Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3077 posts, RR: 53 Posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3758 times:
My apologies if I am posting incorrectly, but I am unsure who I should be contacting about this. I thought it may be best in 'Site Related', but then thought other photographers may want to see this in case it is relevant to them.
Overnight I received a strange email of concern to me. It informed me that I had a photo rejected for 'NOA_Error'. The email said that this photo had been rejected because "During or after uploading an error had occured........due to incorrect or not unique filename or to a server problem." It later went on to say that if the filename was okay - which it was - then it was probably an A.net problem. If the latter, I was asked to upload the file again.
In fact, the photo in question had been accepted on to the database earlier in the day. What is most concerning is that the photo has appeared in the 'Rejected Photos' section of 'My Photos', and my number of rejections has gone up by one. When I say 'appeared', it is actually the small red cross, instead of a photo, but the number of rejections has increased.
Evidently this is some problem with the technical aspect of things - way beyond my understanding. But rejection ratios are something I do understand, so I am not keen to have my statistics affected by a clear technical error.
GPHOTO From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 840 posts, RR: 21
Reply 1, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3750 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
Henks stated somewhere that there is work going on and that there could be strange problems pop up occasionally. I guess this is one of those and if so you'll just have to accept it. It's the A.net equivalent of roadworks, annoying but essential.
I think you are right, Jim, that it is 'one of those things'. I recognise that technical glitches will occur, but given the way the site uses rejection statistics to calculate the number of upload slots available to the photographer, it is not acceptable to have the possibility that rejection statistics will be inflated by rejections that don't exist. We all know how hard it is to avoid rejections from screeners, never mind dodgy technology .
I do hope the Crew will be able to sort this one out and rectify any consequences for rejection numbers counting against anyone where this has occurred.
RG828 From Brazil, joined Jan 2004, 582 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3538 times:
Quoting Willo (Reply 2): This is in "site related" but has received no response since it was posted on Tuesday:
Photo Upload Errors (by RG828 Oct 4 2005 in Site Related)
maybe you'll have more luck getting an answer?
Quoting Psych (Reply 5): It is a shame that there have been no other responses to this and the above linked thread in the Site Related Forum.
I posted that in site-related - should have posted it here!
Glad to see it has'nt happened only to me. Actually, I'm sad its happened to others too!
I'm really just curious as to what causes the files to get corrupted to the point that the screeners cant process it, but I still view them perfectly in my rejections page.
I dont know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everyone
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3267 posts, RR: 50
Reply 10, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3530 times:
Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 7): I'm sure you can come up with something more constuctive than that...
All I'm saying Tim is given time, I'm sure he will get an answer. Maybe someone is actually looking into what happened so they can give an educated response? When the crew are spread out around the globe I imagine waiting on email responses from different time zones can take a while.
I prefer accurate responses even if they take longer.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3077 posts, RR: 53
Reply 11, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3506 times:
Hello RG828 - I think maybe you were correct to post in the Site Related Forum. I posted here partly because I felt this was an issue worthy of bringing to other photographers' attention. I wonder whether there is a slightly different issue going on for the 2 of us: in fact, there did not seem to be any issue for me regarding the filename, and the screeners had no problem processing the photo. I had already received an email some hours before telling me the photo in question had been accepted. But for some reason it then remained in the list on my 'Upload Page' as being 'in screening', but the photo wasn't there - just a box with a red cross in it. And then it became a 'rejection'.
Hopefully someone with technical expertise will understand what type of glitch this is and be able to rectify it. It was more for me about the fact that one photo could be counted in your statistics as an addition and also a rejection at the same time.
I recognise patience was never a virtue for me, but maybe you read a meaning in my statement that I had not intended, Jeff. I was pointing no finger of blame at anyone. I recognise there could be all kinds of legitimate reasons why no-one has responded, not least of which is that the guys who know the answer are beavering away trying to rectify the issue. I used the word 'shame' because a lack of response over a long period - and over 12 hours in threads at A.net means the thread is dropping well down the list of active threads - left me feeling there was a decreasing likelihood of getting a response. I don't need an explanation - I just want to know that the issue has been brought to the attention of the right person/people and someone is on the case - then, hopefully, we can forget about it and get on with our lives or, if we haven't got one, continue to look at photos here and read the forums.
Fergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 51
Reply 12, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3492 times:
It's anoying really that you haven't had any real answer to this, even when someone posted in site related. However I'm not surprised when you consider just how quiet that forum is now. With all the threads being locked for no real reason, ok some are justified, but others I can't see the reason, with that and all the bashing that some of the screeners get, which is bound to happen when you raise the acceptance bar, I'm not justifying it but saying that's what will happen when you raise the standards. It is unfortunate when we can't discuss things in a civilized manner, I for one, am guilty of that, but I have aplogized to the relevant people. This forum used to be the best one going, it used to be a hive of activity with photoshop tips being thrown around like confetti. Now it seems to be lifeless with the odd person popping in. I hope we can get things back to whe they were! Sorry if I went off subject a bit Paul.
Mr Spaceman From Canada, joined Mar 2001, 2787 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3473 times:
>> Paul, I hope you get another email from the A.net staff telling you that your acceptance ratio has been changed back to what it should be ..... along with an explanation of what caused the glitch.
You stated ......
Quoting Psych (Thread starter): When I say 'appeared', it is actually the small red cross, instead of a photo, but the number of rejections has increased.
Regarding problems like this ..... I had a Bell 427 sideview photo rejected back on Sept 2, 05, however the photo that was shown in my rejected photos stats isn't even my photo, but my rejected photos stats still went up!!! Instead it is a photo of the cockpit of a Bell 47 that was taken by someone named Benedict Schafer ..... and the wrong shot is still there now, almost a month after I let the screeners know about the problem. I still wonder if the reasons for the photo rejection were for my photo or the other guys?
So, if there's a Benedict Schafer out there .... your Bell 47 cockpit photo from last month was rejected for the following reasons: NOA_qualityNOA_grainy..... incase you were wondering.
Hepkat From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 2341 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (10 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3434 times:
I apologize for not having seen or noticed this thread earlier. Sometimes it's quite a challenge to stay on top of everything that needs to be taken care of, however you can always help by sending an email to firstname.lastname@example.org whenever such issues arise.
Paul, I'll look into this and get back to you soon with an answer.
JumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2482 posts, RR: 38
Reply 19, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3220 times:
Quoting Henks (Reply 16): Rejections because of errors should not affect your rejection statistics any more.
Is it possible to also not count (INFO rejections ) to our stats also.?
At the end of the day if we get an INFO rejection or category rejection its not that the pic is bad its just that we missed something or did something wrong at upload.
Just a thought .