Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Is Being Done About The Slow Queue?  
User currently offlineNavigator From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 1207 posts, RR: 14
Posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 8961 times:

Hi,

This is probably not a particularly popular subject and has probably been discussed a lot before, but nevertheless:

What is being done about the increasingly slow upload queue? The time in the queue is increasing and perhaps the interest in uploading may then decrease. Are there any new procedures coming to take care of this?

One thing is perhaps to start rejecting on the ground that similar shots have been produced by another photographer. Who needs loads of similar shots on similar dates granted only because they are taken by different photographers?

Any other thoughts on this probably "hot" subject?

/N


747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
191 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offline9VSPO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 8953 times:

Quoting Navigator (Thread starter):

Hi Stefan,

Happy Birthday! Big grin

Correct me if I am wrong but I think the queue is always high this time of year, naturally here in the Northern Hemisphere it is summer so many guys are out shooting and uploading. I wouldn't worry. If you have a shot that has priority it will get looked at sooner otherwise what's the rush? It's a good excuse for me to look at my pics in the queue and decide if I still want to improve them or delete them. Take a chill pill. I'm sure more trainee screeners have been approached.  Wink  Big grin


User currently offlineNavigator From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 1207 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8934 times:

I do not see this as a seasonal problem and I am not particularly worried myself, more than that I think it is a problem for a:net. Perhaps Jethotos and other sites will be more popular in future if this problem (because it is a problem) is not handled. How do you think this could be handled? Do three screeners need to look at all photos? Isn´t every one of the screeners able to make judgments on their own?

Just thoughts...



747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8927 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Stefan

The queue has only recently been going up again. Several factors contribute to the increasing queue now.

-very hot weather in parts of Europe (where most of our screeners are). Usually I close my curtains during the afternoon and do some screening, with 30+ degree weather I'm not gonna do that 

-Worldcup! very little screening before, during, and after game time.

-Lots of uploads due nice weather, airshows, holidays etc.

We are doing the best we can and have just hired two new screeners, Mick Bajcar and Ben Wang who are doing great. We hope to add more new guys in the near future to tackle the increasing uploads. You will also notice we will be instant adding far more photos (I have asked Johan to develop an script where you will see that in your acceptance email too).

Also have to put a little responsibility with the uploaders though. A higher queue affects everyone, so you might want to not upload all 100 approachshots from a day at AMS, LHR or FRA at once at the moment. Yes, we as screeners are responsible for a low queue, but photographers can bear with us as well. A low queue is a two way process. Some variety in screening can also work wonders. It's really tedious going through a batch of 50 of the exact same shots except for the reg. Some variety coupled with quality provides a better screening experience, and will I think results in more motivation for screeners, and thus more screening ->lower queue. Personally I love instant adding 3-4 photos from the best photographers on a.net who usually upload in small batches with lots of variety and great quality. Just something to think about.



Tim

[Edited 2006-07-05 20:02:41]


Alderman Exit
User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8882 times:

Quoting Navigator (Thread starter):
What Is Being Done About The Slow Queue?

Delete those pics in the queue of uploaders who complain???  Wink


Just kidding though. Seriously, as Tim says, batch uploads of 50+ of the same side shot could become tedious. Variety is the spice of life.

I have a reasonable idea now of what the site will accept - and if it's not up to those criteria - then I won't bother uploading, as it just bloats the queue and wastes the screener's time. Looking back at my first upload, it should have been rejected for bad levelling  Wink

Cheers!



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8882 times:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 3):
It's really tedious going through a batch of 50 of the exact same shots except for the reg.

Maybe a way forward would be to impose an upload limit of say, 10 photos per day, in addition to existing upload limits. Personally, I never come home with more than five cracking shots that I need to upload right the same evening.

This way, we'll probably become more selective in what we upload, and also spend more time per upload, which will probably improve quality.

Peter



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineWalter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1299 posts, RR: 28
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 8869 times:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 3):
Also have to put a little responsibility with the uploaders though. A higher queue affects everyone, so you might want to not upload all 100 approach shots from a day at AMS, LHR or FRA at once at the moment. Yes, we as screeners are responsible for a low queue, but photographers can bear with us as well

 checkmark 

... and I also appreciate the screeners' effort to contribute in this forum with the help of a pre-screening and very good advise, which also reduces the queue (sometimes with an immediate effect, but certainly with an effect in the future)!

PS: Personally, I don't mind a long queue, it gives me the time to review, ask questions about the pictures, and in most cases ample time to pull something from the queue!

Best regards,

Walter



canon 340d ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l is usm - ...
User currently offlineSkidmarks From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, RR: 55
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 8815 times:

Upload and forget. Unless there is some reason for fast screening, then there isn't a problem. At this time of year, as has been said, there are people on holiday, the World Cup reared it's ugly head and so has has Wimbledon!  vomit 

Added to this the fact that many people are out taking pics and uploading like mad, and you get the slower seeming queue.

Hold some in reserve for a rainy day and maybe surprise us all.

Just my tuppenceworth.

Andy  old 



Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 8729 times:

Quoting Navigator (Thread starter):
Any other thoughts on this probably "hot" subject?

No thoughts, as the queue is cyclic, leave it be, it will be fine. Just one question though....

What's your rush?


User currently offlineBigPhilNYC From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4077 posts, RR: 54
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 8722 times:

I don't understand, and find it fairly rude, when I see people saying things like "What's being done about the slow queue", as though the photographers are paying customers and Airliners.net OWES them anything liek an excuse or solution for service that you don't feel is quick enough.

Granted, the photographers are what make this site so popular and profitable, but if the queue is slow, deal with it. No one from staff is obligated to revamp or implement new ideas to necessarily speed it up. It gets busy sometimes, and you wait a couple more days.

Does the slow queue disappoint me sometimes? Of course. But asking questions like that is insulting and inappropriate.



Phil Derner Jr.
User currently offlineAndrewUber From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2528 posts, RR: 40
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 8722 times:

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 5):
Maybe a way forward would be to impose an upload limit of say, 10 photos per day, in addition to existing upload limits.

There are plenty of restrictions and upload limits right now. Let's not complicate things further.

I tend to upload photos in groups. I'll do two or three days of spotting, process a batch of photos and upload them. I may only upload photos once a month to a.net, but when I do I upload a dozen or more at a time.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 8):
What's your rush?

There's no big "rush" to get the photos screened - but in retrospect what would you think if all of your photos were still in the queue, Jeff? Kinda puts it in perspective!



I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 8700 times:

Quoting AndrewUber (Reply 10):
There's no big "rush" to get the photos screened - but in retrospect what would you think if all of your photos were still in the queue, Jeff?

My photos go through the same as everyone else's. I have not uploaded any in about a month. Personally I don't care if they get screened in 3 hours or 3 weeks.

Quoting AndrewUber (Reply 10):
Kinda puts it in perspective!

I guess I don't understand Drew.


User currently offlineGhostbase From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 354 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8620 times:

Quoting BigPhilNYC (Reply 9):
I don't understand, and find it fairly rude, when I see people saying things like "What's being done about the slow queue", as though the photographers are paying customers and Airliners.net OWES them anything liek an excuse or solution for service that you don't feel is quick enough.

Granted, the photographers are what make this site so popular and profitable, but if the queue is slow, deal with it. No one from staff is obligated to revamp or implement new ideas to necessarily speed it up. It gets busy sometimes, and you wait a couple more days.

Does the slow queue disappoint me sometimes? Of course. But asking questions like that is insulting and inappropriate.

IMHO Navigator asked a reasonable question which was carefully worded and he did acknowledge that it was "probably not a particularly popular subject and has probably been discussed a lot before". Tim de Groot's reply was likewise reasonable, measured and informative and put over some good points which it helps to repeat from time to time.

Why the hostile overtones? Why is this question 'rude, insulting and inappropriate'?

With the ever growing number of new photographers here there may well be several who are looking at the queue and wondering why it is taking so long for their small allocation of photos to be screened. Question answered  Smile

 ghost 



"I chase my dreams but I never seem to arrive"
User currently offlineSulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2035 posts, RR: 32
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 8611 times:

There is an easy alternative. Enjoy your summer, shoot what you like, when you like, and upload it later.


It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 63
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 8548 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi all

Johan is not in favour of imposing upload limits............so.............if you ain't happy about the size of the queue.......ship yourself off somewhere else  Smile

Regards

Gary


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 8545 times:

Quoting Granite (Reply 14):
Johan is not in favour of imposing upload limits............so.............if you ain't happy about the size of the queue.......ship yourself off somewhere else

I'm not complaining about the queue size, even if I wished it was shorter.
I was trying to adress this:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 3):
It's really tedious going through a batch of 50 of the exact same shots except for the reg

which is true for screeners and viewers alike as far as I'm concerned. However, forget my little unthoughtful proposal as I can see it's not going to work.

Peter Smile



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineKFLLCFII From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3302 posts, RR: 30
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 8524 times:

Quoting Navigator (Thread starter):
The time in the queue is increasing and perhaps the interest in uploading may then decrease.

...Hence solving your problem.  Wink



"About the only way to look at it, just a pity you are not POTUS KFLLCFII, seems as if we would all be better off."
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 8520 times:

Quoting Ghostbase (Reply 12):
With the ever growing number of new photographers here there may well be several who are looking at the queue and wondering why it is taking so long for their small allocation of photos to be screened.

Let them wonder. Or let them see the reality. Surely it can't be that hard to understand the process. With the number of photos submited, it just takes time.

Quoting Ghostbase (Reply 12):
Question answered

If you say so.

Quoting Ghostbase (Reply 12):
IMHO Navigator asked a reasonable question which was carefully worded and he did acknowledge that it was "probably not a particularly popular subject and has probably been discussed a lot before".

It has. And if Navigator had taken the time to do a simple search and read through all the previous responses, he would have got the answer he wanted without even having to 'carefully word' this worn out question yet again. But he didn't.


User currently offlineNavigator From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 1207 posts, RR: 14
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 8491 times:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 3):

Thank you Tim for your nice reply. I understand and appreciate your efforts to shorten the queue. I also appreciate your great work in this respect.

And to some of the rest of you criticising me for even taking up this matter, have a nice summer! I still think this question is worthwhile asking. I hope you did your best in trying to give fair and relevant answers even if I will not reply to you individually.

Cheers



747-400/747-200/L1011/DC-10/DC-9/DC-8/MD-80/MD90/A340/A330/A300/A310/A321/A320/A319/767/757/737/727/HS-121/CV990/CV440/S
User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 63
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 8425 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Stefan

As an ex-screener you will know what we have to go through in the queue.

Yes, worthwhile asking, again, so let's hope it's been answered for you.

Regards

Gary


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11347 posts, RR: 52
Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 8353 times:

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 5):
Maybe a way forward would be to impose an upload limit of say, 10 photos per day

For the record, I thought this was a good idea, so you're not alone.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 8):
What's your rush?

It's a different ballgame when you have a low queue limit versus a high one. Those of you fortunate enough to have high ones will be less afflicted by a long wait. For those of us with low limits, it may take two weeks to find out that a shot was close but not quite, then another two weeks to find out whether the correction was good. In the meantime, your queue is full, so you can't upload a different shot.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 11):
Personally I don't care if they get screened in 3 hours or 3 weeks.

I'm not being at all glib when I say "good for you" - if you truly don't care how long your pics are in the queue, more power to ya. However, what's good for the goose isn't necessarily good for the gander. In other words, the fact that the queue length doesn't bother you doesn't make others' complaints any weaker. People feel what they feel.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineKereru From New Zealand, joined Jun 2003, 873 posts, RR: 45
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 8331 times:

And then there are some of us that have the flu and it is difficult screening with a pounding head ache and watering eyes so have taken a break. I will get back to screening as soon as I can.

Cheers,

Colin



Good things take Time.
User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 22, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 8315 times:

Quoting Granite (Reply 14):
Johan is not in favour of imposing upload limits............so.............if you ain't happy about the size of the queue.......ship yourself off somewhere else

 irked This gets me really angry when a crew member says "If you don't like something bugger off". Why not try and talk sensibly about how it COULD be overcome. Not tell users to nick off if they don't like something. Just remember without users there is no site.

Some people are going to have an issue about the Q limits. That's just a fact. I personally don't. I don't mind when things get screened as I know it will happen sometime. But I also ask the question on what is being done about it? Because lets face it, there are more and more photos being uploaded. The recent Q limits have not helped in anyway, so is there a "plan B"?


User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 23, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 8312 times:

Quoting Eadster (Reply 22):
This gets me really angry when a crew member says "If you don't like something bugger off".

Johan would hardly be classified as a "simple" crew member. It's his playground, he makes the rules. Simple isn't it?

Quoting Eadster (Reply 22):
Why not try and talk sensibly about how it COULD be overcome.

Why? He doesn't have to.

Quoting D L X (Reply 20):
For those of us with low limits, it may take two weeks to find out that a shot was close but not quite,

There is a solution to that problem you know?


User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 24, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 8299 times:

Read the quote Jeff - It was not directed at Johan.

25 Post contains images JeffM : No kidding? I understand it was Granite quoting Johan's policy. Same message, different messenger.
26 StealthZ : Is a pity that Tim's point has not been discussed much further, but then not a real surprise as the "serial uploaders" likely do not read this forum.
27 Post contains images AndrewUber : I agree with you Phil, it is beating a dead horse to keep raising the queue question. Personally the queue doesn't really bother me, but I do wish the
28 D L X : Yup. Daily queue limits.
29 JeffM : Nope. Uploading only worthy images = more acceptances = Larger upload allowance.
30 PUnmuth@VIE : Pride goes before a fall.
31 Viv : The best way to reduce the queue is for each of us to exercise some self-restraint and to upload only our best shots after rigorous self-screening.
32 Granite : Hi all Best thing written so far. Regards Gary
33 Post contains images Granite : Peter Don't worry, I won't be falling anytime soon Regards Gary
34 Post contains images Gary2880 : its true. he has the best zimmer money can buy.... i think Jeff should be made a screener, that would be fun
35 INNflight : With 35k plus I don't think Johan worries about that. I think there isn't much you can do about it. As I said in a previous thread, I think (or assum
36 Post contains images IL76 : I haven't screened for a week now and won't for a few days to come. I'm currently moving house and half my stuff is in one house, the rest in the othe
37 Post contains images 9VSPO : Really??? I doubt that very much. What I find perculiar is that someone with 30 or so pics in the database and not much experience can be asked to sc
38 Post contains images IL76 : Really? When did this happen?  [Edited 2006-07-07 11:38:35]
39 Viv : In relation to the topic of the thread, this is the reddest of red herrings.
40 PUnmuth@VIE : Its not about you, more about how a few of the crew think about customer relationship.
41 Granite : Hi all Some tips for photographers to help reduce the queue: 1. Don't upload a batch of 50 at a time. 2. Avoid bad cloning. 3. Don't clone in new regi
42 Post contains images 9VSPO :
43 D L X : And how are you going to get the word out to those that don't read this forum that they should show restraint? This is the Tragedy of the Commons, ex
44 Viv : I'm not. The queue does not bother me. I upload and forget.
45 Sulman : Wow... I'm still surprised there is a myav AND a.net radio button for uploads. Is this still an issue? It must be tempting for alot of contributors w
46 Viv : Apparently they do not learn anything from experience. Strange ...
47 PUnmuth@VIE : Which is basically a self imposed queue limit. Why not change the current upload slot allocation? Cut the numbers down and make them independent from
48 Psych : I have to stick my oar in here. I am becoming more sanguine about what goes on at A.net - life is too short. I still think this is the best site and I
49 Post contains images ThierryD : Hi all! Mathematically seen this issue is quite easy: if one day's uploads take more than one day to be screened the screening process is too slow. An
50 Post contains images JeffM : LOL....nice. "problem" is your perception, not necessarily everyone's. This is hardly the highest level in photography...... If your at the highest l
51 Granite : Thierry Correct. The heatwave is fast ending. 35 deg in Scotland is pretty much a record and the cloud is fast approaching. Temperatures dropping whic
52 Post contains images Psych : Hi Jeff - you just can't resist, can you . I reckon my comment would have been obvious to most as a reference to the fact that I think there is no hi
53 Philhyde : Actually, isn't anyone that is posting here supporting the site financially? Seems like "paying customer" is a shoe that fits. cheers, Phil
54 Post contains images Ptrjong : It does. In a recent thread I think Johan himself said that there would not be fuss about priority screening if the queue wasn't so long, which was s
55 Post contains images JeffM : Maybe most popular, higher quality? No comment. (read into that whatever you like.) Nope.
56 BigPhilNYC : People don't pay to upload, though. Also, I don't pay. I was grandfathered in before they required the pay feature. Nevertheless, I have paid for Fir
57 QANTAS077 : what shit's me is the fact you wait 15 days for a reject which is so stupid that it frustrates the hell out of you. i got one because i put the carrie
58 JumboJim747 : Mont the screeners have noted in the past that they do not have this feature available to them otherwise would have been easier to do then write a me
59 Post contains images QANTAS077 : you mean to tell me a site as advanced as this and they can't write one simple word in an info box? but they can write 10 or more in another...brilli
60 D L X : Hallelujah!!! Peter, you're my new hero. This seems so freakin' obvious to me, I'm surprised it hasn't been said so many times before. ESPECIALLY con
61 Philhyde : I know that a membership doesn't specifically entitle you to benefits related to photographs. However, in terms of those who might have more of a voi
62 Bruce : I guess we can expect the queue to go to record heights in the near future, as everyone in europe will be at the Farnborough air show (hahaha, well at
63 JeffM : Brilliant insight. The point is what again? Save the nursery rhymes for the kids. LOL.... What does Mark have to do with the comment about this site
64 D L X : Dude, what is it with you? Mark is the pinnacle of photography.
65 Post contains images 9VSPO :
66 Dendrobatid : Doesn't the fact that there are almost 15000 photographs from 2145 photographers in the queue indicate something about where they want to be ? They ha
67 Post contains images Skidmarks : Well, one reason people use this site over any other is that a lot of the industry uses it as a picture source. Most people I speak to at work know of
68 Psych : I still think this, but my heart sinks a bit when I see how difficult it is for us to maintain a reasoned debate about some issues - as has been show
69 Post contains images 9VSPO : Having been a regular reader of this forum for a few years I've seen this same topic come up every single summer without fail. It's just the way it is
70 Paulinbna : We have gone over this in the past, you go back 30 days on both sites and they have almost the same number of uploads. Lets face it the queue is a pr
71 QANTAS077 : the fact that the other site has has nearly 700000 photos which alot are from uploaders here says something too..don't become to arrogant about numbe
72 Post contains images Paparadzi : I have an idea. Why don't we just freeze the upload for 2 weeks? Give time for the screeners to clear up the queue. After that, if the number of photo
73 Psych : You know - there are so many similarities here with the issue myself and colleagues struggle with on an almost daily basis in my line of work in the H
74 Post contains images Scbriml : The number of shots a photographer can upload is not the problem - it's the number of photographers uploading! If you check the queue stats, the aver
75 Javibi : As I see it if you base the upload slots available solely in the acceptance ratio you are encouraging people even more to not risk at all, resulting
76 DC10Tim : Why is the queue so long this summer compared to last year? Are there fewer screeners? I'm not convinced drastically limiting the number people can up
77 Post contains images Philhyde : Wow, that's an interesting statistic. Puts a hole in a few theories here Paul, good re-cap of the options. Assuming that there is no way to significa
78 JeffM : LOL.....Sure, if you say so. Let's lock it up for three weeks and give the screeners a week off.
79 KFLLCFII : Great idea! And an even better idea! If you uploaded a shot today, it would still take two weeks for a screening...So what's one more week for an ans
80 D L X : I'm not sure I agree with that, or at least I'm not sure it's relevant. First, people don't take risks because the screeners have raised the bar on a
81 DC10Tim : OK, I have a question for the screening crew. What percentage of the queue is made up from people who are yet to get one accepted, and what percentage
82 StealthZ : A thought about screening times, Earlier today I photographed a sports event for 2 local clubs, It was Lawn Bowls and as such some of the participants
83 Post contains images Javibi : Surely. None. I still think that basing the upload slots available ONLY in acceptance ratio would be a way of punishing the few people out there that
84 TimdeGroot : This is not really the screeners' task. I doubt the folks who take 'interesting' (different term for everyone) shots will care much if they get accep
85 Morvious : In my eyes, the upload limits should take care of this, but apparently, they don't! If this is so much of a problem, which I agree on, why don't you
86 Psych : Interesting thoughts here. I wonder - if it led to a marked reduction in the length of time to screening, do you think there would be many objections
87 D L X : I'll keep this brief because I think it's straying a little from the main topic. OK. I was under the impression that the screners were in charge of up
88 Post contains images JeffM : Why not drop them in the queue and find out? Seriously, what is the big deal? They will either sink or swim. Was bemusement the word you were really
89 9A-CRO : also MAXUPLOAD limit dependent of the current queue size and affectiong all uploaders could be introduced ie queue size 2000-5000 MAXLIMIT 50 5000-100
90 Ptrjong : Unworkable I'm afraid. People will start to upload their unrecognizable AMS shots as BRU shots for example. Such limits would soon turn semi-permanen
91 Post contains images Cosmic : I don't feel uploading around 50 photos from the same Airport, from the same day is beneficial for the site. I would feel guilty about that, as not on
92 McG1967 : Would splitting the queue between new photos and re-worked earlier rejected photos make a difference to the queue length.
93 Post contains images 9VSPO : I'm sure I've seen it below 4000. In fact I remember uploading a shot and getting an e-mail the next day or the same day even. I'm sure it was this y
94 INNflight : Way too high. Send out another Airliners.net Photographer Email and tell everybody that the queue will be restriced to get the numbers lower. MAX lim
95 Post contains images JeffM : What difference to the DB does it make if 5 a day for 10 days get uploaded, or 25 a day for 2 days, or all in one shot? ...sure, on paper.
96 Post contains images EDDL : No, make that 3
97 Post contains images INNflight : Seems like you bring your point across very well again Jeff.
98 Morvious : Well, lol, then these kind of people need to look for a doctor! To many people around here are suffering from the "I have a 50+ upload limit, and am
99 Cosmic : Hi, Well I'm not sure what you think but I find looking at a large number of photos from the same photographer, same day, same angle and same airport
100 JeffM : Something you have no control over. If I want to upload 50 photos from the the same day, same airport, etc. there is no reason I can't. If you had re
101 Cosmic : Hi, Yes, we don't have no control over it, needless to say I don't view all the photos. There is no need to question whever I read your response. I di
102 Post contains images Diezel : It almost sounds too simple but if there are so many complaints about the big queue, isn't the obvious solutions to use the supermarket approach: just
103 D L X : You know, it just hit me that lowering the queue limits for everyone by the same percentage would still allow people to upload the same number of phot
104 StealthZ : I am not sure that this thread is going anywhere as most the contributors recognise the issue and pretty much have similar ideas on a solution. It has
105 DC10Tim : Think about it. 25 shots screened a week or 50 every two weeks is the same workload for the screeners. The queue wouldn't decrease at all. You have a
106 JeffM : No, it isn't. This dead horse gets beat every 5-6 months. It's not the first or last time we will hear the whining. Some see a problem, others don't.
107 DC10Tim : It's not a matter of whining Jeff. The fact is the queue is longer now than it ever has been. If the site continues to experience such an increase in
108 D L X : True, the workload would be the same, but the time you'd spend in the queue would decrease. In other words, the queue would be half its size, but rep
109 JeffM : Some people far more then others......obviously.
110 SFO2SVO : How about trying Vox Populi? As a test, have 20 or so photos which already went through screening but have not been added to the DB get voted on by re
111 Viv : A recipe for disaster.
112 Viv : A recipe for disaster. Gee thanks! I don't want to be a screener ...
113 TimdeGroot : I keep hearing this but it's simply not true. We have been at 19 or 20 thousand for weeks if not months. Tim
114 NIKV69 : I agree Tim, Though I don't mind waiting 12 days to have a pic screened. I have watched the queue grow steadily. IMO I feel there should be enough sc
115 Post contains images QANTAS077 : i knew i could rely on Nick to come in and save the day... you've not screened at either so your wisdom is on the matter is just about worthless...kee
116 NIKV69 : I have no aspirations of being a screener like you Monty. Though one only needs a short browse through both Databases to see the difference. JP will
117 Post contains images BA747-436 : Nicholas - As has been said you knoledge on the screening techniques, times and process on either JP or A.net is such, that your spout was hardly wor
118 D L X : That argument is so old and it should not be used here. Besides that, if you had read my post, you'd notice that they would be able to upload the sam
119 Post contains images NIKV69 : Oh please. It is not an excuse. The fact that the screening process is much more labor intensive here than JP is no secret. It's the way it is and I
120 StealthZ : mmm, had a post deleted from another thread(as this will likely be)... if the off topic BS was deleted from this thread it would be a much quicker rea
121 Post contains images BA747-436 : How exactly is the screening process here more intensive? Honestly, please enlighten me. As far as i know we work on the same 3-vote screener system
122 Post contains images NIKV69 : Has nothing to do with the number of screeners viewing the photo, the amount of scrutinity a picture is put under is far greater here than at JP. I a
123 StealthZ : Dunno, Mont works for the govt so he likely has advance notice that Australia has been sold to DPRK! Funnily enough our Govt IS trying to do a deal t
124 PUnmuth@VIE : And this is related to the topic discussed here exactly how?
125 DC10Tim : The problem is the screening rate. Now I'm sure lots of people will jump at me squealing for saying such, but if the number of photos processed doesn
126 NIKV69 : Yikes! EXACLTY! If a day goes by with only 800 pics screened it sets things back and efffects are cumaltive. If the average pics screened per day was
127 TimdeGroot : It's very difficult to find suitable candidates nowadays. About 50 photographers have been screeners here at one time, so obviously the talent pool i
128 DC10Tim : Tim, I'm sure you have many suitable candidates, who with the right training could become screeners. If 2 out of every 3 suitable people accept the ro
129 Danny : You should really consider number of days of waiting rather than number of photos in the queue. The number of days is the longest ever while number o
130 Post contains images Linco22 : I think by the time this has all finished the photos will be done. I'm sure of it. Just sit back, relax, and think of......... 'I wonder when my photo
131 Post contains images ThierryD : With all due respect Tim but that's a rather offending statement for the 11950 other photographers uploading to A.net, because basically you're sayin
132 TimdeGroot : That's not what I'm saying at all. It takes more to be a screener than just getting your photos accepted here. Non-screeners can be talented photogra
133 ThierryD : That sounds ok; your way of putting the mentionned sentence was kinda ambiguous. Nevertheless I find it hard to believe that you're running out of op
134 Airplanenut : I don't know how photos appear to screeners, but suppose they were scrambled a bit? That way, if someone uploaded 50 shots of approaches to one airpor
135 Post contains images Fergulmcc : I could name one or two Tim, that are very helpful here in the forum and would make very good screeners, well three actually but I think you've alrea
136 StealthZ : With all due respect to both the screeners and the photographers, maybe the team should think outside the box in the search for screeners. You don't
137 Post contains images Eadster : Another way of making us users feel really welcome.
138 Post contains links JumboJim747 : Quoting Eadster (Reply 137): Another way of making us users feel really welcome. lol at face value the comment by Tim would look like that martin. But
139 Post contains images Mongorat : Well said indeed... Matt L
140 Post contains images Philhyde : 50 out of 12000. That's about 4 in 1000, which is a pretty elite group. I have no doubt that it takes a certain kind of person, and collectively is pr
141 Tappan : Since my name was used in a couple of threads, I thought I should set the record straight.... I have no gripe with a.net. The screening process is har
142 StealthZ : Not a bad concept per se but how do you fairly define a day for a global community? Midnight in Sweden is the obvious choice, Euro photogs that have
143 D L X : Excellent news! I look forward to seeing your new stuff. After all, your shots in Boston inspired me to start shooting planes in the first place. Not
144 Post contains images Glennstewart : Wasn't to hard to screen your shots last night Viv. I think you're practicing what you preach - and it only made my job easier France... How long hav
145 Post contains images PUnmuth@VIE : This text is from the help text for the q-limits not from me
146 Viv : Yes, I am. I could upload endless side-on shots of Luxair Embraer 145s and 737s, but I really don't see any point in doing so.
147 IL76 : A thing I always wonder about…(which has a serious effect on the length of the queue) Many photographers see A.net as a collection of the airplanes
148 StealthZ : Eduard, Very well said and pretty much my thought exactly. That is why I have suggested an "update news" email to the entire photographer community. T
149 Post contains images INNflight : ...which can be a real good idea Chris Selected photos of the Photos with high s.p. value threads could be included and promoted, news and announceme
150 Psych : Hello Ed. I think you have made some excellent point above, and I happen to heartily agree with you. My personal philosophy is to only upload photogra
151 Woody001 : Very wise words from Paul and Eduard. My local is very busy with Easyjet aircraft, I could easily come home with hundreds of images of orange B737's.
152 IL76 : Exactly... If you photograph a very rare/obscure airplane in bad conditions; by all means, upload it! But if this airplane already has 10 photos in t
153 Post contains images Skidmarks : While keeping the queue down is admirable and only uploading your best and most interesting shots is desirable, lets not forget that this is a DataBas
154 Viv : No, they are not. That's what Aviation.net is for. No rejections!!!
155 NIKV69 : Because most feed their ego by being able to tell people the number of pics they have on anet. I could be like most and stand at Costco and just snap
156 D L X : Or maybe because as you noted, with more pics in the db, you get a higher queue limit. You yourself said that someone who has "earned" the right to u
157 IL76 : I think there is a very big difference in making your own database and making the A.net database. Some people want to log all the planes they've ever
158 Viv : This morning, my shot of N499MC (Atlas Air, Boeing 747-400 Freighter) was accepted. There are now 82 shots of this aircraft in the database, so it is
159 NIKV69 : Isn't this easier? For the acceptance rate on last 50 uploads, the upload queue limits are: Acceptance ratio of 0% to 29%: Queue limit 5. Acceptance
160 Post contains images Philhyde : Yeah, good point! I obviously had not considered the clock. DOH! Maybe, but maybe not. On the one hand, I don't see why anyone would need a queue lim
161 Beechcraft : How about: Acceptance ratio of 0% to 29%: Queue limit 10. Acceptance ratio of 30% to 49%: Queue limit 10. Acceptance ratio of 50% to 69%: Queue limit
162 PUnmuth@VIE : Good idea. Everyone should be able to live with that. Quick turnaround times and if you have more stuff you don't have to wait that long because of t
163 Aero145 : I'd go for: Acceptance ratio of 0% to 29%: Queue limit 5. Acceptance ratio of 30% to 49%: Queue limit 10. Acceptance ratio of 50% to 69%: Queue limit
164 Post contains images Mikephotos : If you remove all of the common shots then Anet becomes merely an art gallery with (so-called) 'artistc' shots. Sure, some pretty shots but a useless
165 Mikephotos : Just curious, but who's to say what is "critical". To me, a perfectly lit side-on ramp shot is far more intersting than what many here try to upload
166 IL76 : A perfectly lit side-on is an asset to the site, I fully agree. But a poorly lit, drab grey side-on of a TAP A320 on approach at LHR is not. Especial
167 Post contains images GVerbeeck :       There is no excuse in uploading dull shots of common aircraft. Quality over quantity... However, a perfectly lit and framed shot of a quite
168 LGW : I agree with this and what Ed said, although for me personally there are exceptions, LGW is my local and I wont upload EZY 319s, BA 737s or anything
169 Post contains images Mikephotos : Ah, yes. I do totally agree with that 250%. Maybe I missed it but didn't realize you were speaking of poorly lit, dark, no-sun approach shots which t
170 JGPH1A : Any news on the progress of this queue then ? I'm trying to upload 2 photos (my first attempts, very probably destined for rejection, but I really wou
171 Sulman : I find your comments very interesting, and you've brought some priceless input to the discussion. However, I think you are either overlooking or have
172 Ptrjong : It's been said before, but on the photo search page, the site still lists as its 'top uploaders' those who get the most shots accepted. Certainly, som
173 Post contains links and images IL76 : I guess I don't: So... Bottom line: It's a problem with the uploaders, something that 20 more screeners will not solve. With a lower queue, people wi
174 ThierryD : Without wanting to take part for Stefan, the photographer is surely not the only one to be blamed in this case, Eduard. If A.net really doesn't want
175 Post contains images IL76 : Alright... I'll remember that next time I'm screening.   In the meantime the queue is still filled by people who don't really care about commonalit
176 ThierryD : That's what I mean; you're in the position to MAKE them care. However, words here in the forum alone won't solve the situation; it's like telling peo
177 JumboJim747 : Before i upload any shot to Anet i go through the reg of the aircraft and see how many i have of that reg in the Database. If i notice that i already
178 RuudOnline : What about pre-pre-screening? EVERY a-net member could go to the queue pick out a photo and pre-pre-screen a photo. A pre-pre-screener can add remarks
179 Post contains images Viv : I do it all the time - on my own shots before I decide whether or not to upload them. Most of them get my thumbs-down. I do exactly the same. Why on
180 Post contains images PlymSpotter : It does get a little frustrating to see shot after shot of the same set up just with a different aircraft, or the same aircraft in the same composist
181 Airplanenut : Here's another idea... Let's forget about adding new "regular" screeners, as it seems as though few, if any, are being added right now. What about som
182 NIKV69 : I think we are getting a little off base here. Let's face it, as we go along here the site is going to grow and photogs are going to upload more and
183 JeffM : Nothing at all. Should it be different at 3 weeks? No. LOL....do you make ANet policy now? Don't think so. Relax. this happens a couple of times a ye
184 Post contains links Walter2222 : I am not really bothered about the length of the queue, but I am still interested to read this thread. I had another thought just a few minutes ago, w
185 QANTAS077 : to bad you don't apply the same technique for forum posting...12 or 13 a month would be perfect. weren't you just making excuses a few posts before a
186 NIKV69 : Jeez Monty read the reply, I agreed with Tim that those are things that are all issues that come into play with screening pics, which is why a couple
187 StealthZ : Another point of view, and not really off topic as communicating with contributors is part of what this thread is about. I had an email from a photogr
188 Post contains images Javibi : j
189 JGPH1A : Well I no longer have photos in the queue, but I don't have photos uploaded, or any advise of rejection ? Do you always get an advise if the photo's a
190 Post contains images Javibi : Yes, but there have been some problems with e-mail lately at A.net, so maybe your rejection e-mail is lost j
191 Post contains images INNflight : I at least receive acceptance emails again...
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 Is So Special About This Potd? posted Tue Feb 7 2006 19:29:58 by Cruiser
Why The Slow Queue Recently? posted Mon Jun 7 2004 08:24:49 by Andrewuber
What Do You Think About The Sony P72? posted Fri May 14 2004 10:09:37 by Blackjack
Questions About The "queue" posted Wed May 14 2003 04:35:05 by L1011Fan
Spot This, What Is This All About? posted Thu Oct 24 2002 09:39:15 by AKE0404AR
Photoshop Is Being A Pain In The @ss. posted Tue Apr 9 2002 03:48:34 by Dazed767
What Is So Special About This Photo? posted Sun Apr 7 2002 23:09:24 by JayDavis
Cyeg - What Is The Problem With Security? posted Fri Sep 29 2006 23:06:26 by Psyops
Too Artsy+ What About The Contrast? posted Thu Sep 21 2006 18:06:51 by Rotate
With A Limited Budget What Is The Best SLR? posted Sat Jul 29 2006 19:43:11 by COEXpilot