Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Changing Information - Photographers' Views  
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3618 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Recently this thread has been going on Site Related Forum, asking about what changes people would like to see to the site:

Airliners.net Wishing-List (by Jorge1812 Nov 6 2006 in Site Related)

I wonder whether photography members here would have more to say if they frequented that Forum more.

Recently I uploaded the following photo and two days after the event realised that I had made a mistake:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Markman


I used the Auto Complete function when uploading and all looked okay initially. I fully accept that it is our responsibility as uploaders to check that the information provided this way is accurate - clearly database editors would have to be working full time to iron out all the imperfections. But even they could not have foreseen this issue - this particular aircraft has recently been painted, apparently for winter lease again to Saudi Arabian - hence the hybrid livery (definitely hybrid, not 'special'  biggrin  ). Of course, the Auto Complete produced the airline as 'Onur Air', but I should have uploaded it as 'Untitled (Onur Air)'. This only dawned on me two days after uploading.

I would have liked to have been able to go into my queue and make the change to that information. But here the only way to tackle this was to remove the initial upload from the queue, and resubmit a new file with the correct information appended. Thus my photo 'lost' two days in the queue. I have to admit I didn't like that, but the photo was not earth-shattering in the first place. I have been in similar situations where I would like to have amended a comment attached to a photo, whilst it was still in the queue.

I can imagine there will be some occasions where maybe a photo did not qualify for a priority screening, but was of particular interest. It seems a shame that both the photographer and the site should lose potentially important 'air time' - in this competitive environment of the Internet - simply because the facility to change information in the queue is not available to uploaders.

With the queue now steady at around 6 or 7 days to final screening, this seems a relevant issue to explore again. Also, importantly, such a facility might also reduce unnecessary rejections.

My questions -

* would it be technically possible/easy to create this option for photographers?

* would photographers see it as a worthy development to the site and one that should be prioritised?

I hope by placing the thread here this is an appropriate issue to raise and seek views from other photographers. I also believe Crew and Johan do read what is being discussed here, so if there is a general view that this would be a good thing then this may help move things forward.

All the best.

Paul

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2901 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3608 times:

I think there would be a benefit in being able to change details once photo's are uploaded. I'm sure I'm not the only one who gets back from the airport and is excited about uploading a new livery or a special paint scheme and in my rush to edit and upload them, make typos or some kind of error with the upload information. This would save having to submit corrections if accepted and improve the accuracy of the database. In the example Paul gave above (thanks for pointing this out Paul!!), I had a very similar shot added the day before Pauls shot listed as Onur Air, with the hybrid box ticked. The aircraft was still operating under Onur Air although its in the Hybrid livery, but thinking about it, it should have been added as Paul uploaded his shot. I've now submitted a correction. If my shot had been in the que when Paul had pointed that one, then it would have been nice to be able to correct the information without pulling it from the que.

I think its a great idea. Dare I say it, the 'other' site has this ability and the odd occasion I've uploaded their (mainly cabin shots since I've not sussed taking them as yet!), the ability to correct mistakes before they've been screened is a useful facility.

Thanks,

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineLinco22 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1380 posts, RR: 16
Reply 2, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3578 times:

Hi Paul,

I would agree it would be benificial.

Regards
Colin  Smile

P.S. Apologies for the short reply, but I think its all I need to say


User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 3, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 3569 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hey Paul this issue was raised a while ago and the photogs in many places on many threads voiced that they would like this feature me included but no one will come to the party from the big boys in charge
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineAirMalta From Malta, joined Mar 2006, 394 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3535 times:

Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
My questions -

* would it be technically possible/easy to create this option for photographers?

* would photographers see it as a worthy development to the site and one that should be prioritised?

Good point Paul on this thread.Hope a.net will take yr advise to do this other DB have it.
Malcolm


User currently offlineVzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 834 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3532 times:

There have been many occasions where I would have appreciated the ability to modify information on shots-in-waiting. Some of those were due to errors/omissions I had made, but others were due to newly learned information. (For example, coming across another shot that shows the previously unknown registration of the uploaded subject.) Right now, I have two versions of the same photo in the queue, each with variations of information. I'm awaiting a response from the database folks as to which is correct:

Grumman S-2A Tracker
Grumman S-2 Tracker (G-89/G-121/S2F)

-- or --

Grumman S-2A Tracker (G-.../S2F-...)
Grumman S-2 Tracker (G-89/G-121/S2F)

In this case, the question occurred to me in time to be able to seek clarification (just one more benefit of a healthily sized queue!), but if the shot had been about to enter screening I would have had to decide between leaving it as "Grumman S-2A Tracker (G-.../S2F-...)" or deleting and reloading it.

-Mark



"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
User currently offlineAcontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 30
Reply 6, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3523 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
would photographers see it as a worthy development to the site and one that should be prioritised?

Yes.
Although I have not uploaded that many photos so far, it has already happened to me a couple of times that I submitted a particular picture just to notice later that I wanted to change something on the comments. Definetly a usefull option!



Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2069 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3509 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
would photographers see it as a worthy development to the site and one that should be prioritised?

 yes  YES!  yes 

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 21
Reply 8, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3494 times:

I've been thinking of asking this question for a long time, but somehow, I didn't dare. You've now, Paul, posted that question, so I agree very much with you, this would be a great feature.

Always as boring when your picture has been for 9 days in the Q and you notice the info is completely wrong.


User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 9, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3491 times:

It really sucks when you type in the correct info and it gets changed by someone that thinks they know what its supposed to be:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas - Jetwash Images



There isnt a dash in the BUNO. A couple corrections submitted, nothing changed.

So yes, Id love to be able to go in and make the corrections myself.


User currently offlineDlednicer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 544 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3453 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Vzlet (Reply 5):
Grumman S-2A Tracker
Grumman S-2 Tracker (G-89/G-121/S2F)

-- or --

Grumman S-2A Tracker (G-.../S2F-...)
Grumman S-2 Tracker (G-89/G-121/S2F)

The type should be: Grumman S-2A Tracker (G-89/S2F-1)
If you use the "View Menus" option in the Aircraft Type block on the Photos Upload page, you will see this option.


User currently offlineDlednicer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 544 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3451 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 9):
There isnt a dash in the BUNO. A couple corrections submitted, nothing changed.

The BuNo is a "bastard" one, in that they have taken the USAF serial number and removed the dash to make it a BuNo. As it is on a USMC aircraft, it would be correct to not have a dash. I confirmed this by checking Scramble and have removed the dash.


User currently offlineVzlet From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 834 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 3436 times:

Quoting Dlednicer (Reply 10):
The type should be: Grumman S-2A Tracker (G-89/S2F-1)
If you use the "View Menus" option in the Aircraft Type block on the Photos Upload page, you will see this option.

Thanks, David. I fell for the autofill info, and never ventured into the menus. (Perhaps a lesson there?  scratchchin  )

=======================================

So, I'll re-upload the photo, and this case ends up as another example of why it'd be nice to be able to modify info post-upload.

-Mark



"That's so stupid! If they're so secret, why are they out where everyone can see them?" - my kid
User currently offlineDlednicer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 544 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3414 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Vzlet (Reply 12):
So, I'll re-upload the photo, and this case ends up as another example of why it'd be nice to be able to modify info post-upload.

I gotta agree. I pulled one of mine from the queue yesterday and resubmitted it, to fix an error that I spotted. In that case, while submitting the image, I discovered that there were already two pictures of the airplane in the db, both incorrectly identified. Being an editor, I quickly fixed them, but forgot to correct the autofill on mine.

BTW - the Photos>Photo Index feature in the main menu is really handy for figuring out how to identify aircraft that are sparsely represented in the db.


User currently offlinePictureThis From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 196 posts, RR: 7
Reply 14, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3414 times:

I don't think many photographers will disagree with this function being implemented. What we really need is some crews' views on this. I'm sure it can be implemented as other sites do it.

Ever since I started i've never understood it. There's doesn't appear to be any advantage of the interface being the way it is.

Not being able to change details after they were uploaded is just a burden which could be sorted, and not everyone (including me) gets things right the first time round.

[Edited 2006-11-09 20:04:23]


Make sure they know we're playing the game, but we don't need to play the game because we've already won the game.
User currently offlineDlednicer From United States of America, joined May 2005, 544 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3401 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

I have no problems with info being edited by the uploader between submittal and acceptance. Where the problem comes in is after acceptance. From my work in the db, I can tell you that you have to limit access or things will become more of a mess. The amount of standardization and correction I have had to do is mindboggling.

For example, in cleaning up the F-86s, I first had to get get the registrations corrected - a lot of USAF examples were missing the first digit and the dash. Some images didn't have registrations listed, even when they were visible in the image. In a few cases, I had to figure out the registrations by looking up the holdings of particular museums, etc. Then, as F-86 Sabres were built by five different companies (North American, Canadair, Commonwealth, Fiat and Mitsubishi), I had to find all the incorrectly IDed ones - there were a lot. At this point, I standardized the types too. For example, Canadair CL-13B Sabre 6s were listed as Canadair CL-13B Sabre Mk6, Canadair CL-13B Sabre Mk.6, Canadair CL-13 Sabre Mk6, Canadair Sabre 6, etc. I even had to create the Fiat and Mitsubishi generic types, as they didn't exist yet. If these things aren't standardized, the db links won't work. Next, I went through one reg at a time and looked up construction numbers, if they were missing. Scramble and the Baugher tables were really handy for this. In a few cases, I even figured out that the registrations given weren't right. For example, one with an N number was listed by its old military registration. At the same time, I checked that the codes were listed and listed correctly. Also, I checked to make sure the airline was correct. Again, some were not right.

At this point, I figured I was done, but really, the process isn't complete until the Places are checked and the Special properties (Military, Prop, Preserved, etc.) are also checked. All the work up to this point took me about a week of my free time. The Sikorsky Black Hawks took me almost a month.

My point is that by letting everyone loose in the database, the consistency of the database will quickly deteriorate.


User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 3385 times:

Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
I would have liked to have been able to go into my queue and make the change to that information.

It was the beginning of the year when I bought this up.

Quoting JumboJim747 (Reply 3):
Hey Paul this issue was raised a while ago and the photogs in many places on many threads voiced that they would like this feature me included but no one will come to the party from the big boys in charge

That's right Jimbo, and after much positive response from other photographers, still nothing. It was "too hard". I don't see what's wrong with having access to edit small details of a pic thats in the Q instead of pulling it down, re-uploading to have it back at the end of the Q. That way if a scheme is "special" or "hybrid" that someone has uploaded, but they aren't sure, then they have time to find out and make the change.


User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 17, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3359 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Eadster (Reply 16):
That's right Jimbo, and after much positive response from other photographers, still nothing. It was "too hard". I don't see what's wrong with having access to edit small details of a pic thats in the Q instead of pulling it down, re-uploading to have it back at the end of the Q. That way if a scheme is "special" or "hybrid" that someone has uploaded, but they aren't sure, then they have time to find out and make the change.

It would help also in the Q as the shot might get rejected for info and it will need to be resubmitted.
That would add to the Q size .
Its really annoying when you upload a shot and a few days later when its almost in screening you notice an error then you are faced with the only choice you really have to pull the shot or risk it getting rejected for info or category or whatever this feature would be really helpful to all
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2044 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3339 times:

Quoting Dlednicer (Reply 15):
My point is that by letting everyone loose in the database, the consistency of the database will quickly deteriorate.

I don't think the original post implied that photographer's should be able to edit information once their photo's accepted to the database. Somebody "sneaked" that one in in one of the replies. I agree with you there.

However, editing it while waiting in the queue would be nice. I don't see it as essential, as in a worst case scenario you get rejected for info and the second time around better get it right. Big deal.

If you had the option, I'm wondering what could possibly happen:

1) I see a lot of photos (even some of mine) that should have been rejected for "info" where the screeners didn't notice. Knowing that they're able to change the info post-upload (while in queue), will uploaders get even sloppier, thinking they can fix it in a day or two but then won't get around to it? (In which case, the new feature would be a classic case of a "disimprovement.")

or

2) Info does in fact get better, less info rejections mean less re-uploads, mean less clutter in the queue.

The approach taken should be a pragmatic one. Re-uploads of priority shots will still be added quickly, re-uploads of non-priority shots will be added after two weeks instead of one. Does it really matter? I don't see an important gain for a.net, I do see a potential gain for the uploaders.

So: What is more economical, considering bandwidth and screeners' as well as editors' time? Photographers editing data while pictures are in the queue, or more re-uploads and constant submission of corrections?



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 19, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3281 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 18):
I don't think the original post implied that photographer's should be able to edit information once their photo's accepted to the database.

Correct - here I am only focusing on the opportunity to edit the information on your upload between submission and screening. The ability to alter information after acceptance is already available - as it should be - but, as it is vetted by editors anyhow, shouldn't be any problem in terms of introducing inaccuracies.

Thanks very much to all for the comments so far. I would like to hear from anyone in a position to know more about what the implications would be to the site of considering introducing such a feature - whether it would be easy/seen as desirable etc. I think the viewpoints expressed here and previously suggest that it would be a valuable addition and a positive move for photographers.

On TransIsland's point 1) - I can't say I agree that this is a reason not to do such a thing, even if it were true. Surely most will not purposely upload incorrect information, as they would know that a rejection might be on the cards (and most of us don't like those), and it would just be more work. It has to be better to try to get it right at the outset. But, given most of us will make mistakes from time to time, as does the Auto Complete function, such a user friendly feature which enhances the uploading process has got to be a good thing overall. You can't not do something worthwhile just in case the few 'abuse' the feature.

Ultimately the gain for A.net is that photographers - the heart of the site in the end - have a more positive and helpful experience of the site. That has to be a good thing.

Cheers.

Paul


User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 20, posted (7 years 9 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3236 times:

Quoting Dlednicer (Reply 11):
I confirmed this by checking Scramble and have removed the dash.



Quoting Dlednicer (Reply 15):
My point is that by letting everyone loose in the database, the consistency of the database will quickly deteriorate

I did the same and uploaded it without the dash. I guess someone along the line thought they "knew" what it was "supposed" to read.  sarcastic 

Anyhow, thanks for making it right.


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...
Changing The Photographers Name On Database posted Tue Jan 18 2005 12:02:20 by Thowman
Meet Some Non-A.net LHR Photographers! posted Sat Nov 11 2006 00:38:47 by Aero145
An Improvement To Photographers Choice? posted Mon Oct 23 2006 08:18:43 by Q330
The "New" Professional Photographers posted Tue Oct 17 2006 18:37:30 by N314AS
MAN Photographers... posted Sat Oct 14 2006 22:23:24 by Daleaholic
Your Views On Cabin Photos posted Fri Oct 13 2006 14:35:11 by N178UA
Help From Portuguese Photographers Please... posted Fri Sep 29 2006 18:14:07 by JakTrax
Eurocontrol Photo Database Update To Photographers posted Thu Sep 7 2006 11:19:53 by FlyAUA
Do Not Cheat By Changing The Date On Your Uploads! posted Mon Aug 28 2006 00:58:53 by AndyHunt
MAN/ATL/FLL Photographers posted Sun Aug 27 2006 19:13:58 by Daleaholic