Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Screeners - I Can't Win?  
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11362 posts, RR: 52
Posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 2130 times:

I'm going to be honest with you: these rejections are very frustrating!!

You rejected this for dark and blurry before, and I asked you guys for help. One screener commented, and I addressed every issue he mentioned. I even lightened it over my own desire to keep it a sunset picture. Some other posters offered suggestions too, which I took into account and reuploaded.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...7_DCA_052406_N725UW_DSC_2839_2.jpg

Rejected again! Why?

You rejected this one for contrast before, and I asked you guys for help. One screener commented, and I addressed every issue he mentioned. Another prominent photographer and I went back and forth over email about how to improve the shot, and I took every suggestion he gave and reuploaded.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...7_DCA_052406_N301NB_DSC_2717_3.jpg

Rejected again! Why? This one is REALLY upsetting given the reason for its last rejection and the reason for the new rejection. It really screams out that when it comes to subjective tests, the screeners are not in sync with each other. That and the rejections are getting more and more ticky-tack.

I'm not sure it's even worth asking for suggestions on this forum - it's almost like the screeners are sending a message: "we don't want you to upload here, so please stop."


Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2117 times:

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
we don't want you to upload here, so please stop."

I very much doubt that's what they are saying.

Damon both images look like they have a ghostly look to them maybe due to you trying to lighten them up a little not sure .
Also the first still looks a little dark.
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineFly747 From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1497 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2115 times:

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
"we don't want you to upload here, so please stop."

Damon,

I'm pretty sure that is not the message. It can be frustrating at times when you receive rejections but that's life. The screeners are not in sync. They can't be. Different people, different opinions.
As for these images, I don't know the exact rejection reasons, but the NW A319 is not centered. It is too high and to the right. I would also crop it tighter and the US is rather blurry around the tail.
That's my  twocents 
Good luck to you.

Ivan



Contrails Aviation Photography
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2097 times:

It's obvious both images still lack the quality required. Just because you ask for help here and all the 'experts' chime in doesn't mean the image is going to make it.

Before hitting the upload, take a step back and honestly appraise your photos.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11362 posts, RR: 52
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2088 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 3):
It's obvious both images still lack the quality required.

Can you point out anything specific?

Quoting JeffM (Reply 3):
Before hitting the upload, take a step back and honestly appraise your photos.

Jeff, I don't go and just upload whatever comes out of the camera all willy-nilly. I took an appraisal of the shots.

For the record, the new rejection reasons are completely different from the old ones, and I pointed the screeners to the old versions, just like they request.



Anyways, I apologize for being so melodramatic. I'm just at my wits end trying to figure out what the hell it is you guys want, and the more I think about it, the more I think that some of you want one thing, while others of you want something else.

[Edited 2006-07-08 06:43:27]


Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineKFLLCFII From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3303 posts, RR: 30
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2076 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 4):
For the record, the new rejection reasons are completely different from the old ones

The new rejection reasons being?



"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 offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11362 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2075 times:

Quoting KFLLCFII (Reply 5):
The new rejection reasons being?

You can't tell?

(Hence my problem.)



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineKFLLCFII From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3303 posts, RR: 30
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2051 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 6):
You can't tell?

Well, at face value, I'd say:

#1:

-Jagged (specifically the cheatlines on the nose)
-Still blurry (specifically the left wingtip: check the red nav light and the area in the immediate vicinity)
-And in agreement with Jeff, it still lacks overall quality: Some areas are soft, while others are jagged. I'm also gonna go out on a limb and say it has an excessive yellowish-orange color cast (and yes, that's taking into account the angle of the sun.) Here's a shot with the cast removed:

http://img147.imageshack.us/img147/7...20060707dca052406n725uwdsc2839.jpg

The spot reading was taken from the rear portion of the white cheatline. This still allows the sun's orange reflection to "hit" the aircraft in all the right places for the angle of the shot.

#2:

-Contrast still being an issue.
-Not centered vertically or horizontally.
-Overall quality? Yeah, also an issue. I might be off-base, but I'd say your passes of USM were applied across the entire photo without selective-sharpening what still needed more, yet using an initial setting that was too strong for certain areas of the photo. (Same for the first photo.)



"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 offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11362 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1924 times:

#1: soft

#2: exposure

Screeners?



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1771 times:

Ok, so have a good look at the first image you got rejected there.

The first reson there is its vignetted. have a look at the tail on it, now compare it to the front part of the aircraft.

Now the second image.

Have a look at colours of yours and compare to others. You'll see what the problem is.


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11362 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1637 times:

I'd like to apologize for the emotion-filled outburst here.
That was a product of frustration over repeated rejections for the last 10 or so uploads, and my plummeting acceptance rate.

Then I got some acceptances, and the frustration died down and the acceptance rate went up.

Anyways I don't know if I'm going to edit the first one again. I'll think about the second one, but I'm going to table it for a while I think and start fresh with it later.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1622 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 10):
That was a product of frustration over repeated rejections for the last 10 or so uploads, and my plummeting acceptance rate.

Damon it can get that way to my good fortune i didn't get a rejection for a month then all of a sudden i get 3 in a row i thought i had my sharpening issue sorted out but i guess not 3 in a row for over sharpen and I'm in the same boat as you.
But at the end of the day I'm just putting my head down and trying to sort this issue out but i know how you feel.
All the best with your future uploads.
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineGlennstewart From Australia, joined Jun 2003, 1124 posts, RR: 54
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1561 times:

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
I'm going to be honest with you: these rejections are very frustrating!!

Damon,

First of all... thanks for the post. With the queue the length it is, it's becoming just as frustrating for screeners as it is for photographers. We're both feeling the pain.... trust me.

I know we're working as hard as we can to be as consistent as we possibly can given the large team, with MASSIVE queue. A large queue also really puts a lot of the responsibilty back on to the photographer, as we cannot spoon feed with regards to personal messages, as much as we have in the past.

And with the huge queue, huge number of photographers it's very hard to perform the task of looking at everyone's previous rejections to help you along.

It takes a lot less screening a perfect shot than one with a flaw. We can spend a minutes rejecting your shot for the obvious flaws, and providing a personal with some meaning as well... but figuring out that it was rejection 20,000 images ago and making a comparison, then pointing you in the right direction.... that's five minutes for the screener who rejects the shot, and more delay to the next 14,000 images in the queue.

If the same effort was applied to all shots in queue that would be....
5 minutes x 14,000 = about 48 days.

Please keep in mind how much time it takes to go through 14,000 images.

Quoting D L X (Thread starter):
Rejected again! Why? This one is REALLY upsetting given the reason for its last rejection and the reason for the new rejection. It really screams out that when it comes to subjective tests, the screeners are not in sync with each other. That and the rejections are getting more and more ticky-tack.

No one sees behind the scenes.

The screeners are constantly leaving notes on borderline images to ensure we reject for consistent reasons. We email each other to ensure consistency.
At the end of the day, we're all human and we can only try to remain consistent....

I apologise on behalf of the team for any frustration you're suffering because of it, but there is very little we can do.

I ask however that you are very careful with your shots. These above images in my opinion are rejected for very clear and obvious reasons.

Damon - I expect a lot from you. You're far more experienced than most. A photographer with your long A.net history should be spotting and problems with ease prior to uploading. A photographer with your long A.net history should also be helping the newer photographers with their image problems - and not having issues of your own.

Nevertheless, I am happy to help.
I'll take a better look at these shots from my screening PC at home prior to getting stuck into the queue again.



Less problems with uploads, the queue would really be able to be reduced quickly.

Glenn



Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1555 times:

Quoting Glennstewart (Reply 12):
photographer with your long A.net history should also be helping the newer photographers with their image problems - and not having issues of your own.

Glenn sometimes the problems that we think we dont have come back to bite us no matter how experienced you are you will get bitten.
With all due respect to the screeners here i thought i had my sharpening technique sorted out but now i have had 3 rejections in a row for over sharpen.
Just happens we try to learn from it.
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11362 posts, RR: 52
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1549 times:

Quoting Glennstewart (Reply 12):
A photographer with your long A.net history should be spotting and problems with ease prior to uploading.

I appreciate that, but the problem I tend to have is in inconsistent advice on the subjective parts. (For instance, how the advice to lighten the NW up resulted in an overexposure rejection.)

Quoting Glennstewart (Reply 12):
The screeners are constantly leaving notes on borderline images to ensure we reject for consistent reasons. We email each other to ensure consistency.
At the end of the day, we're all human and we can only try to remain consistent....

I appreciate that too. But if there are all these comments going around behind the scenes, how hard would it be to cut and paste some of these comments into the rejection note? I mean, we hear a lot that the screeners don't have the time to write a personal note on each rejection (and I wouldn't ever ask that of you), but if you've got the comments already, why not send them to us? I think that would be helpful. Otherwise, you might get more situations like this, where the queue size is increased by second- and third-edit uploads that result in second and third rejections.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineGlennstewart From Australia, joined Jun 2003, 1124 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1545 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 14):
I appreciate that, but the problem I tend to have is in inconsistent advice on the subjective parts. (For instance, how the advice to lighten the NW up resulted in an overexposure rejection.)

Sometimes it's quite hard to stright a balance on some shots. Last night for example, there were a couple of shots that we both soft on the nose and over sharpened titles - I couldn't possibly reject without a personal message, because it would send the photographer into a confused state.
Mind you, it's my opinion that both faults were blatant - and therefore while I provided guidance, it was avoidable in the first place.

Some things require balance.
To fix one issue, can introduce another. By lightening the NW, you should have added some contrast to compensate to ensure it wouldn't appear over exposed.

Quoting D L X (Reply 14):
how hard would it be to cut and paste some of these comments into the rejection note?

Anything that would have us go outside the screening window simply adds time to the process and is done very ad hoc. Most of the notes we leaves are put into a box right near the photo.
This is the same box used for a personal rejection. And I use this where ever possible.

Glenn



Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
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...
Help: Can These Be Saved? posted Fri Nov 24 2006 18:20:48 by AirbusA346
Rjxn For "Editing": Can Someone Please Explain? posted Thu Nov 23 2006 18:56:06 by D L X
Hooray Screeners posted Fri Nov 17 2006 22:24:36 by AdamWright
New Screeners posted Sat Nov 11 2006 21:39:18 by Timdegroot
Can It Make The Database? posted Tue Nov 7 2006 08:43:05 by Avsfan
Any Ideas How I Can Fix This One? posted Mon Nov 6 2006 16:32:34 by N62NA
Hi And 'Does This Picture Can Be Improved?' posted Mon Nov 6 2006 15:59:30 by FYODOR
Soft Reject: Can I Borrow Your Eyes? posted Mon Nov 6 2006 15:29:44 by D L X
New Screeners? posted Fri Nov 3 2006 15:54:04 by Cosec59
Motive Rejection - Any Comments From Screeners? posted Wed Nov 1 2006 15:10:40 by Acontador