Newark777 From United States, joined Dec 2004, 8796 posts, RR: 41 Posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 920 times:
While browsing through the thread about the slot restrictions, I can across the following quote, which really stuck out to me:
Quote: As a non screener you don't see the absolutely horrible shots we get submitted from people with 0 photos in the db.
If this is a big enough problem to affect the size of the queue, then why aren't we temporarily banning these people?
The number of upload slots is already limited for beginners, so it only makes sense we don't allow people who obviously don't know what they are doing to upload.
OD720 From Lebanon, joined Feb 2003, 1897 posts, RR: 48 Reply 2, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 908 times:
Quoting Newark777 (Thread starter): If this is a big enough problem to affect the size of the queue, then why aren't we temporarily banning these people?
Why would you want to ban them? Screening these shots shouldn't take a lot of effort. These are easy rejections.
Those bans would have very little effect because the affected uploaders could always sign up for a new photographer account using different e-mail addresses and photographer names. this has happened in the past for a couple of times already.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2672 posts, RR: 65 Reply 4, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 880 times:
Ah - I am glad to see a new thread here because that other one took a long time to load up, it was so long!
I agree with Vatche here. I am no screener, but I would imagine that these kind of shots - though irritating in many ways for the screeners - are rather easy to deal with in a matter of seconds. For me this raises some very interesting discussion points about the screening process - I mentioned a few in that other thread.
Though these kind of poor quality shots must inflate the size of the queue rather a lot, intuitively I wonder whether it really makes that big a difference to screening time overall for the queue as a whole; they just get dumped in seconds, I would have thought. So I reckon this is not one of the key factors in determining long term solutions to the large queue length.
IL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2152 posts, RR: 57 Reply 5, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 868 times:
I often tick a personal rejection reason with comment: "Please do not upload pictures taken with your mobile phone". Sounds a bit harsh perhaps, as this person might have used an actual camera, but I think it'll make them think twice before uploading again.
Scbriml From United Kingdom (England), joined Jul 2003, 8943 posts, RR: 51 Reply 6, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 813 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting IL76 (Reply 5): "Please do not upload pictures taken with your mobile phone". Sounds a bit harsh perhaps, as this person might have used an actual camera, but I think it'll make them think twice before uploading again.
DC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1394 posts, RR: 21 Reply 7, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 801 times:
I'm not in favour of dissuading newcomers at all. It's not very long since I was one, so I don't like the idea of banning people for uploading poor quality shots to begin with.
Quoting IL76 (Reply 5): I often tick a personal rejection reason with comment: "Please do not upload pictures taken with your mobile phone". Sounds a bit harsh perhaps, as this person might have used an actual camera, but I think it'll make them think twice before uploading again.
If this is the case Eduard, surely the upload page needs to be more clear as to what is and isn't acceptable, perhaps provide relevant examples.
Cosec59 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 765 times:
Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 7): surely the upload page needs to be more clear as to what is and isn't acceptable, perhaps provide relevant examples.
Once you have entered the reg and location and the info has been generated, there is a link that will show all photos of the selected reg and therefore indicate the quality required
Scbriml From United Kingdom (England), joined Jul 2003, 8943 posts, RR: 51 Reply 9, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 761 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 8): there is a link that will show all photos of the selected reg and therefore indicate the quality required
Yes, but it's not that obvious and it's passive - the uploaded has to want to compare their shot with the others.
I think what DC10Tim is suggesting is something more on the first page where you click on the "I have read and understood the above" link to get to the actual upload page.
Ghostbase From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 344 posts, RR: 4 Reply 10, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 759 times:
If I have understood Harry correctly his proposal would mean that only photographers with photos already accepted in the db would be able upload more photos?
Even if applied only on a temporary basis this would send a very strong and negative message that Airliners.Net is nothing more than a large exclusive private club where belonging is everything. It would gradually become more and more self-centred and eventually would start to wither and die. New members are the lifeblood of any organisation.
I believe that A.Net is aspirational for many aviation photographers, perhaps the majority, and it is important that the current open access for all potential contributors is maintained.
Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 7): surely the upload page needs to be more clear as to what is and isn't acceptable, perhaps provide relevant examples.
Good idea! Surely it would be possible to put together a 'rights and wrongs' page which would visually point out the standards through submitted photos, perhaps presented in a gently humourous way. A link to this could be available to all new photographers. We tend to forget that when we join A.Net the standards are not as clear as we tend to think. I personally found out the boundaries through quite a few rejections and it would have been good to have had some sort of visual reference guide.
Cosec59 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 11, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 747 times:
Quoting Scbriml (Reply 9): Yes, but it's not that obvious and it's passive - the uploaded has to want to compare their shot with the others.
I think what DC10Tim is suggesting is something more on the first page where you click on the "I have read and understood the above" link to get to the actual upload page.
So are you supposing that new uploaders don't look at the photos on the site before they submit a photo?
Ghostbase From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 344 posts, RR: 4 Reply 12, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 716 times:
Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 11): So are you supposing that new uploaders don't look at the photos on the site before they submit a photo?
Looking at someone else's photo does not automatically show a new photographer specifically what the A.Net standards are that need to be met or how to achieve them. It will make tham want to achieve them though
An analogy would be if you decided that you wanted to learn to drive a car and visited the local racing track to watch a top racing driver do a few circuits at speed. You watch the driver drive the circuits, then get in your own car and do the same. Will you then be as good as that racing driver just as a result of watching him/her? Of course not.
There needs to be something more specific here which shows visually what is and is not acceptable here. Standards have to be actively pointed out for people to be able to achieve them.
The oft given advice of 'search for and read the thread that was posted about this 15 months ago, dummy!' tends not to be very helpful either.
Mikephotos From United States, joined Oct 2000, 2923 posts, RR: 63 Reply 13, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 702 times:
Quoting Ghostbase (Reply 12): An analogy would be if you decided that you wanted to learn to drive a car and visited the local racing track to watch a top racing driver do a few circuits at speed. You watch the driver drive the circuits, then get in your own car and do the same. Will you then be as good as that racing driver just as a result of watching him/her? Of course not
No, of course not....but surely you'll learn that the car stays on the track as you go around and not all over the grass I think the discussion is about those who prefer to drive on grass or at the very least has never seen a car driving on pavement.
McG1967 From United Kingdom (Scotland), joined Apr 2006, 299 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 694 times:
As someone who is trying to get their first pic onto the database,and struggling at times with PS, why not offer a pre-screening service. This would only need to be a stickied thread in this forum, that screeners and others with a more experienced eye could offer advice on bringing shots up to standard. It would also reduce the number of similar topics that appear every couple of days on the forum.
Newark777 From United States, joined Dec 2004, 8796 posts, RR: 41 Reply 15, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 689 times:
Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 8): Once you have entered the reg and location and the info has been generated, there is a link that will show all photos of the selected reg and therefore indicate the quality required
Yes, but it is obvious people aren't doing that.
Quoting Ghostbase (Reply 10): If I have understood Harry correctly his proposal would mean that only photographers with photos already accepted in the db would be able upload more photos?
No no no, of course not. My suggestion would be to prevent people from uploading who have previously been uploading photos that are obviously far below standards.
Reading all the replies, you've convinced me banning is not the best solution. However, you need to do more to educate new uploaders on the quality of the site. Currently on the upload page, there is a "Special Note to new contributors" that is very small and easily just scrolled right over. It is clear many uploaders are not aware of the high quality standards here.
Brettdespain From United States, joined May 2005, 142 posts, RR: 17 Reply 16, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 689 times:
Looking at some of my very early a.net posts versus my latest ones, I'm glad I didn't give up when I got (and still do get) multiple rejections. I have learned a great deal in trying to get my images accepted, and I think my work is better for it. Sure, sometimes I don't see eye to eye with the reasons some screeners give for rejections, but they don't show up in my cockpit and tell me how to fly either.
Everyone is a new-comer at some point in their life. The high standards this site sets makes sure that every one gets introduced to the steep learning curve of aviation photography.
Newark777 From United States, joined Dec 2004, 8796 posts, RR: 41 Reply 17, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 684 times:
Quoting Brettdespain (Reply 16):
Everyone is a new-comer at some point in their life. The high standards this site sets makes sure that every one gets introduced to the steep learning curve of aviation photography.
There is a clear difference between people who are getting a lot of rejections because they are just under the quality curve, and are working hard to get their first acceptance, and those that are taking 400px wide photos with their cell phones and uploading it here.
I don't understand why people associate learning to photograph with uploading their photos here. Learn all you want, just do some self-screening and don't upload the obviously poor photos.
Brettdespain From United States, joined May 2005, 142 posts, RR: 17 Reply 18, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 672 times:
Quoting Newark777 (Reply 17): I don't understand why people associate learning to photograph with uploading their photos here. Learn all you want, just do some self-screening and don't upload the obviously poor photos.
Absolutely. However, my point was that my earlier photographs, while not as pleasing to me as my latest images, were still good enough to be accepted on A.net. I'm not saying that we should be in the business of teaching photography basics here and we should all be dilligent in self-screening. But, you have to admit that there is a learning process here even if it is only trying to learn what the screeners are looking for. There are literally hundreds of posts on this website trying to learn just that. Are they all beginner, uneducated amatuer photographers? I think not.
My point is that we should welcome the truly dedicated new-comer and help them learn, just like we did, and hopefully still are.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2672 posts, RR: 65 Reply 20, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 660 times:
Quoting Brettdespain (Reply 18): My point is that we should welcome the truly dedicated new-comer and help them learn, just like we did, and hopefully still are.
100% agree with that point Brett.
McG1967 - feel free to get in touch if you feel I may be of some help. For me one of the primary purposes of this Forum is for people to post threads asking for advice - I think those with more experience should be tolerant of those with little or none. After all, there is no requirement to open up threads unless you want to. But I do think Harry and others make a valid point in that there is something wrong if people consider it appropriate to upload shots that anyone who has spent even a little time on the site will realise are way below par - photos from mobiles would be an obvious example. Looking at further ways that may help reducing this likelihood seems to be a sensible way forward.
I recall some time ago some thoughts about splitting the Photography Forum, or making it available to photographers only, or something like that. These may also be ideas worthy of further consideration.
When discussions are thoughtful and advice freely given this Forum is at its best.
Tbird From United States, joined Oct 2001, 848 posts, RR: 31 Reply 21, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 657 times:
The real issue is the crap that some people upload plain and simple. A.net is free to upload to and is the known more then other sites. When you have thousands of pictures of cut off aircraft, blurry planes, and horizons that are on 45 degree angles it becomes a daunting task for screeners. The other issue I see is people who upload the same plane (different regi) from the same location time and time again.
I recently saw three AWA CRJ 900s that looked exactly the same. Each was taken from the same spot, same angle; same kind of light, and on the same date, the only difference was the regis. People need to self screen before they upload; it’s not about quantity of pics it’s about quality. I’d rather have only a 100 pics that thousands have enjoyed vs a 1000 pics that say nothing.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2672 posts, RR: 65 Reply 22, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 651 times:
Quoting Tbird (Reply 21): The real issue is the crap that some people upload plain and simple.
Tom - I am just not so sure.
No doubt about it - having to wade through really poor quality shots must be irritating for screeners, and there can be no doubt that it takes up time. But I would imagine that screening such photos is one of the easiest jobs for the screeners - complete in about 10 seconds flat (screeners here may want to correct this assumption). So overall I am not so sure that it is awful photos that cause the queue length that we have seen.
For me of much more relevance is the availability of screeners and their time, and the process that has to occur for photos to be accepted that are of decent quality. Of course, anything that reduces the amount of demand on the screeners' time - controlled by upload limits for individuals and appropriate pre-screening - is worth getting right. But I think the former issue is the key.
Newark777 From United States, joined Dec 2004, 8796 posts, RR: 41 Reply 23, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 636 times:
Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 19):
Why not just "throw it in" one of the other two threads acurrently brewing?
Because this is a different topic. Thanks for your well thought out, articulate contribution to this thread.
Quoting Brettdespain (Reply 18): However, my point was that my earlier photographs, while not as pleasing to me as my latest images, were still good enough to be accepted on A.net.
But then that is not the kind of photographs I am talking about. There is a huge difference between a newcomer trying to get his photos accepted and someone uploading shots willy nilly without any regard to the standards of the site.
INNflight From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3598 posts, RR: 71 Reply 24, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 626 times:
Quoting Newark777 (Reply 17): I don't understand why people associate learning to photograph with uploading their photos here. Learn all you want, just do some self-screening and don't upload the obviously poor photos.
Quoting Newark777 (Reply 23): There is a huge difference between a newcomer trying to get his photos accepted and someone uploading shots willy nilly without any regard to the standards of the site.
With every upcoming reply in this thread I wonder.... why does Harry actually care?!?! Eager to get the queue down another 200 photos by banning a bunch of uploaders (note - not photographers)? Just for the sake of it?
Doesn't make much sense imo. As said in the previous thread several times, there will be new screeners added and trained soon. They'll certainly improve the situation (which is better than during the entire last year btw, thanks to dedicated crew members).
Florian
AirTeamImages - take the high road and others will follow
DC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1394 posts, RR: 21 Reply 25, posted (3 years 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 589 times:
Quoting Scbriml (Reply 9): I think what DC10Tim is suggesting is something more on the first page where you click on the "I have read and understood the above" link to get to the actual upload page.
Yes that's exactly what I mean Steve. Just a couple of photos showing what is acceptable quality. Perhaps more importantly, a couple of examples of what is not, shots from mobiles, internal reflection from inside terminals or shots that are just not level or cropped half the plane out.
I do think it is important to stress that the site wants people to improve their skills however, as opposed to basically saying "They're crap - sod off". Perhaps even provide links to the workflows and tutorials that have been written by this forum's members.
Regards,
Tim.
Obviously missing something....
26 Codeshare: That's normal. Per 1000 shots there will be some excellent ones, some decent, some good, some horrible... I used to screen for one website (not Brand
27 DC10Tim: I agree KS and certainly don't think new uploaders should be banned. It would be an interesting thread to ask how many attempts people had before the
28 Shep: Quoting Tbird (Reply 21): The real issue is the crap that some people upload plain and simple. Speaking as a former screener, I can say "crap" is not
29 Newark777: This is what I brought up above, and it is the easiest thing to do, along with making the note to new photogs more prominent as well. As I said, most
30 NIKV69: True, I thought Jeff's approach was harsh but hey for a minute your insulted but in the long run you are a better photographer. They will always be h
31 Edoca: Sorry for slightly hijacking the thread, but then again, it seems like the original question is more or less answered... I'd just like to know from th
32 Mikephotos: Everything keeps saying quality over quantity but whats wrong with quality and quantity? There are many many photographers here who have over 1,000 p
33 Edoca: Very true! I personally have an average of over 2500 per pic with my measly 105 shots here, but if you know that my top-2 pictures have almost 100,00
34 Flyfisher1976: It is? The queue has been discussed to death in multiple threads. I just don't understand what the big deal is. It is a website...this is a hobby for
35 Codeshare: The limits are working. And so are the screeners. There are a maximum of 1140 shots from one day. So, already less uploads to screen. KS/codeshare
36 Eadster: True, take a look at the Q now. It's the best I've seen it since I've been a member here, and its still shrinking in size. Well done to all. Keep up t
Sponsor Message: 
From United States, joined Dec 2004, 8796 posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2005, 2641 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Feb 2003, 1897 posts, 
From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4146 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2672 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2152 posts, .gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (England), joined Jul 2003, 8943 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
I think the discussion is about those who prefer to drive on grass or at the very least has never seen a car driving on pavement..gif){kind=small}
From United Kingdom (Scotland), joined Apr 2006, 299 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
