Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Would You Pay For Extra Rejection Info?  
User currently offlineUnattendedBag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2325 posts, RR: 1
Posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3657 times:

I had an idea after my last few rejections.

What if we were to pay (voluntarily) a little each month to receive a brief explanation as to why our photos were rejected. Instead of the usual NOA_Quality or NOA_Exposure, the screener would actually (briefly) describe why the photo was rejected, i.e. dust spot top right corner, shadow grain under the wing, photo needs a bit of CCW rotation...

I know this is what the NOA_Personal is used for, but I feel that it is grossly underused. It only leads us to posting our rejections in the forum, and most of the time I don't like having other people see my sometimes simple mistakes.

This idea of mine has not included how much an uploader would need to pay, that should be left up to Admin obviously.

your thoughts?


Slower traffic, keep right
19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offline9VSPO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3645 times:

Please make your cheques payable to C.A.S.H. and arrange postage through my e-mail address.  Big grin

User currently offlineOD720 From Lebanon, joined Feb 2003, 1924 posts, RR: 32
Reply 2, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3640 times:

Bad idea. A general idea is already given and more specifics are being discussed here in this forum.

Now people who don't pay, will start complaining here that they are not getting fair treatment.

On a technical side, who will get the royalties out of the payments? Johan or the screener who is investing the time in typing the reason?


User currently offlineUnattendedBag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2325 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3625 times:

Quoting OD720 (Reply 2):
Bad idea.

Thank you!

Quoting OD720 (Reply 2):
A general idea is already given and more specifics are being discussed here in this forum.

Sometimes I think a "general idea" is too vague. I would like it if the screener was a bit more helpful than saying "This photo is not up to A.Net standards, have a nice day".

Quoting OD720 (Reply 2):
Now people who don't pay, will start complaining here that they are not getting fair treatment.

Why would they expect fair treatment? It won't be fair at all.

Quoting OD720 (Reply 2):
On a technical side, who will get the royalties out of the payments? Johan or the screener who is investing the time in typing the reason?

That is not for me to decide. Maybe better Christmas gifts for the screeners... feed an orphan program... that's up to Johan.



Slower traffic, keep right
User currently offlinePepef From Finland, joined Oct 2002, 440 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3609 times:

I'm afraid I don't have enough money to pay for the info on all my rejections. Wouldn't it be better to bribe them into accepting our photos?  spin 

-Pepef-


User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4678 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3598 times:

Erm, how should I put this? 'No' just doesn't quite say it


For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3592 times:

Quoting UnattendedBag (Thread starter):
your thoughts?

Yes, I think YOU should pay extra for that info, i'm not going to.  Wink


User currently offlineCadet57 From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 9085 posts, RR: 30
Reply 7, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3590 times:

Quoting Pepef (Reply 4):
I'm afraid I don't have enough money to pay for the info on all my rejections. Wouldn't it be better to bribe them into accepting our photos?

regardless if it costs or not i feel that we should be given atleast a bit of info as to why it was rejected so to know what to edit in PS or w/e also would save time as opposed to posting a photo on the boards and waiting for a responce.



Doors open, right hand side, next stop is Springfield.
User currently offlineGary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3574 times:

so. Basically. You want to pay to get photos rejected on a website, DSLR ownership not take a big enough chunk out of your bank balance? You want to pay someone to tell you why your photograph is crap (according to a.net standards)

are you feeling ok?

Besides, what's this forum for? come here and you can pay me ill tell you what's wrong with it just pop the amount into my paypal. If I cant I'm sure others will


User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 42
Reply 9, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3572 times:

Although I am in favor of more info paying for it would require an extra mortgage. Big grin
With the number of uploads against the number of screeners it's obvious that there is simply no time to do this whether we start paying or not doesn't change that.

Willem



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
User currently offlineGary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3567 times:

Opens up a whole new range of possibilities,

'right we rejected your photo you wasted our time and photographers time by putting it in the que you now owe us £10!'

I would be bankrupt if I had to pay for each rejection...


User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3565 times:

Quoting UnattendedBag (Thread starter):
What if we were to pay (voluntarily) a little each month to receive a brief explanation as to why our photos were rejected.



 confused 

Then what, pay more for the tips on how to improve?


User currently offlineUnattendedBag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2325 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3565 times:

Well, Im sorry for wasting everyone's time with such a ridiculous idea. My apologies.

Please continue with the ambiguious rejection reasons.  bigthumbsup 



Slower traffic, keep right
User currently offlineGary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3563 times:

Quoting UnattendedBag (Reply 12):
Well, Im sorry for wasting everyone's time with such a ridiculous idea. My apologies.

don't worry, I got to see a bunny with a pancake on its head. I can go to sleep happy now


User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 42
Reply 14, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3549 times:

Quoting UnattendedBag (Reply 12):
Well, Im sorry for wasting everyone's time with such a ridiculous idea. My apologies.

Hehe... don't worry about it just don't post these things on Friday night Big grin



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
User currently offlineLennymuir From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2002, 434 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3542 times:

Quoting UnattendedBag (Thread starter):
...and most of the time I don't like having other people see my sometimes simple mistakes...

Did you guys all miss that quote?

That's sad, but true.

It's all very well being taunted to show your rejected photograph in here, but it doesn't suit everyone.

It probably explains why a lot of people don't, or can't, ask for help.

[Edited 2005-11-12 01:12:27]

User currently offlineUnattendedBag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2325 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3532 times:

Quoting Gary2880 (Reply 10):
I would be bankrupt if I had to pay for each rejection...

I don't recall stating that we should pay for "each" rejection. That would drive everyone broke! A simple fee of a few quid/bucks/wan per month for a little added info. Some users think paying $5 for 'first class' membership is a worthwhile cause. I think a little added rejection info might be a worthwhile cause.

Quoting Lennymuir (Reply 15):
It probably explains why a lot of people don't, or can't, ask for help.

I have posted rejections in the past. The thing is, when I upload a photo, I believe I have corrected every known deficiency from being too dark, removing dust spots and making the photo level. It is in my eyes, acceptable and meets The Standards.



Slower traffic, keep right
User currently offlineAnder From Spain, joined Jan 2005, 367 posts, RR: 21
Reply 17, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3512 times:

I think the problem here is not money, it's more about the time screeners can spend on each photo, so giving money would not solve the problem at all.

On the other hand, I don't have any problem with people seeing my rejected photos. It is very instructive to see all kinds of rejections. Besides, there is a lot of expert photogs in the forum who somehow do the job that screeners simply can't afford to do.

Ander



Born to tri.
User currently offlineAnder From Spain, joined Jan 2005, 367 posts, RR: 21
Reply 18, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3512 times:

I think the problem here is not money, it's more about the time screeners can spend on each photo, so giving money would not solve the problem at all.

On the other hand, I don't have any problem with people seeing my rejected photos. It is very instructive to see all kinds of rejections. Besides, there is a lot of expert photogs in the forum who somehow do the job that screeners simply can't afford to do.

Ander



Born to tri.
User currently offlineGmonney From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2159 posts, RR: 20
Reply 19, posted (8 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3512 times:

Well i think if we had less rejections then we could put a special note in every rejection... but if you look at the number of photo's that we get, its simply impossible to inform... i think this is why the forum was intorduced... you can ask questions for FREE... or wait guys, someone wants to pay for your advice!

Grant



Drive it like you stole it!
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...
What Do You Pay For Sensor Cleaning? posted Mon Oct 4 2004 18:33:13 by Sleekjet
Canon-Nikon: Which One Would You Go For? posted Fri Jul 26 2002 07:42:15 by MightyFalcon
How Much Do You Pay For Picture Development? posted Sat Jul 20 2002 14:09:07 by GRZ-AIR
What Would You Use This Lens For? posted Tue Jan 20 2004 03:51:09 by Maiznblu_757
Would You Charge A Magazine For A Photo? posted Thu Feb 14 2002 13:47:28 by Hkg_clk
What Monitor Do You Use For Editing? posted Mon Nov 13 2006 23:58:24 by Airplanenut
Would You Buy It? posted Sat Aug 26 2006 11:08:33 by Scbriml
Would A.net Go For This Motive? posted Sun Jul 16 2006 14:03:08 by Sulman
What Focal Lenght Do You Use For Cockpit Photos? posted Fri Jun 30 2006 05:38:15 by AirSpare
Would You Buy A NIkon D50/70 From This Seller? posted Thu Jun 1 2006 15:01:46 by Airevents