Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Administrator Partial?  
User currently offlineC72 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Posted (14 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 3609 times:

Today I tried to upload a pic of an AA 757 that I had put on a high-resolution photo cd at the time of development at the local photo shop and was rejected. Well, 3 days ago I saw a few pics that were worse than mine that were uploaded by a photographer who I will not name who has work pulished in many magazines.

Is the admin. of this site partial to people like him? I think that the admin. never though this site would get as huge as it is and had to start these strick standards, "Only the best...." so it won't get out of control.

Steve

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3516 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3022 times:

I totally agree with you, but there's another post here that (to wrap it up) says that we can complain all we want, but the rules won't change. And I understand that too - it is for the best interest of the site.

But I recently saw a couple of pics that I'd like to have explained to me.


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Vasco Garcia



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Vasco Garcia



Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Vasco Garcia



Now, the planes on the photos aren't rare at all, they are grainy and there are lots of white dots and lines (dirty scanner glass?) on the pics. And the light conditions aren't the best...? NOTE! I'm not thrashing the photographer - the pics are great! It's just that I've had pics with better quality and really not too much to complain about rejected. What's going on? Is it that you guys at airliners.net don't have the time to look at all the pics, so you'll just pic a couple and discard the rest? If that's the problem, "hire" more people. I know that there are loads of volunteers.

Anyhow, keep up the good work! But make it better!


User currently offlineAb.400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (14 years 6 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2973 times:

When I look at the pictures which Danny posted, I must say that those are the kind of pic´s which I like to see on this site. Much atmosphere in them ! Can´t be done by random.

User currently offlineAnton P. From Sweden, joined Nov 1999, 90 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2935 times:

I agree with ab400

the MD-11 swissair is a different photo!
maybe not 100% sharp but still unusual angle and light!

I don't see why it should not be here..

regards Anton


User currently offlineTeahan From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 5310 posts, RR: 61
Reply 4, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 2892 times:

What about this picture? I am no expert but the quality seems bad and what about those roadsigns etc. I know it is a special livery but it is definetly not that rare!

Jeremiah Teahan




Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
User currently offlineOvelix From Greece, joined Aug 1999, 639 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2867 times:

I believe, as you, that the photos I send and are rejected are good enough to be added.
I understand that they only accept the very best but it's hard for me to accept that I need an expensive camera with expensive lenses for my photos to be displayed here.
This is a site where amateur photographers can display their images not a site where planespotters with professional equipment can display their work.
I use an expensive scanner already and I edited the images the best I could. I can find worse pics than mine in the database and I believe that they throw away the real air enthusiast by raising the standards so high.
I don't suggest that they should accept any image no matter of quality, I suggest that they should lower the today's standards so the real air enthusiast (not the wealthy planespotter) can contribute.

I sent my opinions to the admin as well, I wait for the response, if any...

Kostas Farmakis


User currently offlineBrick From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 1589 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2877 times:

I have used camera equipment. I am not a "weathly" or "professional" plane spotter. I have moderate quality zoom lenses and a really old SLR camera. In all, I spent less than $300 for my current camera setup.

I have over 500 photos on this site in 12 months of posting photos on here. My accepted rate is between 95% and 98%. So don't give me this bullshit about only the wealthy and professional can get photos posted on here because it isn't true.

To the people who have done all of the complaining: Grow up and QUIT BITCHING ABOUT YOUR REJECTED PHOTOS!! Learn how to take better photos instead of demanding that everyone else lower their standards to match yours....

Mark Abbott
Minneapolis, MN



A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man...
User currently offlineNikonman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 2841 times:

Mark,

I agree 100%.


User currently offlineC72 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2848 times:

Geez!!! I hope nobody judged by the pics on my webpage. Those are old! I have gotten better since then! Hopefully I can do what needs to be done to take better quality pics.

Steve


User currently offlineFastGlass From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 0 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (14 years 6 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2837 times:

This BS goes way beyond just TAKING good pics. The scanning technique is involved 50% at my best guess. A great pic that is properly exposed and developed may look excellent, but if it is scanned poorly - a good pic suddenly becomes a bad one, for upload.

Take good pics, scan them well, and the problems and whining will vanish...


User currently offlineUSAir_757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 996 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2746 times:

Keyword: SCANNING. Point: Not everyone has a scanner!


-Cullen Wassell @ MLI | Pentax K5 + DA18-55WR + Sigma 70-300 DL Macro Super
User currently offlineFastGlass From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 0 posts, RR: 5
Reply 11, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2764 times:

Counter Point: Without a scanner, the pictures don't automatically appear on the monitor. That's NOT what that slot on the front of your PC is for...

User currently offlineC72 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2746 times:

UPDATE:

Well, I went and bought an HP 5200Cse and actually had my first 2 pics uploaded yesterday!  I guess it takes patience, skill, and a good scanner.

Steve


User currently offlineUSAir_757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 996 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2739 times:

FastGlass: Those of us(such as me) who do not have a scanner use a PhotoCD or PictureDisk.


-Cullen Wassell @ MLI | Pentax K5 + DA18-55WR + Sigma 70-300 DL Macro Super
User currently offlineDeltAirlines From United States of America, joined May 1999, 8913 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2723 times:

First of all, I would like to say that Brick is correct. You don't have to be rich, etc. I have an old camera (15 years) and it still works fine. All you need (I am guessing) is patience with scanning your shots. It can seem frustrating to those of you who don't have a scanner (like me), but at least try your best. Also, Gary Watt said in another thread to scan you photos and then don't look at them for a day or more. Then, go back and look at them and see if you should upload them or rescan them.

Jeff


User currently offlineBellcore From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 2721 times:

I don't think the admin has the point of view to decide about the quality of a photo. I also don't think there're raising the standars so high...

I also don't know what process do the follow to decide what photos they accept or not   Maybe random  


User currently offlineUSAir_757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 996 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2711 times:

The MD-11 one is sweet! and it is pretty rare, sunrise(or set) is always gonna be rare as it is, but then that cool angle spices it up even more!  


-Cullen Wassell @ MLI | Pentax K5 + DA18-55WR + Sigma 70-300 DL Macro Super
User currently offlineAke0404AR From United States of America, joined May 2000, 2535 posts, RR: 45
Reply 17, posted (14 years 6 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 2727 times:

Hello,

maybe I should add my comments to this topic as well, as I was the " lucky one ".
I was surprised that the SR M-11 was uploaded as the pic was not 100% sharp, but what someone already mentioned and thanks for that, neither the Airline nor the aircraft is rare but the angle, the time ( was shortly before sunset ) and that brings atmosphere into the picture and I would image this is one of the criteria how the judge a photo and why the pic is where it is.
So for all out there I had better pictures, not added to the database for some reason.
I accepted it, turned around tried harder and it works.


Regards

Vasco Garcia

Boston, MA


User currently offlineBellcore From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (14 years 6 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 2701 times:

I think many of you people don't understand the difference between the quality of the image and the quality of the "photo".

I'd say almost 80% of the photos in this database are "just photos" of planes.

But there's something true. This is a personal site, and the author/moderator follow his own rules. If we don't like it, go to another site, or create your own gallery.

I did a "test" some days ago with one of my latest photos, and was rejected. I don't care, but would like to know (only curiosity) to know why, but the admin didn't answer. No problem, as I said before, he has the reasons, and I have to understand it (but not necessarily to agree).

And sorry, I'm not an amateur. A work daily with photographs (in advertising), and know perfectly what's good or not, in terms not only of image quality (noise, bright, saturation, etc, etc) but "look and feel" (angle, perspective, environment, etc.. ).

Enjoy the flight.
-Bellcore


User currently offlineUSAir_757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 996 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (14 years 6 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 2682 times:

Another thing: maybe 1% of all photographers can go outside the terminal to the ramp, at least that's how it is here in the USA. I tried asking to go out, and it just didnt work. I don't know if I can set up an appointment or what, but I don't have access to the ramp currently.


-Cullen Wassell @ MLI | Pentax K5 + DA18-55WR + Sigma 70-300 DL Macro Super
User currently offlineLawrence Feir From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 39 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2672 times:

I've been reading the posts here on this topic and thought I'd put my 2 cents in.

First I'd like to say that we are all guests here and the admins do put in a lot of time and effort to make this a place we can all come to and enjoy. I don't always agree with them either but do understand it's not an easy job and that not everybody is going to be happy with the decisions they must make.

My views on picture "quality".

I learned a long time ago when I was in school that just because a photograph isn't sharp or it's not in perfect focus doesn't make it a "bad" picture. I'd have to say the same for small bits of dust and scratches etc.

What is important is LIGHTING, & composition. Scanning is also important but I'd have to say that for 95% of the problems I see with poor scanning are not due to the scanner but to the operator. I have a $79.00 flatbed scanner we use for faxes that will do more then the quality requested on this server. It's a learned skill to scan photographs properly. This is especially true of under or overexposed prints. My suggestion to those who can't get the hang of scanning or would rather leave it to the pros is to have your film put on photo CD when it's processed.

The same holds true for cameras. You can get a camera for under $100 that will give more then adequate quality. If you want to shoot subjects in the air or over a distance then you will need to spend more, but again, good photos are a combination of good lighting and good composition. A good photographer with a disposable camera will take better picture then a poor photographer with a new Nikon f-5 any day of the week, all day long.

Well, I've had my rant,

Go easy on the admins guys, focus on improving you photos and it you still get rejected pics then post them someplace else and we can look at them and talk about it.

Lawrence Feir


User currently offlineUSAir_757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 996 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2636 times:

Guys I put a suggestion for the admins in one of my old posts, "Possible reason for so many rejections" its at the bottom. Tell me what you think.



USAir_757/MHT
ps. Lawrence you have really great shots!



-Cullen Wassell @ MLI | Pentax K5 + DA18-55WR + Sigma 70-300 DL Macro Super
User currently offlineNikonman From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2639 times:

I like the air-air shots dude! The Continental D3 is great...keep em up!

Good work man!

Nikonman


User currently offlineJMOD From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2647 times:

I understand that talking exsessively about rejected photos in this forum can lead to admonition by the more experienced photographers, but for the time being I cannot think of a better place to discuss my frustrations.

I have submitted about 25 pictures and have had 1 accepted. In MY OPINION this picture was not my best. It was not the sharpest, or the best scanned. It was not the best composed, and it was not taken in the best light conditions; it was an overcast day with flat light conditions.

All of the rejections came with the caveat "image quality is low". I have downloaded some of the photos of establised airliners.net photographes and compared my photos side-by-side with these photos and I cannot see that my image quality is low. The image quality of my photos is comparable to many existing airliners.net photos.

Are photos rejected because there are too many pictures of American Airlines 757s? Or because there is a fence in the forground? Or because the aircraft wingtip is blocking the logo on the tail? (These are all things that I try hard to avoid). If this is the case, I would sincerely like to know how I can improve my photos. Again in MY OPINION (which is only my opinion) I cannot reconcile the "low image quality" rejection with my work.

Please share your experiences.

Sincerely

JMOD


User currently offlineDanny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3516 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (14 years 5 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2628 times:

Anyone read my post about the idea for a rating with the upload confirmations? FEEDBACK! Please...

/Danny


25 Post contains links and images WT : ???????????Quality?????????????? Click for large versionPhoto © George Polfliet NOTE! I'm not thrashing the photographer It's just that I've seen
26 Administrator : Ok, it's apparently time I reveal myself, it seems I can't escape your prying minds. I'm part of an alien force from Mars, here to take over the world
27 USAir_757 : Well fine then. I have officially lost my patience on this matter. Do please read the last post on the topic "Possible reason for so many rejections".
28 JMOD : This is a good website and having some more of my pictures posted here would make me happy. I wouldn't be trying so hard and feeling the rejection so
29 Nikonman : Guys, lay off Johan...He's NOT a robot (i think) He's doing his best, photos slip by...Out of the 60 photos I uploaded yesterday, a couple were reject
30 Rotate777 : We can't blame Johan for a picture that slips by somehow. It's not exactly his fault stuff like that happens. Although I still don't know why one of m
31 Chris28_17 : Okay, i would like to agree with JMOD 's last post. As far as myself, I think this is the best airline site of any kind that exists (in my opinion) an
32 Post contains images Chris28_17 : Oh yeah, one more quick thing... like i said, this isnt your web site! Maybe you send in the best airline picture anyone has ever seen, if the admin d
33 Ckw : I can appreciate the frustration of not getting pics accepted - but if you think the administrator here is tough, don't ever try a traditional publish
34 Granite : Hi I agree with Colin. I have heaps of shots of Swissair aircraft from a recent trip to ZRH but have not uploaded them all as there are many already.
35 JMOD : All my rejections have said simply "image quality low". None have said "Enough 757's on this site" or "through fence". I don't think the image quality
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Partial Acceptance Of Uploaded Images-? posted Mon Oct 1 2001 13:31:24 by TomH
Question For Administrator Regarding Nose Closeups posted Wed Jan 24 2001 18:19:13 by Bodobodo
Administrator Partial? posted Mon May 29 2000 06:21:36 by C72