my mistake. I am sorry.
Rejection reason, "Image processing error".

Regards
Kone

No biggie. It's just so the newbies won't get confused. At least some things should work as expected these days 

this must be the most out of focus stock photo ever. must've made  it through alamy qc on the coat tails of their checking only one photo out of the entire batch.


http://tinyurl.com/256llde

Hi all, i copy and paste what i found in alamy website, it said that one rejected and all the 'awaiting QC' will be rejected. But i am not sure if only the first batch is inspected for rejection or whole batches will be inspected.

Base on what i read somewhere, does it mean some photos that is not meeting the technical requirement will pass through as alamy just check the first batch?(to explain how that out of focus jewelery photos is there)


Ongoing submissions

Once you�ve passed your QC test we only check a sample of images in subsequent submissions.
A submission is defined as any group of media that are awaiting QC at the same time regardless of the day they were submitted (they will all have the status �Awaiting QC�).
If we fail one image, we will reject all images in all media awaiting QC.
Media grouped together as a submission will be QC�d together and will have the same QC date in �Track submissions�.
We will indicate the media which contains the failed image, with an information icon in Track submissions.
Avoid rejection by always checking each of your images at 100% looking for all possible QC failure reasons.
The average amount of time for a contributor to wait for their QC outcome is 48 hours � please note that we do not undertake any QC at the weekend.
Ongoing QC failures can result in your online upload privilege being frozen for 30 days and in extreme circumstances your account being terminated. Blog post on freezing procedure
QC waiting time is dependent on your QC history, failing QC successive times harms your QC rank meaning that it may take longer for your work to be quality controlled. Blog post on QC time dependent on your QC history.

Quote from: ap on July 26, 2010, 15:57

this must be the most out of focus stock photo ever. must've made  it through alamy qc on the coat tails of their checking only one photo out of the entire batch.
http://tinyurl.com/256llde

Why would someone submit that?   

Clearly that image is sharp, it just happened to be a 2 Megapixel source image. All loss of detail occurred during up-sizing. 

Quote from: mtkang on July 18, 2010, 01:06

have 1 more questions,

can we submit an image as RM for editorial without model release, but change it after to RM with model release after we got the model release successfully?
 

It's my understanding that you cannot change the type of image license once it's Set at Alamy.

It's correct, that you can't change the license type once you've set it, but if you sell your RM as editorial, you also have to set restrictions. If you have the MR and/or the PR you can delete these restrictrions and your image is then a normal RM.

Quote from: madelaide on July 18, 2010, 12:16

Is there RF Editorial at Alamy? I really don't know, as I am basically uploading RM there.

Here is a response from alamy member services:

<big snip>
... then it might be advisable to set Editorial Only restrictions as extra security. Alamy will not by ourselves set �any� usage restriction to any images.
<snip>

The irony being that they don't actually allow the most obvious thing which is an Editorial Only option, you have to 'opt out' of all other uses, which is more complicated than it should be.
For example, you set that you don't want your images to be used in any of the commercial options (several clicks back and forward). Then you decide that you don't want your images to be used commercially in any country, so you place restrictions on every country - and you've shot yourself in the foot: now your image is not available to be sold, for any purpose, in any country.
It's really counter-intuitive, when all they need to do is provide a button for 'Editorial Only'.
Goodness knows why they keep refusing to do this.
Slainte
Liz
PS: unless the thinking is that a commercial buyer might buy an unreleased image because they really like the image and themselves clone out any unreleased people or items.
Also, giving the buyer some discretion could be valuable. For example, a genuine photo of Princes Street, Edinburgh with unreleased  people and shop signs, busses, taxis etc would never be allowed on the Micros. I once read that it's OK for such a photo to be used editorially in a guide book, but for example a Tourist Board using it in a publication would be 'commerical use'. However (always depending on the actual use), it's highly unlikely that a Tour Company or Tourist Board using such an image would be sued.
In the same vein, on my protest website, I've used three 'creative commons' images of famous people: because these people publicly support the wider cause, and I decided (unilaterally) that they were unlikely to sue for non-commercial use of their photo in conjunction with quotations by them supporting the general cause.

Odd, I've been setting my images "Licensed" Editorial Only, one click, since I started with Alamy? As soon as I click "no model release", it's sets that license, I don't have to do anything.

It actually says 'editorial only'?
When I click no release, of course it sets to Licensed, but it doesn't say editorial only. A licensed image can be used for advertising (and in some cases might be highly desirable, as paying enough would stop possible use by competitors), but the 'no release' (model or property) alerts the potential buyer that some uses would not be available. So no release implies 'editorial and possibly other limited uses at the buyer's responsibility'.
The link you gave suggests setting restrictions:
You must have model and property releases  for relevant subject matter in an image. If you don�t have them you can set restrictions to licence the image for �Editorial use only�.

I'll have to upload a photo to see how I'm doing it, and I'm booked for the next four days, then a couple days in the office and a four day weekend. I don't expect to have anything edited for upload for at least two weeks.

No release, includes people, no release, I believe it defaults to "Editorial Only". I don't click the property that needs a release, just the people, because it's one less click, click.

Alamy makes it clear that it's the responsibility of the BUYER to make sure the use is done properly and legally. I know that's different from Micro that Micro_Manages everything from multiple submissions, to keywords, to deciding what's of interest to buyers. Alamy on the other hand, says, if it's a good exposure, you can sell it. Plus, the buyer is responsible for the legal complications. This leaves out the agency and the photographer! Kind of nice when you think about it?

The whole issue of property releases for common houses constructed before 1990 in the US is faulty. There is no law requiring them. Micro wants all kinds of things that they don't need, which makes people paranoid and nervous.

Try to keep this in mind. The correct usage and liability rests with the BUYER! Example, you sell an image Editorial Only and the buyer uses it for a soap ad. You aren't responsible. As long as the photographer properly identifies and truthfully licenses the image, it is the responsibility of the buyer. Also if the photographer makes a mistake, it's going to come down to the buyer being responsible, because they are supposed to verify what they use. See where this is leading?

Yes, if the photographer lies or has a fake model release, then they can be liable, but if licensed properly, the end user is responsible for the final usage.

Quote from: RacePhoto on August 19, 2010, 01:38

Odd, I've been setting my images "Licensed" Editorial Only, one click, since I started with Alamy? As soon as I click "no model release", it's sets that license, I don't have to do anything.

It actually says 'editorial only'?
When I click no release, of course it sets to Licensed, but it doesn't say editorial only. A licensed image can be used for advertising (and in some cases might be highly desirable, as paying enough would stop possible use by competitors), but the 'no release' (model or property) alerts the potential buyer that some uses would not be available. So no release implies 'editorial and possibly other limited uses at the buyer's responsibility'.
The link you gave suggests setting restrictions:
You must have model and property releases  for relevant subject matter in an image. If you don�t have them you can set restrictions to licence the image for �Editorial use only�.