Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9593 posts, RR: 70
Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2143 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
This type of thread is ridiculous. Richard, I have an idea why you might be upset, seems to me you had a picture in the queue that had a really awkward crop and there was much discussion about it, I for one would not have allowed it in, but other screeners liked it, but to do a dummy spit and threatned to leave is nothing but an attempt you slag the screening team and create attention for yourself.
FlightShadow From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 937 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2046 times:
Are you simply quitting because you no longer take interest, are you "retiring" at the end of a long, enjoyable "career" of aviation photography, or do I sense some hostility? If it is the latter, why have a hissy fit over a rejected photo? Take a deep breath and move on. It's not that hard. Don't leave us out cold just because a shot (or a few) got rejected.
If you're interested in joining a website about aviation in Utah, please see my profile.
CYEGsTankers From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 245 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 2042 times:
The attempts at getting a good photo accepted no adays has got out of hand. Some who can afford the high price equipment can amazingly get it through the scive. I keep watching the acceptance ratio plum it and it looks really bad right now. Though I did have ramp access in the past and could probably get it again, it just seems very unfair to not only the ones who try but the ones who are new at this as well. I think this is a good site, photos, information and good for contacts, but the restrictions are escalating too much. All magazine photos getting in now. My little batch of small props lately is nothing to write home about, but that's airside.
2nd thread on this topic so,
(I'll take a break for now and check back in when I can afford a
multimillion dollar lens)
Click, were you on about this photo? http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1107420/L/
PS: Thanks PRAT (Mr. Gibson)
Oh well, don't let the door... well, you know the rest.
I'll ask this again. If you don't want to upload, why do you feel the need to tell everyone? It's obvious you're looking for something else. Or as Royal said, you are just trying to stick it to the screeners.
CYEGsTankers From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 245 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1986 times:
Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 9): Your ability to plug your own photos is really amazing.
To make it easier for all the others
Umm.. Very cute, you think of this in an internet cafe? And that was a link for Click.
Quoting JeffM (Reply 11): Or as Royal said, you are just trying to stick it to the screeners.
Umm.. At what point did I state that? I stated the restrictions were too high throughout the site.
Quoting JeffM (Reply 11): Oh well, don't let the door... well, you know the rest.
Umm.. Why do you even bother responding to my posts? Really, email me if you must.
Quoting FlightShadow (Reply 7): Are you simply quitting because you no longer take interest, are you "retiring" at the end of a long, enjoyable "career" of aviation photography, or do I sense some hostility? If it is the latter, why have a hissy fit over a rejected photo? Take a deep breath and move on. It's not that hard. Don't leave us out cold just because a shot (or a few) got rejected.
Didn't say I was quiting, stated that I was taking a break, rethinking if that's a better word for you.
To keep it short, it's been MANY rejected photos, and no I'm not lacing them here. There have been corrections made to them as well as appeals. Also I have taken many deep breaths and seen that photos that have taken some effort in getting, yes, effort as in a car being stuck, being hassled by RCMP, chased off by farmers, although they are from PUBLIC roads, be swept away.
BoeingOnFinal From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 476 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1870 times:
Who cares about acceptance ratio and that stuff? When I watch these great photographs in here, I think that this photographer is awsome to produce something like this. I don't look at the acceptance ratio. It's what's in here that counts, not the rejected photos that we can't look at anyways.
Keep sending in those great images, and it don't get accepted, try again. That is what makes this site so great, good quality. Not quantity or acceptance ratio
Flyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 802 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1786 times:
Quoting Viv (Reply 18): One of my most recent acceptances was taken with a point-and-shoot camera (Canon Ixus 800).
Good for you....sounds like you got lucky.
Quoting Timdegroot (Reply 19): Just had a look at your rejections and except from the latest one I see only correctly rejected shots.
In your opinion...and here lies the problem...such a wide range of opinions and standards used by the screeners = inconsistent screening results. Getting pictures accepted here is more often a lottery than anything else. Different screeners on different monitors with different opinions on what is acceptable. Apparently, despite many discussions and opinions on how we could make the process more standardized and fair little is likely to change.
Ptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3883 posts, RR: 19
Reply 24, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1753 times:
Quoting CYEGsTankers (Reply 14): photos that have taken some effort in getting, yes, effort as in a car being stuck, being hassled by RCMP, chased off by farmers, although they are from PUBLIC roads, be swept away.
Sounds like you are in fact frustrated because you no longer have access.
If you have something to say worth discussing, why not do so when starting the thread. You're talking so vague and incoherent.
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
: Comparing the acceptance standards on this site to any other "game" is rather silly. The only parallel I could draw is if each time Tiger hit the bal
: I do not agree with the parallel you draw. While I agree that there is some (probably inevitable) inconsistency in the screening process, nevertheles
: Very much agree with Viv and with BoeingOnFinal in Reply 17. It's perhaps a pity you cannot see your older rejected pictures any more. I bet you woul
: I sense that some of the frustration is coming from people who are trying to be more adventurous in their photography and have technically good shots