Alphasierra From Australia, joined Aug 2001, 34 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1562 times:
I would be very interested in the replies from screeners. I sympathise with you and hope I dont find myself in the same situation. I hope that potential A.netters do not read these postings and are subsequently put off the idea of posting on A.net.
LGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1541 times:
Yes, because, as I say I don't blame anyone, I think the screeners do a wonderful job and if they think the photo looks OK then they pass it over I am just suprised at the gulf between the number accepted by the screeners and the ones accepted by Johan
Granite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5551 posts, RR: 65 Reply 3, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1546 times:
I will hold my hand up and say that I have screened some of your pics.
Some I have rejected and some I have accepted and passed on to Johan. The ones I have passed on to Johan would have been acceptable to my eyes.
Johan obviously had a different view on them.
Did you say that your pics were on CD?
I mentioned this before but you never replied.....if they are on CD, I am willing to have a play around with the pics and let you see the results. If you agree and send me the CD, I will copy and return ASAP or if you leave it with me I will 'process' all your pictures to my best ability, save and burn to CD and send back.
Don't feel bad, your pics are pretty good..........and I know what I am talking about
LGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1532 times:
Yes some of my pics are from CD, I am happy to send you CD to let you have a look at them, sounds good. Not all the photos are from CD's so you wont be able to mess around with some of them but I have a few that are
Sukhoi From Sweden, joined May 2006, 371 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1500 times:
I think that this illustrates well that Johan wont give the screeners the capability to upload shots directly. If in their opinion the screeners thought these were "acceptable" shots (Probably some marginal ones in their too) and he rejects 99% of them its not going to happen any time soon.
Just shows that the addition of the screeners really hasnt helped the overall running of the site in the upload process for acceptable pictures.
Screener2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1506 times:
On the contrary, the time saved for Johan is huge. I think I reject somewhere between 60 and 80% of the photos I screen (I expect other screeners are about the same), and that means that Johan only needs to view a fraction of the number of pics that come in. Of course, he gets the hard ones - the ones that we might ponder over for several minutes, deciding, "Yes or No", and finally saying "yes". We generally like to give the benefit of the doubt.
Just to give you an idea, I spend on average about 1 minute per picture (including load times, but I have a very fast connection). Many are easy - 5-10 seconds is enough. Some borderline cases I have to think about for 5 minutes or more. As Johan gets a lot of our borderline cases, he probably spends even more time on average than we do.
It is also possible that, apart from Johan's desire to raise the bar in accordance to advances in commonly available photographic and scanning technology, he may also be simply rejecting the worst of what he sees. Since he only sees the pictures that have passed pre-screening, that raises the bar significantly, and all the borderline pics that the screeners pass automatically become the bottom of the pile, even though they were better than 75% of the other pre-screening submissions.
I also think that over the past few months, the number of daily uploads has risen to the point that no single person could possibly screen them all on his own, unless he did it as a full-time job 12 hours per day, 7 days per week.
Sukhoi From Sweden, joined May 2006, 371 posts, RR: 8 Reply 8, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1465 times:
Thanks for your response.
Sorry should have made myself clearer, I was talking about pictures that you had passed. I do understand that you have cut down on all the "crap" as Gary puts it that Johan would normally have seen.
I totally agree with your statement about the number of uploads on the increase, looking at the upload page I think there are 3000 odd pictures in the queue again, presuemably most of this have been screened. (Yes I know the site is falling apart around Johan's ears so he hasnt had time to sort them)
What I was worried about was that the ammount of shots you guys had passed on to Johan that he rejected. From previous threads he had issued a tougher set of quality rules for you guys to go by, so why is he still rejecting so many shots that you have passed? Can you give me an idea of how many borderline shots you pass through as opposed to how many okay shots you pass through, 50 / 50??
Just trying to get an idea of what Johan sees and what his taste is like
Screener6 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1458 times:
Just a suggestion, until you improve your rate of acceptance, why don't you upload fewer photos at a time. Scanning 76 photo is a lot of work and must have taken a lot of your time. Personally I feel bad when someone new uploads a large amount of photos and I have to reject them all due to poor quality.
Personally when I upload my own photos, I still only do 10-20 at time. Pick out some of your very best photos and really work on refining your scanning techniques. Even if you have your photos put on a CD by your lab, you will probably need to clean them up a little with a photo editing program.
I have also screened some of your photos and noticed you have uploaded alot of tail shots. Shots like this are a lot harder to get accepted. They have to be really good shots or they will get rejected.
Screener2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1450 times:
I would say that around 25% (or maybe a bit more) of the pics we recieve are borderline cases.
Basically, you can split it like this:
5% - Excellent, upload quality without question
10% - not perfect, but should not cause a problem unless Johan is in an evil mood (hey, we all get up on the wrong side of the bed sometimes).
25% - Borderline, with a problem or two, but not so bad as to clearly take it out of the running. Generally fixable.
60% - Clear problems, some fixable, but most often not.
So if the screeners let half of the borderline cases go by, 72.5% get rejected outright, and the rest pass on. Unfortunately I have no way to see what percentage Johan rejects, but I suppose it is somewhere around a quarter of what he recieves or so, leaving about an 80% rejection rate.
These are all ballpark numbers, of course.
I have a question for you and others. Given that Johan seems to reject most of the borderline cases, would you prefer us to be more strict with them? Screener responses usually are very fast, and it would give you the opportunity to tweak it and re-upload. Or would you rather us to pass it on to Johan, and have to wait a long time for a response?
Of course, Johan will get upset if we start loosening our standards (unless you can convince him otherwise), but I would like your opinion on this.
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 20 Reply 11, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1436 times:
Maybe add an option to give comments on shots you do pass, warning that a shot is borderline according to you or you think it is good enough but Johan might not like it for some reason.
That would give a headsup while still leaving the good cop/bad cop thing in place
Paulc From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1490 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1433 times:
Is it possible for the "tougher" set of quality rules to be posted ? for us mortals to view - just to give an idea of what to aim for / avoid in terms of quality. I know there are sample pics covering some aspects of this but how relevant are they to the new rules.
I also feel it is becoming more difficult to get an image past the screeners - let alone Johan - not necessarily a bad thing but people will soon get fed up at getting rejected at the screening stage and so may not bother to upload - at least if Johan rejects an image you know it is 'almost' good enough and is worth trying to improve on.
Are the images given a score on various points such as subject, lighting, sharpness, in database etc leading to an overall 'pass' mark by which they get accepted at screening stage? - if yes then on rejected images would it be possible for these marks to be included with rejection message? - again to indicate areas that need to be improved. If no then is this something that could considered in the future?
Screener2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1426 times:
Unfortunately only Johan can give warnings without knocking the picture out of the queue. I frequently wish for that feature, but the mechanics of actually working it like that would be difficult and confusing.
Paul, I know what it feels like too. I once had 140 pictures in the queue and all got blasted . That was the experience that provoked me into buying a slide scanner.
Recommendation to all uploaders:
In order to save time on-line, and to make sure you can easily re-upload a rejected-and-tweaked shot, you should keep your data somewhere. What I do is build a little Excel file where I import all the relevant info from my main database (msn, Registration, name, construction date, etc.), and type in any additional comments. Using text formulas, you can build your entire remarks section with this info and additional remarks, so that when you are on the upload page, all you do is cut and paste. It also gives you the possibility of reviewing and correcting all your comments before you get online. This process works so fast that I often will have 2 or 3 seperate upload pages open at the same time, because I'll be filling one out while the others are uploading. Then you keep the file in case you have to use it again for rejections.
P.S. I just did a little screening a few minutes ago. The pre-screening queue is now empty (there were only 3 when I looked), so if you haven't recieved any e-mails, your pics are waiting for Johan.
Screener6 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1431 times:
Sorry Paul, that is what I get for trying to type at 5 am after being up all night!
And yes I too would be pissed if I was in LGW's shoes, but that is why my suggestion to all is to upload fewer photos at a time. This way all or your hard work and time is not wasted. Now that the airliners.net database in so large, the emphasis now is definitely on quality and not quanity. Unless your shot is of something rare it must be of the very best quality to be added. True there are a lot of lesser quality photos in the database, but for the most part these are older uploads. Personally I am going through a lot of my older shots and rescanning them and re-uploading them. Most of my older shots would never make it past the screeners today.
Jwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 20 Reply 16, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1411 times:
S2, that is indeed a nice tip. Myself, I include most information in the filename (formatted REG-date-serialfordate), and for the type I keep a book open next to my screen (I don't upload so many at a time I forget which airline it is ).
Thanks for letting us know our charges made it past the hounds and are now on the way to the evil Grand Vizier of this site
Only one last hurdle to overcome before we can claim the princess
LGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1412 times:
I know about uploading a few shots and see how they get on but, I am doing a lot of AMS/LHR/LGW/STN/LTN shots for my website so I though whilst uploading them to my site, why not have a go on airliners.net with the best ones, and when I was getting so many accepted by the screeners I though that the quality must be OK other wise most would be rejected
Screener2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1413 times:
"It ain't personal, It's just business." - Who said that?
Considering that you have your own web site, and that you'd like to improve your standing on this site, I think you'll need some kind of film/slide scanner in short order. Any chance of you picking up one soon?
Now that Slide scanners are starting to become more common, I have noticed very recently that a few used ones have appeared in shop windows (Never seen before).
Sukhoi From Sweden, joined May 2006, 371 posts, RR: 8 Reply 21, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1399 times:
"and when I was getting so many accepted by the screeners I though that the quality must be OK other wise most would be rejected"
LGW has come up with what im sure a lot of people think. If the picture passes the screeners then its got to have a "reasonbly" good chance of making it to the database. I would guess everyone would do the same and add more pictures whilst they were being accepted.
Maybe S2's suggestion is right that they should be more stringent and reject the ones that are borderline, in LGW's case this would save a lot of his time and trouble.
Im just throwing ideas out here, now that everyone is used to the screeners original process maybe its time to extend their capability and that would help Johan. Or at least stop him pulling any more of his hair out with the server problems!
LGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (12 years 3 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1396 times:
Yes, I feel that I have to either go 100% digital and get a really good digital camera or buy a film/slide scanner
dunno which, probably the latter
I really dont know much about film/slide scanners at the mo and I have just paid out quite a bit of money for my summer holiday next yeat to TFS, me and 5 other mates are goin out there for a couple a weeks for a relaxed holiday - yeah right!