Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Upload Ban!  
User currently offlineJid From Barbados, joined Dec 2004, 972 posts, RR: 31
Posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3096 times:

Well happy Christmas all.

I have been banned for uploading a reworked picture. Normally if I have a rejection I leave it at that and try and learn from the comments. This time I thought the shot in question was worth spending a little time on and reworking it, which I did.
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/jiddster_1161_V2.jpg

For my trouble I would taken another rejection and put it my personal collection no problem. Instead for a get an e-mail saying...
"Due to repeated violations of our photo upload rules and guidelines, you have been banned from uploading photos to Airliners.net for 1 week. Following this ban, all photos you had in the upload queue have been removed".
Repeated suggests that I send in reworked pictures on a regular basis and submit them. I very, very rarely rework pictures and submit them and I have only ever appealed one. I was just thinking about celebrating getting 500 pictures on A.Net, now I guess you can think what I'm feeling.

Would anyone like to comment ?


G7EPN is back after 15 years! Operating all Bands 80mtrs -> 70cms QRZ DX
48 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3008 times:

It always pisses me off when I take my time to re-work a photo then to get that slap in the face. Sometimes I think why bother with it?

User currently offlineCodeshare From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2995 times:

Did you try appealing it? Could be worth a try.


How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3149 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2992 times:

Getting banned for one week isn't the end of the world. And remember that we've Christmas next week. Maybe you can do other things instead of uploading and will resume it in one week.
Bye, Georg.


User currently offlineJfazzer From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2001, 157 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2985 times:

That's bad news Jid,
Some of your recent shots have been great. Oh well at least it is only for one week, (bet that dosn't cheer you up).
By the way I guess you were at MAN today? After describing you to Jane, I believe she sent you a text message warning you about an idiot on a step-ladder.
Just for the record, your rejected shot is very nice, and pin-sharp, which I'm sure you don't want to hear. Such a shame!

Later..... John


User currently offlineSA006 From South Africa, joined Sep 2003, 1883 posts, RR: 54
Reply 5, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2961 times:

Hello Jid!

What was that rejected for? If it was badmotiv , which I think it was , I can kind of understand the screeners' predicament. There's not much one can do with a photo rejected for badmotiv.

Although , this was a little harsh...

Rgds  Big thumbs up
SA006



Proudly South African
User currently offlineLHRSIMON From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2002, 1343 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2961 times:

What a great picture. I can see why you tried to rework it. Its realy annoying when you have a photo you want to share and cannot get it in. I had one of a GH DC10 and after it got rejected twice (after a good hour reworking i gave up with it.... No ban though !!!

What was it rejected for. Please tell me it wasn't BadQuality !!!!!



Canon 1D Mk III,Canon 20D+17-40 L f4.0,70-200 L IS USM f2.8,400 L USM f5.6,135 mm L f2.0, 50 mm f1.8,1.4 x II extender
User currently offlineFergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 53
Reply 7, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2944 times:

That was rejected  Wow!

Great shot Jid,

But you must have done something jid for them to ban you like that or have they really banned you for re-uploading a picture.

What rules did you violate?

Fergul  Big thumbs up



Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 8, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2941 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Sorry to hear this Jid. Lovely clarity to the image.

I have sent you a personal email.

Take it easy.

Paul


User currently offlineChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2927 times:


You cloned out the fence? Quite visible, but if its your first violation a ban is harsh. If its not, then well sh1+ happens =)



what seems to be the officer, problem?
User currently offlineChris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2819 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2851 times:

Bad to hear Jid, I love that pic! how do you get it looking so clear and sharp?

Chris



5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
User currently offlineJid From Barbados, joined Dec 2004, 972 posts, RR: 31
Reply 11, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2701 times:

I would like to thank everyone for their messages and personal email.

I shall quickly nip through a few of the above points:
DLKAPA, I don't often re-work shots but I did do one a couple of weeks and it got accepted, so don't give up hope

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jid Webb


So it can work.

Jorge, appeal !! Can't be bothered.

Jfazzer, yes that was me at MAN today  Smile I did get a warning text. Next time I will have to come say hello.

SA006, LHRSIMON, the shot was rejected for badcentered. I am quite happy to live with that but to be banned as well?

Fergulmcc, Done something, no that's it. I re-worked one picture and re-submitted it and got a ban.

Psych, thanks for you mail. I will reply personally.

ChrisH, Chris78cpr, I would not mind if I had cloned a fence out! Yes my first 'violation' although I did not realise that if you re-work a shot and it gets rejected you get a ban.

Over night I got the standard e-mail rejection which I am quite happy with. Here is a small quote "Continous reuploading might result in a temporary ban from the site."
Now I don't call one re-work continous!!

The to make things worse I get this

"Hello Jid Webb,

This is just a short note from us at Airliners.net thanking you
for 2004 - we hope you will continue to send us your aviation
photos under next year as well and promise to keep improving
our services for photographers."

Looks like they are going the right way!

On a final note, as well as getting a ban you also get all the shots removed off the queue that you had just spent all morning freezing your nuts off for.
I am also somewhat disappointed that no-one from Admin or Crew have posted a valid reason for my ban yet.

Thanks again all .. Jid



G7EPN is back after 15 years! Operating all Bands 80mtrs -> 70cms QRZ DX
User currently offlineSulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2035 posts, RR: 32
Reply 12, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2692 times:

Jid,

Under the circumstances you described, that sounds a little harsh to me. Perhaps a mistake has been made. Any crewmembers care to clear things up?

Cheers


James



It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 13, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2667 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Jid,

A public comment from me. In my very early days of uploading - thanks in no small part to your help - I reworked a few images definitely twice or more before they got accepted. I did write comments to screeners to let them know what I had been trying to do.

My recollection is that in the standard texts for some rejections there is an invitation to rework the image and reupload if you think you have addressed the reason for that rejection. Therefore it cannot be the case that you can be banned for just reuploading a rejected photo - unless it was simply a mistake.

The question I'm raising is whether there are certain rejection categories where an attempt to reupload is not considered 'appropriate etiquette' - such as bad motive. But I think we have already established in previous discussions that one screener's 'badmotive' is another screener's lovely photo. So surely at least one further attempt - especially if something has been changed from the original photo - is acceptable, because if there was only one rejection reason given and the photographer believes they have addressed that issue in their reupload, then it seems they may stand a fair chance of it being accepted this time round.

Is there a need to revisit the standardised rejections that screeners use that will give the photographer a clearer indication of what they should and should not consider doing next? I recall getting a 'baddouble' rejection and it did say then that 'Continuous' reuploading following such a rejection may result in a ban. If 'continuous' means 'don't try to rework this image - it will not be accepted in future' or we should read 'continuous' as 'one more time' then maybe it should say so more clearly. Also, if it is the case that screeners have a specific rule whereby they will not subsequently overturn a previous (different) screener's decision about a photo (I'm thinking of badmotive here as a good example of this) then I think it would be very helpful to know that so that we can all waste less of our own and screener's time trying to rework certain images.

Apologies to all readers for my wordy post, but I think this issue for Jid raises some key points that would benefit from clarification. I have said it many times already - I can live with subjectivity and mistakes being made - but specific rules should be clear for all and applied fairly.

All the best.

Paul


User currently offlineFergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 53
Reply 14, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2660 times:

Hear Hear, Paul

Fergul  Big thumbs up



Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
User currently offlineAirplanepics From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2003, 2732 posts, RR: 41
Reply 15, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 2647 times:

Did you write a comment for the screeners explaining what you had done to the rejected picture?

Simon Nicholls



Simon - London-Aviation.com
User currently offlineJid From Barbados, joined Dec 2004, 972 posts, RR: 31
Reply 16, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2602 times:

No I did not write any comments this time or the last. My first submission was rejected for Badsoft, which it was, as well as badcentered. I did not wish to insult the intelligence of a screener and say look I have re-cropped and sharpened this image. I thought it would be quite obvious what I had done. I certainly would not reupload an image without re-working it. A simple rejection of the second upload, I would not of had any problem with it as I said before.

This still does not clear up the point .. That if you re-work a picture and it does not get passed, is it a one week ban plus all other pictures in the queue deleted?

[Edited 2004-12-22 12:32:42]


G7EPN is back after 15 years! Operating all Bands 80mtrs -> 70cms QRZ DX
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 17, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2571 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Regarding your last, Jid, if what you say is true, that's a major issue. As I said, I have had second uploads rejected before. As far as I am aware no rules regarding uploading have been changed recently.

This would be silly anyway. What is wrong with the photographer making changes following a rejection if s/he believes that the changes they are making are addressing the initial criticisms of the screener and so improving the image? UNLESS they are specifically told in their feedback from the first rejection that to reupload this particular photo will not be acceptable because it is already falling foul of a clearly stated site rule. For me baddouble is the clearest example, though some may recall a recent thread where even here we were debating the clarity of this rule.

Paul


User currently offlineTZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 53
Reply 18, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2570 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Jid:
"I did not wish to insult the intelligence of a screener and say look I have re-cropped and sharpened this image."

Sorry Jid, but it's imperative that when anybody uploads a reworked shot they inform us what they've done to the image. That's what the "comments to screeners field" is for. When examining hundreds, or even thousands, of images in a screening session it isn't unreasonable that you draw our attention to what you've changed.

I personally don't know the difference between the first and second crop, but if they were substantially the same, then we would consider that a re-upload and handle it accordingly.

Tamsin (a.net screening crew)



TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
User currently offlineJid From Barbados, joined Dec 2004, 972 posts, RR: 31
Reply 19, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2546 times:

Thanks for the reply Tamsin,

The actual rejection is not really an issues here. I do take your point that if I ever do anymore re-work I will add a comment to the screener. The issue is the one week ban, for and I quote

Jid Webb,

Due to repeated violations of our photo upload rules and guidelines, you have been banned from uploading photos to Airliners.net for 1 week. Following this ban, all photos you had in the upload queue have been removed


"Repeated violations" suggests that I am re-uploading shots all the time. This is only the second case of me uploading a re-worked image that I can remember. The one before, as I previously posted got accepted to the DB. I feel very very very harshly treated by having this ban imposed and photos removed from the queue. I am just hoping that someone can make sense of it all and maybe even say 'hey we made a mistake'.

Jid.



G7EPN is back after 15 years! Operating all Bands 80mtrs -> 70cms QRZ DX
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 20, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2514 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I agree with Jid here again. The issue here is not really the particular photograph - we can all have different views on that. It is his being given a ban for an apparent REPEATED violation of the rules and guidelines.

As a fellow photographer I feel I need to understand:

* what rules/guidelines Jid has transgressed by reuploading this image

* in what way his behaviour can be seen to have been repeated enough that he can legitimately be seen to have ignored something he should have been aware was incorrect. In effect, how has he 'misbehaved/wasted screeners' time unnecessarily?

Paul


User currently offlineKaddyuk From Wallis and Futuna, joined Nov 2001, 4126 posts, RR: 26
Reply 21, posted (9 years 8 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2506 times:

Such a shame to hear that jid

Nice shot though mate!  Smile



Whoever said "laughter is the best medicine" never had Gonorrhea
User currently offlineSukhoi From Sweden, joined May 2006, 373 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 2431 times:

Havent been screening in a while so cant comment on the picutres in question, but the email you have been sent is a standard email that goes to all who are banned, the wording is generic. But there may have been a personal comment added by the screener...

User currently offlineJid From Barbados, joined Dec 2004, 972 posts, RR: 31
Reply 23, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2352 times:

Indeed there was a personal comment from the screener. Here is the email content again...

Jid Webb,

Due to repeated violations of our photo upload rules and guidelines, you have been banned from uploading photos to Airliners.net for 1 week. Following this ban, all photos you had in the upload queue have been removed

Here follows a personal message from the screeners regarding this ban:

the PIA 77 is still badcentered as it was the last time. Read the Upload FAQ

Sincerely,
The Airliners.net Photo Screening Crew


I am not disagreeing with the screener’s judgement that the photo was badcentered. What I am disagreeing with that this is the first time I have resubmitted a photo and not had it accepted. It appears that because I resubmitted it did not pass screening, instead of the standard rejection I get a weeks upload ban and all the photos I had in the queue deleted. There has still been no explanation for the "repeat violation" wording.

One instance is not in my book is not classed as a repeat.

Clarification of this point would be appreciated.

Jid.



G7EPN is back after 15 years! Operating all Bands 80mtrs -> 70cms QRZ DX
User currently offlinePhilhyde From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 678 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (9 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 2344 times:

"There has still been no explanation for the "repeat violation" wording"

Sure there has:

{{Sukhoi}} "the email you have been sent is a standard email that goes to all who are banned, the wording is generic"

I would tend to agree that you have been judged too harshly in the final analysis, but strict adherence (or not) to the rules is the discretion of the screener.

cheers,
Phil



HoustonSpotters Admin - Canon junkie - Aviation Nut
25 Jid : Hi Phil, I think that the wording of a generic message for repeat violations as it is, is fine. The issue here is it is not a repeat! Repeat suggests
26 Psych : Again - agreed Jid. Of fundamental importance here is that a ban can be given - and let's face it, that cannot be a pleasant experience for anyone - o
27 Dendrobatid : There seems to be unanimity here that Jid has either been treated harshly or unfairly. The standard rejection (and I've had plenty) positively invites
28 Dehowie : Well from looking at the other sites it seems plenty of "good" photographers are already tired of being treated poorly. I'm not sure if ANET has ever
29 Post contains images Vir380 : "People are wondering why the queue is so low. Mmmm i think i know" Yup .... its cos we all are working hard screening and not biting your bait and it
30 AIRBUSRIDER : If I have learned one thing from uploading to Anet, I have learned to not take things personal. I was banned for similar reasons not to long ago and I
31 Bronko : Jid, your PIA shot is one of the best I have seen recently. What lens(es) and body do you use?
32 Bruce : Upload ban??? did I miss something? Is this something new? I re-work rejected pictures all the time and never heard of a ban for it....I do use the co
33 Dendrobatid : Vir380 My comment about reinstating Jid were not intended as bait. I realise that you have been working hard on screening and last weekeend I was scan
34 Post contains images Jid : Bronko, I was using a Canon 35-350mm 'L' lens for that shot on my 300D for what it's worth On a final note, I never got a true explanation for my ban.
35 Spencer : Isn't a ban a little like being given detention at school, or worse, being sent home!! I mean, a ban, come on!!! A little bit OTT isn't it? As Tamsin
36 TZ : Spencer: "in the occurrence of a rejected photo, I sometimes can't even be bothered to rework it, and I'll just resend it" Thanks for pointing that ou
37 Skidmarks : I am somewhat perturbed to see this subject go on and on. I personally think the pic from Jid is a damn good shot, worthy of A.net. However, if the sc
38 Law4fun : A Screener wrote: "Perhaps we'll send you a three-month ban for Christmas? If we can be "bothered", of course." Jumping Jesus on a Pogostick, get a li
39 Jderden777 : not that my input matters at all in here since we photographers just seem to roll with the punches here on johan's site but i personally think that th
40 Post contains images Vir380 : Law4fun ... you have actually been reading this thread right ? please read it again then youll get the context it was meant Another thing how exactly
41 TZ : All Please don't read my statement as some kind of threat - just a reiteration of the airliners.net rules which everybody agrees to when they upload.
42 Spencer : This is Airliners.net Tamsin, nothing more nothing less! I DO abide by the rules, but freedom of speech is also something I abide by!! If you take eve
43 Ryangooner : What has this site become? - who's gonna have the balls to answer,? screener or otherwise - 3 month ban, why dont you extend that to a year maybe we a
44 TZ : Spencer I have nothing against you, but your comment is akin to you posting on an official Police website that you sometimes drive in excess of the de
45 Jid : Poeple .. you appear to of strayed from my original thread which was, why I got banned for one week for uploading one reworked photo. The photo was ba
46 ChrisH : While I'm willing to agree with tamsin that spencers remark might encourage less experienced uploaders to break the rules, I think it's common knowle
47 Spencer : Tamsin. I've had time to sober up now, but I still stick to what I've said, and that's that different screeners will let different images on. You have
48 TZ : Spencer Glad to see the "heat" taken out of this debate. We are humans, and human errors can occur - an image may get added after previously being rej
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...
Upload Queue Limits Change For New Photographers posted Thu Nov 23 2006 20:10:18 by Administrator
How Should I Upload This Shot? posted Tue Oct 31 2006 19:37:31 by DLX737200
Which One To Upload? posted Mon Oct 23 2006 20:08:52 by Acontador
How Do I Upload Pictures? posted Mon Oct 23 2006 14:22:36 by Wrighbrothers
Upload Help - Airline Confusing Me. posted Mon Oct 23 2006 00:15:58 by Jorge1812
Format / Size For Upload posted Fri Oct 13 2006 18:49:23 by LH526
Third A320 For 4M, Which To Upload? posted Sun Oct 8 2006 02:45:00 by NicolasRubio
Should I Upload These...? posted Sat Oct 7 2006 07:03:42 by Homm
Should I Upload This, Or Not? posted Fri Oct 6 2006 15:29:02 by Raptors
Too Scared To Upload posted Wed Oct 4 2006 22:33:12 by 9V