MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Alamy site problems and hostility  (Read 16205 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« 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
1857 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
6141 Views
Last post August 18, 2009, 22:43
by SNP
Site problems at 123?

Started by LSD72 « 1 2  All » 123RF

32 Replies
7555 Views
Last post February 23, 2010, 05:37
by madelaide
2 Replies
1322 Views
Last post January 23, 2016, 05:10
by Justanotherphotographer

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results