Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airliners.net Needs More Screeners  
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9668 posts, RR: 68
Posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4139 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

The que is at historic levels and (seems to me) becoming unmanageable. Having spoken to some of the top shooters on this board, the length of time between uploading and acceptance are just too long.

I am sure the current screeners are working as hard as they can while still trying to enjoy their personal and professional lives, which further highlites the need for more screening resources.

So how 'bout it? The competition is screening photos is 24-48 hours.

Don't risk alienating your most valuable asset (the people who upload their photos) by ignoring this situation.

53 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineVafi88 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3116 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4069 times:

You know? I actually felt like I needed to start this Thread too, but you beat me to it.

I feel like there IS A SERIOUS need to get more screeners, about 2X as many.

At 7,200 and growing, how would YOU like to have a photo with 7,199 before yours???

Get some more screeners please!



I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 2, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4049 times:

Deal with it!

Signed,
Places 1-100 in the Queue



User currently offlineMia777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2002, 1165 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4032 times:

I agree. If the "deal with it!" approach is taken, many photographers may concentrate on websites that don't have or have addressed these issues...


MIA777
User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4021 times:

MIA777, that's probably true already, of many photgraphers...


"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineMia777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2002, 1165 posts, RR: 6
Reply 5, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4015 times:

Yes I know...I think it's time for an upload limit? 10 photos a day? I don't think any of the site administrators have responded to these requests in past threads...


MIA777
User currently offlineVafi88 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3116 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4012 times:

Ryan - I don't think 10 a day is a good thing. for instance - my photos have been sitting in the queue for about 4 or 5 days, with the rule, I could upload 50 shots. Imagine 50 photogs uploading 50 shots each... that's a tough job, and then you have to sort it out.

I say just hire more screeners - it's not like A.net has to pay them anyways.

BTW - Don't get me wrong, the screeners are doing a good job.



I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 7, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4008 times:

I was being sarcastic...

Obviously, right now, people in spots 1-100 are pretty thrilled.


User currently offlineMia777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2002, 1165 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3999 times:

Well I mean once the present queue issues are sorted out, a 10 photo limit would work out well. People couldn't upload hundreds of photos and the queue could probably always be less than 1,000. This would require that a certain amount of screeners screen everyday but in the end more screeners are a must.


MIA777
User currently offlineKereru From New Zealand, joined Jun 2003, 873 posts, RR: 45
Reply 9, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3992 times:

I haven't been screening as much in the last week, I will resume a higher level this week. Some things that can help is to make sure the data fields are all filled in and it is amazing just how much time can be saved screening for little things like that. If the reg is already in the DB with a complete list of data it is easy to check and make sure any new uploads are the same. Keep them coming the queue will drop in the near future as we resume screening.

Colin



Good things take Time.
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 10, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3992 times:

queue will drop in the near future as we resume screening.

So, nobody is screening at the moment?


[Edited 2004-02-22 06:43:06]

User currently offlineBruce From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5067 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3963 times:

Ok.....how 'bout something different. Try this one on for size. How about a upload limit for NEW photographers - say, those who have added less than 100 photos on the database in the past 180 days. These are generally the people who need to work on either shooting or finishing techniques or whose equipment isn't the greatest, right? And also those who would have the highest concentration of rejections so a limit on these could keep the queue from becoming bloated with marginal shots.


Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
User currently offlineKC7MMI From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 854 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3925 times:

I'm not sure if I agree with that new photog limit. I am a "new photographer" and yet I have uploaded 75 photos since the end of Sep in 2003. My technique has much improved and my rejection rate isn't too bad (I'm guessing around 30%, sometimes better, sometimes worse). I have also become much more selective on which photos to upload. I'm sure this is the case with most new photographers that have gained some experience.

If you want to put a limit on uploads, do it so that no more than 50 photos from one photog will be at the top of the Q. The photog will be able to upload more than that, but the rest will remain at the bottom of the Q and won't start working their way to the top until their first 50 have been FULLY processed. How 'bout that?

BTW, wouldn't it be nice to have the photo stats tell you what your current rejection (or acceptance) rate is, based off the last three uploads? I think that would be really cool.

-Benjamin


User currently offlineHeliporter From Switzerland, joined Jul 2003, 140 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3900 times:

Vafi88 wrote:
I feel like there IS A SERIOUS need to get more screeners, about 2X as many.

I FEEL THIS TOO !

Really a great job done by the screeners today, but there are simply too much photos to handle. A queue of 4000+ is almost every time the case. No surprise that some identical pictures are published on "other sites" a full week earlier (just another reason for a.net to do something). There are so many good photographers, that it should be no problem to find more screeners. Any other restrictions (upload limit ...) had been discussed many times without any action.

Clickhappy already mention the target: The competition is screening photos in 24-48 hours

///Markus



Markus Herzig - Swiss Helicopters, Pilatus Porter and Aviation Photography
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2239 posts, RR: 48
Reply 14, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3888 times:

I agree with an upload limit. Something like: If you upload a picture, you can not upload another for an hour or something. It will take the quality inspection task from the screener to the photographer himself. IF you want your picture on A.net, the photographer really needs to do some self-screening and make sure that he uploads only his best work. This will keep A.net standards high, and will encourage photo-diversity... (f.e. One would not be uploading 50 pics of approaches to LHR 27L in one batch anymore)
I think we had this discussion here a while ago.


User currently offlineVIAF From Brazil, joined Jan 2004, 196 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3880 times:

I agree with a upload limit!!!! Big thumbs up Necessarily!!

Maybe several uploaders will stopping upload every day hundreds of pics!!  Pissed


Upload 5 for a day!!!And the photographers will uploading only the best shots which they have!!!!


VIAF


User currently offlineSfilipowicz From Netherlands, joined Jul 2002, 327 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3848 times:

I also agree with the idea of IL76, I think that would be a good solution to get the queue smaller.

User currently offlineGKirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24964 posts, RR: 56
Reply 17, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3836 times:

Even screeners need a break sometimes.  Big grin


When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineSpotterboy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3821 times:

Hmmm, but if we have an upload limit some people who did really long trips ( e.g. Sam Chui?) will need ages for getting all their good shots in the database if there's a limit of 5 per day  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

I think maybe 15 - 20 a day would be ok.

regards, Florian


User currently offlineFlumuc From Germany, joined Oct 1999, 392 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3814 times:

I don´t think a daily limit would be good.

If someone only has time e.g. every Saturday and is only allowed to upload 5 or 10 shots, it would take forever to upload a bunch of good shots.

Wouldn´t a limit like 30 pics every 5 days be more appropriate? If you upload the 30 on one day you have to wait 4 days to upload more.



User currently offlineBeechcraft From Germany, joined Nov 2003, 828 posts, RR: 41
Reply 20, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3816 times:

Hi,
i´d go with the "more screeners" opinion here, since i don´t think an upload limit would work or be accepted.
I mean, you probably won´t save time if instead of waiting in a 7500+ queue with 30 of your photos you could only upload e.g. 5 photos at a time, which would mean to go back to the end of the uploads every day.
Also, A.net now has what, like over 6000 photogs? even with an average of 2 uploads per photog, there would be an instant 12000 pics to screen.

I think a limit would be very hard on people like Art Brett, who is listetd with 77 high quality uploads from the last 48 hours. If they had to reduce their uploads, they´d be easily frustrated and maybe would even move on "other sites", something nobody could have an interest in.
As the page continues to grow, with increasing numbers of uploaded shots, the call should be for more screeners.
The hard thing with that of course would be maintaining the high standards of screening here at a.net, but in my opinion more screeners would mean more smiling faces and reduced standing in line times.

but maybe thats just me...

best regards,

Denis



That's it! You people have stood in my way long enough. I'm going to clown college!
User currently offlineJaspike From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2008, 1 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3812 times:

As the page continues to grow, with increasing numbers of uploaded shots, the call should be for more screeners.
The hard thing with that of course would be maintaining the high standards of screening here at a.net, but in my opinion more screeners would mean more smiling faces and reduced standing in line times.


I agree  Smile But this isn't my area, I'm only giving my views, not the views of A.net  Smile

-And there are currently 7889 photographers. Multiply by 2 and you've got 15778  Big thumbs up

Josh


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3800 times:

I've done hardly any screening since the turn of the year, mainly due to being much busier at work this year. And I'm not one of the top screeners! Several other screeners are "down" at the moment too, no doubt for their own personal reasons.

I had some free time yesterday morning, and thought I might do some screening. I checked my e-mail first, only to find some kind photographer had sent us screeners an e-mail. The subject line was:

You are a f**ing idiot..."

except that the subject wasn't edited with asterisks, and you can guess that the content was equally abusive. One of the screeners replied, nicely, suggesting that such an rude stance wasn't really the way to get things done, in response to which that screener got a further e-mail from the same person saying:

I sent Johan already and told him somebody has their head up their butt at his place. Hey, it must be you. I don't need you or Johan or airliners.net to put my pictures up if the screeners are so f***ing stupid.

Now I fully appreciate that not many photographers, especially those contributing to this topic, are rude like that. The majority are nice folks who genuinely want to help. But just to illustrate the idiotic minority spoil it for the good majority because having read that exchange I thought to myself "why bother just to get all this abuse" and didn't do any screening yesterday, and instead I processed and prepared some pictures for uploading to another site in which I now have an interest as a contributor. Sorry and all, but that's the way it goes - like I say, the moronic minority can sometimes spoil things for everyone else!

----

As an aside, we've been recruiting more screeners and they'll be starting work shortly.

Andy

[Edited 2004-02-22 12:15:43]

User currently offlineJkw777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 3788 times:

Ahh I don't know.... I think your just getting impatient!  Wink/being sarcastic

Seriously, the screeners do a fantastic job, they are unpaid, and also have lives to lead I'm sure  Smile As GKirk said, they need a break too!

Keep up the good work  Smile

Justin  Big thumbs up


User currently offline9A-CRO From Croatia, joined Jun 2000, 1574 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (10 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3768 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

The three screeners rule should be dropped, at least to two
screeners. That would fasten up the queue.

Also as someone suggested above uploading "windows" of 10-30 photos would be good. If script detects that there are more than limited number of photos in queue it adds photos at the end of the queue.
I know that queue software is based on e-mail address but with minor modification such as adding #1,#2... at end of e-mail address and later removing it should work.



When once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward...
25 Granite : Hi all Guys, guys......for the record 7 new screeners have been employed and are currently awaiting their passwords for the pages etc. I have been wor
26 AKE0404AR : Well this will be a never ending story / vicious circle More screeners = fast processing This may apply for the moment but The number of photographers
27 Post contains images Jkw777 : Well that is good to hear, now guys stop whining Cheers for the inside info Gary Regards, Justin
28 Post contains images Beechcraft : 7 new Screeners sound great to me, i hope this takes a heavy workload off you guys. What i wanted to add to my last reply was that i´m fine with wait
29 Post contains images Spotterboy : Guys, guys......for the record 7 new screeners have been employed and are currently awaiting their passwords for the pages etc. Sounds good to me Than
30 Post contains images Granite : Hi all I agree with Vasco on: ''Upload 100 shots and have them all in the 24-48 hrs queue...... Come on,is this really necessary?'' In my humble opini
31 Post contains images N178UA : Since when my name is recognized as a quantity uploader??? Any one please tell me any of my shot are repeatitive? I will do my best to ensure a break
32 Apuneger : Personally, I think Airliners.net needs the following solution: - More self-screening by the photographers themselves. - Some more screeners (AFAIK th
33 G-CIVP : "Comes back to the old Airliners.net saying.....'Quality NOT quantity' Yes, there are many who upload good quality stuff on their hundreds.....but not
34 Post contains images Spotterboy : 'Quality NOT quantity' Exactly the way to go.... But lots of new photog's are uploading EVERYTHING, just for getting their first shot accepted... I kn
35 Cabbott : Guys Vascos comments were BANG ON! and 100% correct. It's important that each member takes a few seconds to think about what he/she is about to upload
36 Skymonster : Guys, we can bang on about self-imposed limits all we like but the repeat mass-upload offenders either (a) are not regular visitors here so aren't awa
37 Post contains images Spotterboy : Agreed... Big thanks to all screeners who are doing it voluntarily and without getting paid! THANK YOU regards. Florian
38 Granite : Hi all Well said Andy and adding a little footnote...........how many of you would be willing to leave your own photo processing for weeks until you h
39 Post contains images TS : Hello all, Interesting topic. I like the idea of an upload limit as suggested by Vasco & some others. However, during my last upload I think the avera
40 Mirage : To have more screeners is good but it's not the definitive solution, in a question of 6, 7 monthes we'll be discussing this again. It's urgent (in my
41 Granite : Hi all My mistake, cannot count.......will be 8 new screeners! Cheers Gary Watt
42 Fireguy274 : I think anyone who sends a nasty email to any of the screeners should be removed from the site immediately.....Artie
43 Heliporter : Seven new screeners - big thanks to all! As most people pointing out here - only an upload limit will solve also future problems. There will always be
44 Post contains images Spotterboy : - I think anyone who sends a nasty email to any of the screeners should be removed from the site immediately.....Artie Might be nessecary! - My mistak
45 KC7MMI : I think that if there is going to be an upload limit, we don't have to completely reject all the photos that are over the limit. Just leave the remain
46 Mia777 : I think hiring new screeners is the easy way out. As others have mentioned, this same problem will arise again when the number of photographers greatl
47 Airhead711 : I think when you upload a photo it should be screened in the order in which it was recieved.Even if you already have photos in the queue,I don't think
48 Vafi88 : I agree with the whole 2 screens Idea... OR - we can have 2 seperate queues which will eliminate lower quality photos right away - for those, you coul
49 KC7MMI : It's very good that we have eight new screeners but something else still needs to be done. There are some good ideas in this thread and it would be ni
50 Donder10 : And who are these magical 8?
51 Post contains images Vir380 : Donder10 ..... All in good time .. all in good time Just to point out again the reason the Q is very high at the moment is : 1 . Due to life commitmen
52 Paulinbna : I think one of the things that needs to be done is try to get every ones pictures to be screened before the next weekend Wait hear me out. Say I go ou
53 Post contains images Mirage : Am I missing something or this topic is being locked Luis
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...
Something Needs To Be Done At Airliners.net posted Fri Jun 17 2005 07:23:56 by Blackhawk144
More Airliners.net Photos Used On Web Site(s) posted Sun Sep 5 2004 07:46:23 by Mattbna
Airliners.net Is Looking For New Photo Screeners! posted Thu May 8 2003 01:14:28 by Administrator
Airliners.net Feedback....... posted Wed Dec 6 2006 21:36:28 by AKE0404AR
My 200th Image On Airliners.net posted Sun Oct 1 2006 04:43:52 by Rsmith6621a
Quarterly Airliners.net Photographer Email posted Tue Sep 19 2006 23:22:00 by JumboJim747
Airliners.Net Material? posted Tue Aug 29 2006 06:38:30 by AlitaliaMD11
Airliners.net Photographer ID Card posted Thu Jun 1 2006 16:50:16 by Administrator
Why The "AIRLINERS.NET" Superimposing? posted Mon May 8 2006 17:53:13 by AirRyan
Why Airliners.net Written On Some Pics? posted Mon Apr 3 2006 18:37:26 by Bravo45