Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Later Y'all.......  
User currently offlineBIGDEN From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 147 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2570 times:

Hey!

To the many of you I have met over the years I say thanks for your help in this great hobby.

Hope to meet many of you in SXM.

My patience has run out.

BIGDEN


Never met a 747 I didn't like!
36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2569 times:

Quoting BIGDEN (Thread starter):
My patience has run out.

Patience for what?


User currently offlineN62NA From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4411 posts, RR: 6
Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2557 times:

Maybe he's tired of having his photos rejected. I must admit, it seems like there's a little red star next to my name because no matter what I upload, it gets rejected!

User currently offlineBjcc From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 327 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2549 times:

Oh well...If thats the reason, it had to start happening...If things don't improve soon, I may well be following.

User currently offlineWhyWhyZed From Canada, joined Jan 2005, 914 posts, RR: 16
Reply 4, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2519 times:

Why don't you post your rejects here, so that we can help you out? It's a much more mature solution then hanging up your shoes.

- Jason DePodesta


User currently offlineBjcc From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 327 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2490 times:

Because Whywhtzed, when a photo is rejected (as my last one was) for bad info, when the info as that of the auto fill function, I really don't need to a second opinion.

And

When a photo is rejected, foir angle, when everything except the runway, which is on a hill is vertical and level...I don't need a second opinion.

And as for so called quality rejections? yes, posting them here, MAY get an answer, but then as the ONLY person who knows why they rejected in was a screener, it MAY not.

In other words, rejections are fine, when either, there is a good reason, or the reason is made clear.

Rejections that are unjustified, or impossible to understand are really not helpful for anyone. 'Hanging up ones boots' is in effect the only last resort, given how poor the situation is becoming.


User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2457 times:

Cya on the flipside.

User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2413 times:

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 5):
Because Whywhtzed, when a photo is rejected (as my last one was) for bad info, when the info as that of the auto fill function, I really don't need to a second opinion.

I had that happen to me (not here, other site) I emailed the screeners and the photo was added and the issue resolved.

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 5):
When a photo is rejected, foir angle, when everything except the runway, which is on a hill is vertical and level...I don't need a second opinion.

Again, appeal or email the screeners and they will explain the rejection or it will get accepted on appeal.

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 5):
Rejections that are unjustified, or impossible to understand are really not helpful for anyone. 'Hanging up ones boots' is in effect the only last resort, given how poor the situation is becoming.

Funny, but I see many pics being accepted from good photogs here. So there is a way to take a good picture and get it accepted. So instead of whining get back out and shoot and keep trying, if not. Take care.


User currently offlineA388 From Netherlands Antilles, joined May 2001, 9708 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2403 times:

I know the feeling as most of my photos get rejected too but I keep trying and improving on them. Combined with the great help and tips I get here on this forum, I see more of my photos getting accepted, even rejected photos so I just keep going. I came to the point of being desperate, angry and hopeless too, but I kept and still keep going... Don't give up and keep working on the skills. It will improve over time.

I have to admit that rejections because of photo/angle is already in the database more than twice (especially with airports that have a lot of aircraft spotters) and rejections because of jagged edges while you can find photos with similar jaggies in the database, yes, it bothers me but it doesn't make me stop from continuing with aircraft photography. I just keep going and now I'm seeing an improvement in my photo acceptence rate. Only bummer now is that my camera broke and I can't get it fixed in time before I go to AMS on vacation, so I'm looking at ways to buy a new camera if my pocket can afford it....

Regards,

Roger

[Edited 2006-02-21 23:46:40]

User currently offlineJFKTOWERFAN From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, RR: 15
Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2403 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 5):
Because Whywhtzed, when a photo is rejected (as my last one was) for bad info, when the info as that of the auto fill function, I really don't need to a second opinion.

Could you provide the details so I can look into it, and maybe provide a better answer?

Corey



C'mon Man
User currently offlineBjcc From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 327 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2403 times:

NIKV69

Thanks for the advice. Perhaps I ought to bin the 1800 photos I have on here, and the 2 years worth of effort and nip out and take some better ones then!

On the other hand, instead of having to email screeners, why not solve the issue in the first instance by:

1. Not rejecting for spurious reasons.

and

2. When rejecting give a proper reason, not a vague catch all called 'quality'. which means nothing.

For the 2 years or so I have been submitting photos to this site, I have avoided getting involved in these discussions. I figured they achieved little. Now the table has turned, the rejections and reasons are achieving little.

The standards are rightly high, and should be, but there is only so high even the best photographers can jump. The alternative is to jump, not as high, but ship. If enough of us are forced down that route by frustration, this site will cease to exist. In other words, too higher standard can end up being self defeating.

Corey.

It's in the appeal queue, a chipmunk, G-BARS.

BernieC

[Edited 2006-02-21 23:43:17]

User currently offlineBIGDEN From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 147 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2395 times:

Hey!

Why does the word "whining" always come up when somebody has a complaint? Is there a REMOTE possibility they could be correct? Is there a "brownie point" system for "non whiners?"

BIGDEN



Never met a 747 I didn't like!
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2363 times:

Quoting BIGDEN (Reply 11):

Why does the word "whining" always come up when somebody has a complaint? Is there a REMOTE possibility they could be correct? Is there a "brownie point" system for "non whiners?"

No.  crying 

Regards



Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2354 times:

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 10):
Thanks for the advice. Perhaps I ought to bin the 1800 photos I have on here, and the 2 years worth of effort and nip out and take some better ones then!

On the other hand, instead of having to email screeners, why not solve the issue in the first instance by:

1. Not rejecting for spurious reasons.

I would think a veteran here wouldn't subscribe to the conspiracy theory that seems to be everyones argument as to why their pics get rejected here. It is true that the bar has been raised here, and this is fine but to infer that pictures are getting rejected because of "spurious" reasons is not true. You and everyone's pictures get the same shake, if they get rejected it is because a screener saw something, not because they are deceitful and want to reject your pictures and as always you have the option of appeal.

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 10):
2. When rejecting give a proper reason, not a vague catch all called 'quality'. which means nothing.

The quality rejection is a little broad but you can always email the screening team or post it here and one of the screeners are always more than willing to discuss it.

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 10):
The standards are rightly high, and should be, but there is only so high even the best photographers can jump. The alternative is to jump, not as high, but ship. If enough of us are forced down that route by frustration, this site will cease to exist. In other words, too higher standard can end up being self defeating.

LOLOL, I almost fell off my chair! I know the ol "site is in trouble" and "cease to exist" mindset is prevelant and shared by many spotters I know, but believe me this site was here before you came and will be here long after you leave.


User currently offlineJAT74L From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 618 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2350 times:

Hi Dennis,

Sorry you've decided to leave. Guess I'll talk to you soon where "Willy in the rainbow" lives!!

Regards

John



I like trains just as much as planes but trains don't like the Atlantic!
User currently offlineJFKTOWERFAN From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2324 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 10):
It's in the appeal queue, a chipmunk, G-BARS.

This is a case where the autocomplete is wrong. And before everyone jumps up and down and stamps their feet, here is why. The autocomplete is based on info provided from other photos. The three other photos of this aircraft have the wrong version because the photogs did not not use the drop down menus instead they entered information on their own. Yes they were accepted, no they should not have been in the first place, but let it go it happens all the time and that's what the Editors are here for.

Please don't hesitate to send an email to editors@airliners.net when you(anyone) has this type of problem and we will get it corrected.

Corey



C'mon Man
User currently offlineBjcc From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 327 posts, RR: 4
Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2310 times:

NIKV69

I'm sorry, I'll read that again (You would miss the humour in that statement, not being English!).

Ok, I've read what I said again. Did I say anything about a conspiracy? No..I didn't. Please read what's written, not what you want to read.

Sperious reasons, means wrong reasons. It does not indicate a conspircy, it indicates a wrong or incorrect reason. Such a reason could be, where the auto fill function provides the details of the aircraft, and the photo is then rejected on the grounds of info, when this site provided that info.

With me so far? good.

Right, this bar, not only are we trying to jump at it, we are doing so blind. ie, get a rejection on quality, and guess what, you have no idea what that quality issue is.

There are a large number of people who are equally perplexed by this issue, and have been for some time. If we all emailed the screeners, or appealed, the system would grind to a halt. It is therefore a flawed system.

A better answer, like I suggested, had you bothered to look at the words on the screen, is to give an accurate reason for rejection. If it's underexposed, then say so etc. There are already a number of rejection catagories, its just a matter of expanding them.

Finally, I did not say this site was in trouble, what I said was that if enough people leave or cease to submit, then the site will cease to exist. That is logic, not a mindset. It is also an indication that there is a mesure of frustration being experienced. If the first statement in this thread is that of someone who has had enough of it, then that alone shows there to be a problem, again, not a mind set, a very real issue. I certainly hope that things improve, quickly.

I do hope you have read what's written this time, not what you thought was written.


User currently offlineBjcc From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 327 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days ago) and read 2302 times:

Corey,

Thank you for looking.

I have checked the UK's CAA database, and I'm not sure what part of the information is wrong.

It is a DHC-1 Chipmunk Mk22. Thats what it also says on the 3 photos of this aircraft in the database?

Perhaps you could shed some light???????

This link may help (if it works)

http://www.caa.co.uk/application.asp...detailnosummary&fullregmark=G-BARS

Bernie C

[Edited 2006-02-22 00:44:08]

User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days ago) and read 2286 times:

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 10):
1. Not rejecting for spurious reasons.

That is what you said.

Here is Webster's definition.

Main Entry: spu·ri·ous
Pronunciation: 'spyur-E-&s
Function: adjective
Etymology: Late Latin & Latin; Late Latin spurius false, from Latin, of illegitimate birth, from spurius, noun, bastard
1 : of illegitimate birth : BASTARD
2 : outwardly similar or corresponding to something without having its genuine qualities : FALSE
3 a : of falsified or erroneously attributed origin : FORGED b : of a deceitful nature or quality

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 16):
Ok, I've read what I said again. Did I say anything about a conspiracy? No..I didn't. Please read what's written, not what you want to read[/quote

If you are going to words I would check what they mean first. I am not sure I understand what you mean by "wrong reasons" If you are inferring that the screener made a mistake and rejected your picture for a "wrong reason" then an appeal would be the way to go.


[quote=Bjcc,reply=16]where the auto fill function provides the details of the aircraft, and the photo is then rejected on the grounds of info, when this site provided that info.

If you read the auto-fill info you would see that a quick change or email to a screener would have cleared up the issue. It is not a product of your "rejected for wrong reason" belief as you are so quick to jump to.

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 16):
There are a large number of people who are equally perplexed by this issue, and have been for some time. If we all emailed the screeners, or appealed, the system would grind to a halt. It is therefore a flawed system.

This is just more of your poor attitude and defeat-us mentalilty. If more people did email the screeners and ask questions they would understand why their pics got rejected and not believe that the system is flawed like you do.

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 16):
Finally, I did not say this site was in trouble, what I said was that if enough people leave or cease to submit, then the site will cease to exist. That is logic, not a mindset. It is also an indication that there is a mesure of frustration being experienced. If the first statement in this thread is that of someone who has had enough of it, then that alone shows there to be a problem, again, not a mind set, a very real issue. I certainly hope that things improve, quickly.

It is most certaintly not logic, you want to make it logic but the facts point to exactly the opposite of your claim. When you say "If enough people cease to submit" you are doing yourself a disservice because the opposite has been true. Your hypothetical situation has zero chance of happening. If some want to leave and cease to upload that is their right and I respect it but trust me it won't affect the site.


User currently offlineBjcc From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 327 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days ago) and read 2265 times:

NIK69V

Please re read your supplied definition. If you are not able to read English, I am sure you will find a friend (or maybe not) who can help you.

'3 a : of falsified or erroneously attributed origin'

Note the word erroneously.

Sorted? good.

Next point. The other 3 photos were accepted. There is no reason to suppose the info is wrong. In fact it is correct, technically. Just as the alternative is. So, having looked at 3 accepted versions, why should I presume they are incorrect? Afterall, they were accpeted.


Defeat us, defeat them mentality. No, an example of you not reading. I was led to understand that the American Education System was one of the best in the world. Perhaps you didn't take advantage of it?


Logic....Yes..... The art or science of reasoning. If everyone stops submitting the site ceases to exist. I see no flaw in that logic. What you are talking about is probablity. A subtle difference, not! (thats called ironny, not its not like tinny, but made of iron)

Deals with that I hope.


User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 5 months 3 days ago) and read 2252 times:

Quoting Bjcc (Reply 19):
Logic....Yes..... The art or science of reasoning. If everyone stops submitting the site ceases to exist. I see no flaw in that logic. What you are talking about is probablity. A subtle difference, not! (thats called ironny, not its not like tinny, but made of iron)

Ok, I will allow you to indulge in your fantasy but saying that if everyone stops uploading the site will cease to exist is like saying if my Mother had a dick she would be my Father. It will never happen.  footinmouth 


User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2236 times:

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 18):
If you read the auto-fill info you would see that a quick change or email to a screener would have cleared up the issue. It is not a product of your "rejected for wrong reason" belief as you are so quick to jump to.

How is an uploaded supposed to know that the auto-fill is wrong if it all looks sorted and the other shots in the DB have the same info Nick?

Instead the photog follows the rules, uploads a great shot, waits 2 weeks and gets it rejected and gets a ratio hit for doing NOTHING wrong.


User currently offlineJFKTOWERFAN From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2215 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Bernie I have answered your question here:
Ask Your "bad_info" Questions Here (by JFKTOWERFAN Feb 22 2006 in Aviation Photography)

Corey



C'mon Man
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2195 times:

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 21):
How is an uploaded supposed to know that the auto-fill is wrong if it all looks sorted and the other shots in the DB have the same info Nick?

Instead the photog follows the rules, uploads a great shot, waits 2 weeks and gets it rejected and gets a ratio hit for doing NOTHING wrong.



Quoting JFKTOWERFAN (Reply 15):
This is a case where the autocomplete is wrong. And before everyone jumps up and down and stamps their feet, here is why. The autocomplete is based on info provided from other photos. The three other photos of this aircraft have the wrong version because the photogs did not not use the drop down menus instead they entered information on their own. Yes they were accepted, no they should not have been in the first place, but let it go it happens all the time and that's what the Editors are here for.

Please don't hesitate to send an email to editors@airliners.net when you(anyone) has this type of problem and we will get it corrected.

The problem is easily fixed if you take the time to email the proper people and discuss the matter instead of rushing for the photo-av forum and telling everyone your pic got rejected for a "spurious" reason.  footinmouth 

As for the two week wait, the queue is large, that is life. As for the ratio hit he will get the pic accepted after he makes the correction and he will cancel out the rejection.


User currently offlineBIGDEN From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 147 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (8 years 5 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 2184 times:

Hey!

A few last words:

NOTE FROM SCREENER:

"Denis - We are picky for a reason. We accept only the best photos. Your photo in question had 2 things going in your favor - 1 being the rainbow. 2 being taken at a fabulous location. Neither of these reasons guaranteed a successful submission. This photo is off-center and not very good quality wise. Please, allow us to be picky. If we were not picky - there would be tons of crap photos on our site. Thank you - and above all - keep submitting your photos. You have a great eye for airplane photography !! "


REPLY:

"Hey!

Thanks for the note. Too bad I don't agree with your criticism.

Photography is supposed to entertain. Aviation photography should provide the viewer with an experience and sight they may never see in person.

The site consistently overlooks these factors and does not allow a great deal of expression, dwelling on technical issues instead . There is a happy medium that could be achieved bringing some sort of emotional factor to the process.

The rejected shot would not work if centered. Quality is good enough for thousands of views on JP.

As for allowing you to be picky...no problem, but not with any more of my shots."

Enough said.

BIGDEN



Never met a 747 I didn't like!
25 JeffM : Absolutely. Actually more then enough. I laugh when people post "good byes". If you can't hack it, C-ya.
26 NIKV69 : As usual you (Like so many) lose sight of the fact this is not a Democracy. They accept pics based on their criteria. We don't have a vote and they a
27 StealthZ : Only kind of.. photos are hosted for free but discussing the issues costs money!! Don't forget that A.net may be hosting the photos for free.. A.net
28 Post contains images N178UA : Hi Denis Really enjoyed your SXM snaps! (From brand x site) Any chance you will be in SXM in July. Hope to meet you Sam
29 BIGDEN : Hey Sam! Yes, in July. I have an invite to the opening of the new Princess Juliana. I go every 2 months and certainly would enjoy visiting with you. C
30 Post contains images BA747-436 : Looking foreward to seeing more of you on the 'Other Side' Denis - Dan
31 Post contains images NonRevKing : Like you did here...then at JP...now back here? We'll be honored to have you at the "copysite" D man... B
32 Chris78cpr : LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL You the man B!!!!
33 Post contains images ChrisH : ROFLMAO
34 Post contains images BA747-436 : Hmmm it would seem someones been oWned.
35 Post contains images JeffM : Never made a post like this. Left here once because of a disagreement with one of the moderators. Left Brand X forever. An utter waste of Time Brian.
36 Administrator : Alright then, later BIGDEN. You're always welcome back if you change your mind. Regards, Johan
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...
Any Chance At All To Get This Accepted? posted Thu Dec 14 2006 21:34:28 by Aloges
For All You Pentax Users New K10D! posted Thu Sep 14 2006 00:53:47 by RomeoKC10FE
Copyright Story To Top All Others.. posted Tue Sep 12 2006 17:49:36 by Airlinelover
To All Frankfurt Spotters! posted Wed Aug 23 2006 14:46:03 by Lufthansi
My First Mag Cover A Thanks To All posted Tue Aug 15 2006 13:50:20 by JumboJim747
One Year & 201 Days Later........ posted Tue Aug 8 2006 21:39:15 by Rsmith6621a
Do These Have Any Chance At All? Both Taken At MAN posted Sun Jun 18 2006 21:12:18 by BradWray
Att. All: Another Illegal Photo Usage posted Wed May 17 2006 17:32:08 by Photolppt
Our All Pics Used By Saturn Medishop In Dresden posted Fri Apr 28 2006 17:50:28 by Jorge1812
Calling On All LAX Spotters posted Fri Apr 28 2006 16:03:21 by Singapore_Air