Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Photo Rejection Issue...  
User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2384 times:

Recently I submitted a photo of an F-16 taken at an air show in Rhode Island U.S.A.. The photo was rejected for "BADINFO". After going over the photo several times, confirming the registration and comparing this photo to the only other one of this registration in the database, I could find no information discrepancy. So, I re-submitted the photo kindly but specifically requesting a personal message from the screener clarifying the "BADINFO" rejection should the photo being rejected again. After patiently waiting another 5-6 days for the photo to be reviewed, it was rejected again for a different reason. This time it was rejected for "BADINFO/BADEXPOSURE". Furthermore no personal message from the screener was provided.

Subsequently, I appealed the photo Johan explaining the situation and was hoping for some sort of guidance or explanation regarding this inconsistency in the screening process. After several more days I received another computer generated standard email response stating the same information furnished in previous rejections.

How can a photo be rejected twice for two different reasons?
Is there a set of standards used by screeners to review photos?
Why wasn't my personal request for clarification from the screeners or you granted?
Why was my Repeal to Johan met with the same cold computer-generated response?

I am normally very patient and understanding when it comes to rejections, I understand that standards are high. As a paying customer of this website, I don't expect any special privileges when it comes to getting photos accepted. However, I do expect a higher level of customer service than I have received. Not only do I pay membership dues, but I visit advertiser’s links and constantly promote this site to members of the aviation community.

Any advice on this situation would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks!!

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2376 times:

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Thread starter):
How can a photo be rejected twice for two different reasons?

Different screeners have different monitors and different eyes.

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Thread starter):
Is there a set of standards used by screeners to review photos?

Generally yes but see above

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Thread starter):
Why wasn't my personal request for clarification from the screeners or you granted?

Because they are very busy people

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Thread starter):
Why was my Repeal to Johan met with the same cold computer-generated response?

See above

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Thread starter):
I am normally very patient and understanding when it comes to rejections, I understand that standards are high. As a paying customer of this website, I don't expect any special privileges when it comes to getting photos accepted.

Then why did you start this thread?

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Thread starter):
However, I do expect a higher level of customer service than I have received.

Nobody cares.

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Thread starter):
Not only do I pay membership dues,

And that entitles you to what special privelages exactly?

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Thread starter):
but I visit advertiser’s links and constantly promote this site to members of the aviation community.

You should feel so proud of yourself, but again, nobody cares.

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Thread starter):
Any advice on this situation would be greatly appreciated!

If you actually want anybody to take you seriously, stop bitching and post the rejected photo.


User currently offlineJAT74L From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 618 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2364 times:

DLKAPA - Priceless!!

Regards

John



I like trains just as much as planes but trains don't like the Atlantic!
User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 2360 times:

Should I just ignore your response? Do you have a n y t h i n g positive to add?

User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2355 times:

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 3):
Should I just ignore your response? Do you have a n y t h i n g positive to add?

Do you have anything positive to say? Show us the photo maybe then we can help you. As i said above, until you do that, you're just wasting time.


User currently onlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 5, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 2356 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hello,

The issue of the emails resulting from rejections is often discussed on this Forum. Many people complain that they are not given appropriate information to put right their rejections, and also many complain about the impersonal nature of the emails. Another factor that you can often read about is where photos are rejected for one reason, resubmitted, and then rejected subsequently for another reason. Also, the theme of screeners not correcting 'minor' mistakes in uploading that can lead to rejections, is explored often.

I think it is fair to say that most photographers here are familiar with such frustrations and the Crew have said that work is being done to improve the emails we receive. One of the biggest frustrations for us all is the inherently subjective nature of the screening process - no matter how well the rejection reasons are defined there will always be that subjective element, and when you are on the wrong end of a rejection, this can be tough. But there is no doubt that screeners do a difficult and time-consuming job, and the liaison between screeners and photographers is an area that can always be worked upon.

It can be difficult to get personal feedback on rejections - even when you ask for it through the appeals process - and I think one good function of this Forum is to post issues here and ask for guidance. Screeners do often pop up here to give their advice and guidance. So my suggestion would be to post a thread and you will usually have many questions answered.

Paul


User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2321 times:

Been waiting for ANet to come back online to make a full reply!  Smile

Thanks Paul for some insight into my original post. It's unfortunate that DLKAPA has to resort to flamebait/harsh language to get his voice heard. I hope he found some amusement in mocking me.

Unfortunately he missed the main question addressed in my original post:

How can a photo get rejected twice for two completely different reasons?
Are new screeners aware of the original reason for rejection on re-sumittals?
Do they read the "message to screeners" posted at the bottom?

Furthermore, had my original photo been rejected for "BADEXPOSURE" in the first place, I would have accepted the opinion, and moved on without objection...Lord knows I've done it before!  Smile (which is probably why I'll never be a screener!). It was the fact that it was rejected twice for two different reasons that ruffled my feathers. And a request from someone human for some sort of insight...even Johan was met with the same computer-generated response. The quality of the photo is not the issue...I think all my photos stink...that's why I would make such a terrible screener!

-JD


User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 7, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2296 times:

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 4):
Do you have anything positive to say?

And that does match to your own replies exactly how?

Quoting DLKAPA (Reply 1):
Nobody cares
...
You should feel so proud of yourself, but again, nobody cares.
...
If you actually want anybody to take you seriously, stop bitching and post the rejected photo.

Flyfisher about your badinfo rejection. You provided AF940041 as registration which is not correct. The correct reg would have been 94-0041.
A simple search would have revealed this  Wink
http://www.airliners.net/search/phot...search=94-0041&distinct_entry=true

Hope this clarifies the badinfo rejection.

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 6):
It's unfortunate that DLKAPA has to resort to flamebait/harsh language to get his voice heard. I hope he found some amusement in mocking me.

You know each to his own  Wink Sometimes you have to ignore the BS.



-
User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2268 times:

This definetly helps!  Smile

However, if you type "AF940041" into the photo submission auto complete form along with the airport code "oqu" it pulls up this photo where it says "Click here to view all photos of AF940041"
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=AF940041:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Daniel White



Is this not the same aircraft? Confused


The registration on the tail in my photo does clearly say "AF940041" *not* "94-0041".


User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2258 times:

Interestingly enough if you type AF940041 into the regular search form it doesn't pull up anything! It only pulls up the photo (above) when you type it into the autocomplete on the submission page...
The plot thickens!


User currently offlineDiezel From Netherlands, joined Oct 2002, 646 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2254 times:

The help for registrations on the photo upload page says:

"For military aircraft, list the serial in the registration field and the additional code if any in the code field. USAF and USArmy aircraft are listed with the full serial including the fiscal year, e.g. 43-12453 or 85-0035, for the US Navy use the full six-digit BuAer number, e.g. 160457."

So I guess 94-0041 is correct and AFS940041 is wrong.

Roel.



Never be afraid of what you like. (Miles Davis)
User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2251 times:

Interesting...
I never went into the help section because i didn't think I needed any. This was my first military submission. In other words when I typed in AF940041 into the autocomplete it pulls up a photo of the same aircraft. In my mind there was no question that this was the correct registration. Little did i know that this one photo is obviously an exception, or mistake. The rules have obviously changed since this photo (above) was added.


User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2199 times:

Well it seems someone has suddenly corrected this little error since my last post. AF940041 no longer references the photo shown above (ID826233) when typed into the autofill section of the photo submission page. I just wish the screeners would admit this obvious system error and accept my photo, for the original rejection was based on an autofill information error. This aircraft *was* listed under two different registrations at one time...Guess my vindication will have to be personal...like my photograph.  Smile

User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 13, posted (9 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2203 times:

The error by the screening team was that the one picture in the database listed as AF940041 slipped through. This one should have been badinfo also.

Errors can only happen where work is done  Wink



-
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...
Photo Rejection Letter posted Sun Sep 25 2005 22:16:26 by Dj737
Help With Photo Rejection (Bad Quality) posted Mon Jun 7 2004 21:10:16 by Pacallen
Sunset Photo Rejection posted Tue Nov 19 2002 08:57:14 by Airbus_A340
Advice After A Photo Rejection Email? posted Fri Mar 8 2002 03:56:30 by VS11
For Johan: Photo Acceptance Issue posted Sun Jan 21 2001 17:32:30 by Cfalk
How Do I Issue A License For Photo Use? posted Mon Feb 27 2006 21:23:17 by AndrewUber
Rejection - Any Way To Improve This Photo? posted Thu Jan 26 2006 00:44:08 by QantasA332
Quality Issue With This Photo posted Mon Nov 21 2005 01:24:18 by Viper0933
Strange Issue With Rejection posted Thu Oct 6 2005 08:10:52 by Psych
Why Did This Photo Get A Badmotive Rejection? posted Thu Feb 5 2004 01:59:15 by Q330