Alamy - The Challenge - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

01/18/2006 01:07:10 PM · #651

Originally posted by Marjo:

Sorry about the disappearing post. I was embarrassed about being rejected and figured I'd remove it before anybody responded.
Now I am discouraged again and wish I hadn't posted.
Since it's so easy to be approved, I guess I won't bother to resubmit.

The first test images to Alamy they look over them very closely. I also failed the first group, mainly because of upsizing and the way I was doing it. I also use resiepro from fredmiranda and I think I pasi about $20 for it. Extremely easy and automatic to get above the 48Mb size. One my second try all apporved but one they couldn't read????. Give it another try, just review at 100% and don't send any that is still 'fuzzy around the edges. Oh one of mine was rejected because when I cropped it I left a very small 1pixel white edge down one side. Keep trying, there are a lot of real bad photos at Alamy and a lot of real good ones. Your can be the good ones ;)

WGF Images

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

01/18/2006 01:26:43 PM · #652

I have 1600+ on alamy and have only had 6 images failed (because of size issues...i forgot to upsize them!) I use CS2 and upsize in one step.

Re: Alamy's acceptance of images...

They only check the quality of the image, not the content, so yes they can pass a horrible image, but I have already had sales from stuff I would otherwise had left on the HDD. So even the so-so stuff I shoot goes to Alamy, because if it fits the buyers needs, it'll sell.

Ecce_Signum

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/18/2006 02:35:45 PM · #653

Am now in the processing queue so I guess they got them on their servers ok?

Marjo

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

01/18/2006 11:44:44 PM · #654

Originally posted by WGF Images:

I have 1600+ on alamy and have only had 6 images failed (

"Gosh, that makes me feel so much better," she said sarcastically.
Rub it in a little, why don't you? ;)

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

01/25/2006 11:29:28 AM · #655

Originally posted by mcmurma:

Originally posted by Marjo:
I set up an action to resize in increments at 110 percent. Some at 105 percent.

JPEG issues aside, I personally feel this is the biggest problem. I don't know who started the "stair-stepping" upsizing rumor, but IMO it doesn't work at all. Maybe 10 years ago when upsizing was a fairly new thing this led to better results, but not these days.

If you have CS you should try upsizing using bicubic smoother in one single step to get your original to the the proper size. This is what I do and have had no issues at all with quality control. And I submitted a lot of Sigma SD9 images that were 3.4mp files to start with.

More like about a year ago. Prior to PS CS, stair interpolation was argueably better than the bicubic algorithms in PS. As a direct result, PS CS gained the bicubic smoother and bicubic sharper options (which essentially do the same thing as SI)

Message edited by author 2006-01-25 11:29:53.

Ecce_Signum

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

01/26/2006 01:08:42 PM · #656

Tonights task will be keywording my initial submission, all 10 passed QC :)

mcmurma

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Nikon MF 180mm f/2.8 ED AIS

01/26/2006 01:26:14 PM · #657

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by mcmurma:

Originally posted by Marjo:
I set up an action to resize in increments at 110 percent. Some at 105 percent.

JPEG issues aside, I personally feel this is the biggest problem. I don't know who started the "stair-stepping" upsizing rumor, but IMO it doesn't work at all. Maybe 10 years ago when upsizing was a fairly new thing this led to better results, but not these days.

If you have CS you should try upsizing using bicubic smoother in one single step to get your original to the the proper size. This is what I do and have had no issues at all with quality control. And I submitted a lot of Sigma SD9 images that were 3.4mp files to start with.

More like about a year ago. Prior to PS CS, stair interpolation was argueably better than the bicubic algorithms in PS. As a direct result, PS CS gained the bicubic smoother and bicubic sharper options (which essentially do the same thing as SI)

No doubt you are correct. But in all my attempts (prior to CS) to get any decent upsizing accomplished using the "stair-step" method, none of them worked worth a hoot. Single-step upsizing using Bicubic always produced much better results for me. This could have been due to my technique (or lack of it), my camera, or the particular images I was upsizing... I dunno.

In any case, it never worked for me, even prior to CS. Your experience was probably different.

mcmurma

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Nikon MF 180mm f/2.8 ED AIS

01/26/2006 01:27:03 PM · #658

Originally posted by Ecce Signum:

Tonights task will be keywording my initial submission, all 10 passed QC :)

Congrats, Ecce. Keywording sucks :)

leaf

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

01/26/2006 01:56:53 PM · #659

congrats. :)

briphoto

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

01/27/2006 01:14:54 AM · #660

Originally posted by mcmurma:

Originally posted by Gordon:

Originally posted by mcmurma:

Originally posted by Marjo:
I set up an action to resize in increments at 110 percent. Some at 105 percent.

JPEG issues aside, I personally feel this is the biggest problem. I don't know who started the "stair-stepping" upsizing rumor, but IMO it doesn't work at all. Maybe 10 years ago when upsizing was a fairly new thing this led to better results, but not these days.

If you have CS you should try upsizing using bicubic smoother in one single step to get your original to the the proper size. This is what I do and have had no issues at all with quality control. And I submitted a lot of Sigma SD9 images that were 3.4mp files to start with.

More like about a year ago. Prior to PS CS, stair interpolation was argueably better than the bicubic algorithms in PS. As a direct result, PS CS gained the bicubic smoother and bicubic sharper options (which essentially do the same thing as SI)

No doubt you are correct. But in all my attempts (prior to CS) to get any decent upsizing accomplished using the "stair-step" method, none of them worked worth a hoot. Single-step upsizing using Bicubic always produced much better results for me. This could have been due to my technique (or lack of it), my camera, or the particular images I was upsizing... I dunno.

In any case, it never worked for me, even prior to CS. Your experience was probably different.

That's interesting, I'm guessing you do the SI manually? Or, at least, you haven't been using one of Freds actions? Maybe you should try it, I don't know why you say it doesn't work "worth a hoot". As far as I can tell, I've had excellent results using the SI Interpolater sold at the FM website. I did check some sample upsamples at //www.interpolatethis.com and the stair step interoplater from FM seemed to compare favorably to all the other methods. I just speak from what my eye could see on their samples. Maybe different conditions, or a more critical eye would see otherwise.

gorke

Nikon D70

01/27/2006 11:40:29 PM · #661

Can you guys confirm that it is okay to have a file name, for example, "apple_1", or do they only want letters and/or numbers, with no other characters, etc? I just noticed this, and I can't exactly rename the file on a CD-R...

tonyv

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

01/27/2006 11:56:02 PM · #662

Originally posted by gorke:

Sam

Underscores are OK. In my initial batch I left one with underscores (my standard naming uses underscores) and it was accepted.

02/10/2006 08:08:44 AM · #663

Woooo!!!! Just to let everyone know, my FIRST SALE just happened on Alamy! $286.20! Sweet! Thanks everyone for turning me onto them!

Doug

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

02/10/2006 08:28:07 AM · #664

Question on CD software settings for Alamy submissions posted to this thread: ISO9660 setting to burn CD's

Message edited by author 2006-02-10 09:43:39.

leaf

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

02/10/2006 10:41:02 AM · #665

Originally posted by dswebb:

Woooo!!!! Just to let everyone know, my FIRST SALE just happened on Alamy! $286.20! Sweet! Thanks everyone for turning me onto them!

Doug

Congrats :)

Gordon

RIM BlackBerry Curve

Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 USM

02/10/2006 10:48:03 AM · #666

Originally posted by dswebb:

Woooo!!!! Just to let everyone know, my FIRST SALE just happened on Alamy! $286.20! Sweet! Thanks everyone for turning me onto them!

Doug

Nice - congrats. which image ?

glad2badad

Apple iPhone 16 Pro

Lensbaby Sweet 35 Optic

02/10/2006 10:50:36 AM · #667

Ok all you veterans of Alamy...can you share some tips please? See my post from earlier today. Thanks!

02/10/2006 12:30:12 PM · #668

It was a picture of some Hurricane Katrina devestation down here in Slidell, Louisiana. I don't know how to post thumbnails here of an image on Alamy... but if you search for image AYXM36 on Alamy, that's it.

And I found out the $286 was the selling price, of that only $183 is mine. Which is fine, I still think it's amazing. However, they only make payouts when you have more than $250 in your account, so I haven't really "made" it yet... :-( Need to sell a second one now to get my money! :-)

As for burning CD/DVDs, I just use the default settings on my DVD burner. I don't do anything special...

Doug

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

02/10/2006 12:32:40 PM · #669

Oh, the funny thing, it was for a real estate brochure on SALE/RENTAL PROPERTY!!!!! Ha ha ha ha ha! Maybe they were going to use it to say "Look at all the cheap 'fixer-upper' projects you can get in Louisiana now"!!!! ha ha ha ha ha.

Doug

dogz

Nikon D70

02/10/2006 02:52:12 PM · #670

Originally posted by dswebb:

And I found out the $286 was the selling price, of that only $183 is mine. Which is fine, I still think it's amazing. However, they only make payouts when you have more than $250 in your account, so I haven't really "made" it yet... :-( Need to sell a second one now to get my money! :-)

Doug

Congrats, Doug! Yes, the bummer is that you have to wait until you hit $250 before they cut you a check. Do you know if it was a credit card sale? Those usually clear within 45 days. Once I was over 250, I still had to wait 5 months for the first sale to clear.

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5G IF-ED

02/10/2006 03:51:22 PM · #671

Yes, it said it was a credit card sale. Man, 5 months for it to clear seems a little excessive! Did they give you a reason it took so long, or just had to deal with it...

Doug

livitup

Nikon D70

02/11/2006 10:06:32 AM · #672

Unrelated question...

I was browsing the want ads at photographers direct and I saw this...

Originally posted by some guy:

Request 3998. GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY SEAL

I'm looking for a very good picture of the Georgetown University school seal.

Budget: E60 (for use other than book, magazine or brochure eg. poster, calender, advert, tv, website etc)

Notes on Budget: Big enough to put on a degree.

Now I live about an hour from Georgetown, so it would totally be worth 60 Euros to me to go out there and get a shot of their seal. But I have a legal quandry here... I'm sure that the school's seal is copyright, trademarked, etc. etc. and I doubt seriously that the person requesting this photo is going to ask the school for permission to use it.

1) Do I have any liability as a photographer for taking such a picture
I don't think so

2) Do I have anyliability as a photographer for selling such a picture?
Here's where I get nervous.

Let's leave the moral questions out of this for now.

P.S... getting a property release seems unlikely, to say the least. :)

oOWonderBreadOo

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM

02/11/2006 10:40:28 AM · #673

Put it in as a Rights Managed. This is exactly what it's for. Say not property released and and user needs to get permission- happens all the time and there's no reason to think this guy wouldn't get permission.

I work for a golf photographer and every time an image gets used non editorially the client has to go thru this.

edit to say- oops, Photog Direct is the one where you have to deal with the client yourself and in that case you might not wanna go there... (especially with the degree comment!) :0)

Message edited by author 2006-02-11 11:57:13.

ClubJuggle

Canon EOS-400D Rebel XTi

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

02/11/2006 04:21:56 PM · #674

Originally posted by livitup:

Unrelated question...

I was browsing the want ads at photographers direct and I saw this...

Originally posted by some guy:

Request 3998. GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY SEAL

I'm looking for a very good picture of the Georgetown University school seal.

Budget: E60 (for use other than book, magazine or brochure eg. poster, calender, advert, tv, website etc)

Notes on Budget: Big enough to put on a degree.

Now I live about an hour from Georgetown, so it would totally be worth 60 Euros to me to go out there and get a shot of their seal. But I have a legal quandry here... I'm sure that the school's seal is copyright, trademarked, etc. etc. and I doubt seriously that the person requesting this photo is going to ask the school for permission to use it.

1) Do I have any liability as a photographer for taking such a picture
I don't think so

2) Do I have anyliability as a photographer for selling such a picture?
Here's where I get nervous.

Let's leave the moral questions out of this for now.

P.S... getting a property release seems unlikely, to say the least. :)

This question probably belongs in a separate thread, but I wouldn't touch this with a 10-foot pole. This place is probably looking to use it for bogus degrees sold over the Internet.

The legality is certainly suspect.

~Terry