pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Alamy site problems and hostility  (Read 16214 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: June 09, 2009, 10:06 »
0
If I were running a stock web-site and had as many daily problems as Alamy does with everything from uploads, unreported sales, CTR, Zooms, QC, manage image tools, policy changes, and the list goes on and on... I wouldn't be so quick to revoke contributors upload privileges when they have a hard time dealing with the QC monster fiasco! It sends the wrong message that it's ok for Alamy to screw up big-time on a daily basis but No latitude for contributors QC errors. To me it's hostile, mean spirited, and arrogance at it's worst. They created the QC monster, now let them deal with it ALL on an equal basis.

Mag
« Last Edit: June 09, 2009, 16:20 by MagtheHag »


« Reply #1 on: June 09, 2009, 10:11 »
0
Never had any problems with them and I often see people say they are friendly and easier to deal with than the micros.  I wish they would tighten QC, they already have over 16 million images, it can't be that difficult.  Perhaps you should speak with them instead of having a go here?

« Reply #2 on: June 09, 2009, 10:13 »
0
I shoot RAW with EOS 5D and now 5D mark II and only prime glass. I have never had problems with Alamy QC. Only two rejections: One image was too small (my bad!) and one had some data error, everything else have passed without any problems. Maybe you should check your gear and workflow instead of barking at Alamy.

I like Alamy more than any micro site, I think they are friendly and really trying their best to sell images.
« Last Edit: June 09, 2009, 10:17 by Perry »

« Reply #3 on: June 09, 2009, 10:38 »
0
Alamy isn't the site that I access daily. I upload small batches, and not very often.
Never had any problems.

lisafx

« Reply #4 on: June 09, 2009, 10:53 »
0
Alamy isn't the site that I access daily. I upload small batches, and not very often.
Never had any problems.

^^ Me too.

RT


« Reply #5 on: June 09, 2009, 11:02 »
0
If you researched this you'll probably find 99% of the contributors don't have any problem with them.

Sometimes things don't go together, maybe your photos and Alamy is an example of this.

« Reply #6 on: June 09, 2009, 11:04 »
0
I see all of MagtheHag's 4 posts here are ranting about alamy.  Perhaps there should be an obsessed ranting newbies section for this sort of thing?

« Reply #7 on: June 09, 2009, 11:11 »
0
I see all of MagtheHag's 4 posts here are ranting about alamy.  Perhaps there should be an obsessed ranting newbies section for this sort of thing?
Great Idea sharpshot...OBTW...were you the one in grade school carrying the briefcase, wearing suspenders and giving the teacher an apple everyday?

« Reply #8 on: June 09, 2009, 11:12 »
0
I see all of MagtheHag's 4 posts here are ranting about alamy.  Perhaps there should be an obsessed ranting newbies section for this sort of thing?
Great Idea sharpshot...OBTW...were you the one in grade school carrying the briefcase, wearing suspenders and giving the teacher an apple everyday?
Nice to see you have moved on from alamy ;D

« Reply #9 on: June 09, 2009, 12:48 »
0
I see all of MagtheHag's 4 posts here are ranting about alamy.  Perhaps there should be an obsessed ranting newbies section for this sort of thing?
Great Idea sharpshot...OBTW...were you the one in grade school carrying the briefcase, wearing suspenders and giving the teacher an apple everyday?

To a British English speaker it looks like you're accusing him of wearing womens clothing!

« Reply #10 on: June 09, 2009, 13:41 »
0
They got weird QC system but I would not call them hostile. For me I am not always agree with rejections but I accepted fact that they want to be different.

« Reply #11 on: June 09, 2009, 14:53 »
0
Alamy QC standards have certainly changed. It's nothing wrong to be high standard but it also runs into the danger of having the "plastic" images and prevent true editorial shots from getting in. Ironically being an editorial agency, it has moved towards the direction of micro stocks, with the emphasis on RF and so on. However it is their problem.

The biggest issue I have with Alamy is unreported sales and sometimes very delayed payment system. I hope they will make the buyers pay at the time of sales, not a few months later.


PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #12 on: June 09, 2009, 15:02 »
0
I think their QC is pretty lenient unless they tightened it up in the past month or so. I started submitting pictures with less post processing just to see where their threshold was. I wouldn't call it low but they're not anal picky either.

Maybe you should post some stuff here for some help. Or would you just rather dispute the standards than understand why you're not meeting them?

LSD72

  • My Bologna has a first name...
« Reply #13 on: June 09, 2009, 15:51 »
0
Brand new there but 10 for 10 approved with QC. That's out of a D60 with Kit lenses. Honestly I think getting into IS or SS is harder but Alamy does not check for content of the pic.

As far as other problems...I can't comment on yet.

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #14 on: June 09, 2009, 15:58 »
0
I am not sure what your problem is with Alamy, but as shown here with most commentors, the last thing Alamy is  is difficult. In fact, I think Alamy is one of the most contributor friendliest sites . So if you have a personal problem, I think you should take it up with Support as I never had anything but good rapport with Alamy , keywording , etc.

« Reply #15 on: June 09, 2009, 16:04 »
0
If you researched this you'll probably find 99% of the contributors don't have any problem with them.

Sometimes things don't go together, maybe your photos and Alamy is an example of this.
I see all of MagtheHag's 4 posts here are ranting about alamy.  Perhaps there should be an obsessed ranting newbies section for this sort of thing?

The only thing about Alamy is that sales are not often coming by. But being a trouble site? That's the last thing I would call Alamy. If I had a penny for every angry contributor for Alamy, I would still be very very poor indeed.

« Reply #16 on: June 09, 2009, 16:33 »
0
I also have no complaints about Alamy QC.  I still have images from my 7.1MPix Canon Powershot A620 approved if they are good, clear and sharp (and that even considers a mild yet present noise in sky even at ISO 50).  I had a batch of two images rejected that I had mentioned before here (elephants in mud pool) but they weren't perfect at all.

Squat

  • If you think you know, you know squat
« Reply #17 on: June 09, 2009, 16:55 »
0
I also have no complaints about Alamy QC.  I still have images from my 7.1MPix Canon Powershot A620 approved if they are good, clear and sharp (and that even considers a mild yet present noise in sky even at ISO 50).  I had a batch of two images rejected that I had mentioned before here (elephants in mud pool) but they weren't perfect at all.

Agreed. I started with Alamy using my 7MP Olympus and had only rejections for my very first batch. Then after I knew how to upsize properly with clean sharp and noise free images, my approval has been consistent.
I even had a couple of times uploaded some unfinished images by mistake and wrote Support which corrected my errors for me.
Another time, since I was quite new to RM, I didn't know what to do. I asked Support to help, and the lady from Support did everything for me.
If that is not excellent customer service , I don't know what is.
My biggest complaint about Alamy? Hell, I can't find anything bad to say about them  :o
« Last Edit: June 09, 2009, 16:56 by tan510jomast »

charlesknox

  • www.charlesknoxphoto.com
« Reply #18 on: June 09, 2009, 17:09 »
0
I've never had a problem with them whatsoever and if something screws up they respond to my emails very soon after one person actually called me personally when i first signed up. Go alamy!

bravajulia

  • I will do it only for money!!
« Reply #19 on: June 09, 2009, 17:14 »
0
the biggest issue I have with Alamy is unreported sales and sometimes very delayed payment system. I hope they will make the buyers pay at the time of sales, not a few months later.



 Unreported sales? this is a big issue if this is with bad intention... you are very luckie to discover it... About the delayed payment, when I was working with traditional film stock agency they report the sales only when they was payed from customer and it was sometime 180 days after the publication....this is the editorial world....

« Reply #20 on: June 09, 2009, 17:25 »
0
Brand new there but 10 for 10 approved with QC. That's out of a D60 with Kit lenses. Honestly I think getting into IS or SS is harder but Alamy does not check for content of the pic.

As far as other problems...I can't comment on yet.

Well, not quite. Alamy you have to have your images right on if it is going to pass QC, after having it upsized. For SS, IS,etc... it's easier because you can always downsize your "not so sharp" images.

Given that, it's really not difficult getting approved by Alamy. All you need is to make sure your images are clean, sharp and well exposed.

« Reply #21 on: June 09, 2009, 17:53 »
0
the biggest issue I have with Alamy is unreported sales and sometimes very delayed payment system. I hope they will make the buyers pay at the time of sales, not a few months later.



 Unreported sales? this is a big issue if this is with bad intention... you are very luckie to discover it... About the delayed payment, when I was working with traditional film stock agency they report the sales only when they was payed from customer and it was sometime 180 days after the publication....this is the editorial world....
They do a lot to track down unreported sales.  I don't see it as a big problem.  I have looked in their forums and the alamy pro forums and there aren't many complaints.

« Reply #22 on: June 09, 2009, 19:03 »
0
If you don't have the problem, good for you. But it does not mean it didn't happen to others. If you didn't see the complaints from Alamy Pro and Forums, apparently you haven't looked long and hard enough.

Most of my sales from April and onwards have not been paid by the buyers.


the biggest issue I have with Alamy is unreported sales and sometimes very delayed payment system. I hope they will make the buyers pay at the time of sales, not a few months later.



 Unreported sales? this is a big issue if this is with bad intention... you are very luckie to discover it... About the delayed payment, when I was working with traditional film stock agency they report the sales only when they was payed from customer and it was sometime 180 days after the publication....this is the editorial world....
They do a lot to track down unreported sales.  I don't see it as a big problem.  I have looked in their forums and the alamy pro forums and there aren't many complaints.

« Reply #23 on: June 10, 2009, 04:15 »
0
If I were running a stock web-site and had as many daily problems as Alamy does with everything from uploads, unreported sales, CTR, Zooms, QC, manage image tools, policy changes, and the list goes on and on... I wouldn't be so quick to revoke contributors upload privileges when they have a hard time dealing with the QC monster fiasco! It sends the wrong message that it's ok for Alamy to screw up big-time on a daily basis but No latitude for contributors QC errors. To me it's hostile, mean spirited, and arrogance at it's worst. They created the QC monster, now let them deal with it ALL on an equal basis.

Mag

You have to stop using your P&S camera it won't get through QC  ;D

« Reply #24 on: June 10, 2009, 08:15 »
0
If I were running a stock web-site and had as many daily problems as Alamy does with everything from uploads, unreported sales, CTR, Zooms, QC, manage image tools, policy changes, and the list goes on and on... I wouldn't be so quick to revoke contributors upload privileges when they have a hard time dealing with the QC monster fiasco! It sends the wrong message that it's ok for Alamy to screw up big-time on a daily basis but No latitude for contributors QC errors. To me it's hostile, mean spirited, and arrogance at it's worst. They created the QC monster, now let them deal with it ALL on an equal basis.

Mag

You have to stop using your P&S camera it won't get through QC  ;D

FYI I shoot with a Nikon D-300 and top quality Nikon lenses. Problem is, I don't shoot one dimensional brick walls at F/32 like you.

Mag ;D ;D

« Reply #25 on: June 10, 2009, 08:34 »
0
FYI I shoot with a Nikon D-300 and top quality Nikon lenses. Problem is, I don't shoot one dimensional brick walls at F/32 like you.

If you think f/32 gives you the sharpest images, then you are definitely on wrong track...
Maybe you have problems because you have a crop sensor camera, or you're exposing wrong or you don't shoot raw?

I'd very much like to see your rejected images at full size (or at least crops)

« Reply #26 on: June 10, 2009, 09:19 »
0
FYI I shoot with a Nikon D-300 and top quality Nikon lenses. Problem is, I don't shoot one dimensional brick walls at F/32 like you.

If you think f/32 gives you the sharpest images, then you are definitely on wrong track...
Maybe you have problems because you have a crop sensor camera, or you're exposing wrong or you don't shoot raw?

I'd very much like to see your rejected images at full size (or at least crops)

In agreement with Perry, the sweet spot is not the smallest aperture.

If you are here to make Alamy look bad, already you see that you are all alone .
OTOH, if you came here to get some info and helpful suggestion from Alamy contributors, you would do well to show us the images so we can give you a hand to get your images accepted.
My first guess is that your images are not sharp enough, as that is about the only thing Alamy rejects . Or you're not spotting images , or having some fringe problem,etc..

Once again, as Perry asked, are you shooting RAW?
 

« Reply #27 on: June 10, 2009, 09:29 »
0
FYI I shoot with a Nikon D-300 and top quality Nikon lenses. Problem is, I don't shoot one dimensional brick walls at F/32 like you.

If you think f/32 gives you the sharpest images, then you are definitely on wrong track...
Maybe you have problems because you have a crop sensor camera, or you're exposing wrong or you don't shoot raw?

I'd very much like to see your rejected images at full size (or at least crops)

Perry, Read the post!!! It says "I don't shoot at F/32".  I was merely being facetious and implying that the only images currently getting through QC are those that are FLAT!!!  It's only since they outsourced ( which is another black-eye against Alamy ) QC over to India have experienced contributors been experiencing problems.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2009, 09:41 by MagtheHag »

puravida

  • diablo como vd
« Reply #28 on: June 10, 2009, 09:45 »
0
Mag, if they moved QC to India and you are getting shafted, maybe you got Old Hippy as  reviewer for your latest batches  :D

« Reply #29 on: June 10, 2009, 17:22 »
0
If I were running a stock web-site and had as many daily problems as Alamy does with everything from uploads, unreported sales, CTR, Zooms, QC, manage image tools, policy changes, and the list goes on and on... I wouldn't be so quick to revoke contributors upload privileges when they have a hard time dealing with the QC monster fiasco! It sends the wrong message that it's ok for Alamy to screw up big-time on a daily basis but No latitude for contributors QC errors. To me it's hostile, mean spirited, and arrogance at it's worst. They created the QC monster, now let them deal with it ALL on an equal basis.

Mag

You have to stop using your P&S camera it won't get through QC  ;D

FYI I shoot with a Nikon D-300 and top quality Nikon lenses. Problem is, I don't shoot one dimensional brick walls at F/32 like you.

Mag ;D ;D

Well if that was a shot at me, like your Alamy slagging you are way off mark again, I've only shot one red brick wall and that was at f4, oh! and it does make sales so somebody must like 1 dimensional images
David

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #30 on: June 10, 2009, 21:06 »
0
If I were running a stock web-site and had as many daily problems as Alamy does with everything from uploads, unreported sales, CTR, Zooms, QC, manage image tools, policy changes, and the list goes on and on... I wouldn't be so quick to revoke contributors upload privileges when they have a hard time dealing with the QC monster fiasco! It sends the wrong message that it's ok for Alamy to screw up big-time on a daily basis but No latitude for contributors QC errors. To me it's hostile, mean spirited, and arrogance at it's worst. They created the QC monster, now let them deal with it ALL on an equal basis.

Mag

You have to stop using your P&S camera it won't get through QC  ;D

FYI I shoot with a Nikon D-300 and top quality Nikon lenses. Problem is, I don't shoot one dimensional brick walls at F/32 like you.

Mag ;D ;D

Wow, you come here to whine about your work not being up to Alamy's lax standards and then take cheap shots at some of the members. Hmmm, I wonder why you're having problems. 

« Reply #31 on: June 10, 2009, 21:39 »
0


Wow, you come here to whine about your work not being up to Alamy's lax standards and then take cheap shots at some of the members. Hmmm, I wonder why you're having problems.  
[/quote]

Jeez Walnuts...you're more hostile than Alamy. All I'm doing is stirring up the pot a bit in a supposedly open forum. Oh yes, I never said that I'm having problems with QC...I just don't agree with their hostile policies like closing down their forum! Lets keep a perspective on this and realize that they're nothing more than a frigging middle man and are making millions upon millions off the backs of us. You make them out to be God's gift to the stock photographers of the world...get a grip!!!

Mag
« Last Edit: June 10, 2009, 22:14 by MagtheHag »

PaulieWalnuts

  • On the Wrong Side of the Business
« Reply #32 on: June 10, 2009, 22:39 »
0


Wow, you come here to whine about your work not being up to Alamy's lax standards and then take cheap shots at some of the members. Hmmm, I wonder why you're having problems.  

Jeez Walnuts...you're more hostile than Alamy. All I'm doing is stirring up the pot a bit in a supposedly open forum. Oh yes, I never said that I'm having problems with QC...I just don't agree with their hostile policies like closing down their forum! Lets keep a perspective on this and realize that they're nothing more than a frigging middle man and are making millions upon millions off the backs of us. You make them out to be God's gift to the stock photographers of the world...get a grip!!!

Mag
[/quote]

Oh, I never would have taken you for a pot stirrer until you pointed it out. Thanks.

Yeah, I can't understand why those dummies over at Alamy would have locked down their forum. I would think a company like Alamy would appreciate that most of the posts were "Alamy sucks" and "Alamy QC sucks" and "James West is the devil". All companies should be honored to have a forum like that.

Oh of course you're absolutely right. I need a grip. Please do enlighten all of us mindless lemmings with your obvious brilliance.

« Reply #33 on: June 11, 2009, 03:07 »
0


Wow, you come here to whine about your work not being up to Alamy's lax standards and then take cheap shots at some of the members. Hmmm, I wonder why you're having problems.  

Jeez Walnuts...you're more hostile than Alamy. All I'm doing is stirring up the pot a bit in a supposedly open forum. Oh yes, I never said that I'm having problems with QC...I just don't agree with their hostile policies like closing down their forum! Lets keep a perspective on this and realize that they're nothing more than a frigging middle man and are making millions upon millions off the backs of us. You make them out to be God's gift to the stock photographers of the world...get a grip!!!

Mag
[/quote]

If you are not happy with the middle man making millions off your efforts, why not sell your images directly to the customer, you will save a fortune and become a millionaire yourself, probably overnight.

« Reply #34 on: June 11, 2009, 04:22 »
0
For me I am not always agree with rejections but I accepted fact that they want to be different.
I have yet to see their first rejection - haven't got a one thus far. But I didn't upload much and I upload in-frequently - I am too lazy with their lengthy process of describing images.

I suppose people who deal with Alamy a lot probably have a very different experience than me.

RacePhoto

« Reply #35 on: June 15, 2009, 18:01 »
0
Now we find the truth, mag-hag is upset because Alamy started moderating the forums, and closed the playground to open hostility, boycott campaigns, and Hag has to find someplace else to troll. It has nothing to do with QC. :D

By the way, I don't shoot RAW and after 1200 accepted images, I had one rejected because the focus point was on the second subject of three, not the first and rejected for soft or out of focus.  I don't find them difficult at all. The idea is don't send in things that will be rejected. People have to self check QC instead of sending in a bunch of shots and seeing what slips past review. It's that easy.

Blocking people for continued uploads and rejections is welcome. If someone can't tell if a photo is good or not, why waste the reviewers time. Keep in mind they do not review for content, only image quality. This is the easiest place I know of to get photos accepted.

« Reply #36 on: June 15, 2009, 19:19 »
0
Ridiculous.

I uploaded and sold many pics from my D70. They're still getting through QC. I dunno what you are doing wrong but I could take your D300 off your hands for a small fee if you'd like. Maybe something is wrong with it... ???

It's like the people complaining about Crestock's acceptance criteria. If you can't reach it don't bitch, just try to get better. Other people get stuff accepted, so crank up the quality and move on.

Any agency reserves the right to ban users or shut down threads or their entire forums. It has all happened before. Why is it such a big deal now?

Quote
...more than a frigging middle man and are making millions upon millions off the backs of us...

Uhhh, can anyone explain to this poster that this is how this industry works?



 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
1863 Views
Last post December 13, 2006, 18:01
by roman
1 Replies
1867 Views
Last post February 20, 2007, 23:28
by epixx
22 Replies
6148 Views
Last post August 18, 2009, 22:43
by SNP
Site problems at 123?

Started by LSD72 « 1 2  All » 123RF

32 Replies
7564 Views
Last post February 23, 2010, 05:37
by madelaide
2 Replies
1325 Views
Last post January 23, 2016, 05:10
by Justanotherphotographer

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results