CYEGsTankers From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 245 posts, RR: 1 Posted (10 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2336 times:
Not singling out any of the screeners or screeners in training, but as a whole, why are you boys tightening the reins again? Like really, I thought about sending this into the forums a little while ago when there was a ridiculous spree of rejections for "Bad Image Quality". We all as uploaders can see that someone wants "Absolute Perfection" again. Lets not make this a
My 2 cents.
CYEGsTankers From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 245 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (10 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 2268 times:
Screening for 6 months, one year or five years. Does it matter? All of a sudden the appeal range has grown again. I'm not complaining about rejections I've had. I try to fix and re-upload them with the advice given instead of waiting for the appeal to go through. It's just when the appeals grow the section for uploads triples all of a sudden, thus creating that long screening process. So, my point is, with the sudden flood of uploads, is the screening of a photo looked at for flaws more closely and more susceptible to rejection? IE: the scape goat "Bad Image Quality"?
Matt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 44
Reply 4, posted (10 years 5 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2256 times:
Get over it.
I just had three pictures rejected. But at least I was offered a few tips.
So what did I do?
I followed their advice, made the changes and re-submitted them.
Now I'll go on with my life and see what happens. If they get accepted, great. If not, oh well. Life goes on.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe the reason the rejection rate is so high is because the subjects you are submitting are a dime-a-dozen-like American MD-80's and Southwest 737's?
I won't even TRY to submit those because I know it's pointless.
If you want to get in the database, then you better have the best of the best quality or take some really unique pictures, or find some vintage ones, where the standards are lower.
And if that doesn't work, and you really, REALLY need to have your pictures online, then find a web hosting service (I use http://www.angelcities.com) and post pictures there and include HTML or hotlinking in your text posts so that everyone can still see your work.
Fergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 52
Reply 7, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2167 times:
Can we stop the bitching please and making the screeners in training the scape goats here. I've had more than my fair share of rejections and thats just made me try to improve the next lot of photos or use my PS better. Of course is anoying but you get on with it. I see what the rejection is about' and if I can improve it, if not, no big deal! One example is on my very first day out photographing and I got a 727 rejected for bad quality. After a few weeks later when I had got to grips with PS I resubmitted it and was accepted. I didn't cry and winge when it got rejected! I tried to learn more on how I could improve the photo to a.net standards!
This forum is about helping each other with problems. If you have a rejection then post it so that we can all help in making it a better picture, if thats possible. Standards in a.net are high, and rightly so. There is nothing worse than viewing a bad quality photo.
Jid From Barbados, joined Dec 2004, 977 posts, RR: 30
Reply 9, posted (10 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2140 times:
I always check the rejection reason to see how I can improve my shots. I can't remember having an image quality rejection that I would not agree with. The standards for screening do not appear to have changed to me over the past 10 months. There are always going to be times when you don't agree with the screener decision but you will find that they are nearly always right.
G7EPN is back after 15 years! Operating all Bands 80mtrs -> 70cms QRZ DX