Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Colorful Paint, Chapter 3  
User currently offlineFrippe From Sweden, joined Sep 2005, 185 posts, RR: 8
Posted (7 years 12 months 2 days ago) and read 2282 times:

Hello again,

Today most of my frustration returned.

This photo is wonderful, no doubt, and it is the first in the database showing the new sticker with the text "Bye Bye EasyJet"

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bartosz Bujak (EPGD Spotters)



But the Cross Data Check shows that it is added as COLORFUL_PAINT.

Myself, I had a rejection and then another on appeal for EI-DAO with at similar text, and it was only accepted when uploaded as OTHER_PAINT.
http://www1.airliners.net/discussion...earchid=259070&s=Colorful#ID259070

What shall I do the next time I upload an aircraft like this?
COLORFUL or OTHER_PAINT?
I can live with rejections, but this situation is not fair. And we have waited a LONG time for a final clarification now, almost one year!

Best wishes to you all,
Frippe

19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently onlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2077 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (7 years 12 months 2 days ago) and read 2275 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

I can understand your frustration for such a rejection Frippe.
This one qualifies for "Hybrid / special marking" [Def.: This includes all kinds of unusual paint schemes ... . Examples are ... special markings that are limited to one or a few aircraft.].
So either there was a mistake (probably by 3 screeners then) or some screening guys need to re-check the category definitions...  scratchchin 

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 2, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2257 times:

Which category should the following plane(s) be in:
1.)
- Full clours of an airline
- but no titles

2.)
- all white with titles?

[Edited 2006-12-01 13:38:39]


-
User currently offlineTZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 52
Reply 3, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2257 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The entire "OTHER_PAINT" vs "COLORFUL_PAINT" etc is being discussed by the crew, and will be announced when a decision is made.

In the meantime, that scheme is a "Hybrid/Special Marking" and not an entire "Colourful Scheme".

TZ



TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 4, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2218 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © A J Best
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © A J Best



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © A J Best
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © A J Best


Are all white and untitled also under discussion?



-
User currently offlineTZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2213 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Peter

The Flightline aircraft is neither "all-white" nor is it "untitled". It is the standard Flightline scheme. If you are going to pick on a photographer (based upon a grudge from another thread) then please use valid examples to do so.

I can only re-iterate my statement of before:
"The entire "OTHER_PAINT" vs "COLORFUL_PAINT" etc is being discussed by the crew, and will be announced when a decision is made."

My words concisely and precisely described the situation, so I have nothing more to add.

TZ



TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 6, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2195 times:

Quoting TZ (Reply 5):
I can only re-iterate my statement of before:

OK so i put my question in clear words:
While the issue is discussed by the crew are the help text's on the upload confirmation page valid and can the uploaders rely on the screeners following the information given there?

Quoting TZ (Reply 5):
based upon a grudge from another thread

If you feel this is the case then it's up to you. I was just interested if all white aircraft (the lower two examples as the Flightline was a wrong choice from my side) are to be uploaded as Hybrid. And furthermore if an airliner in a standard sheme of an airline but without titles also falls under Hybrid. I think yes but a statement based on facts from the crew would be appreciated for sure.
Thanks



-
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3064 posts, RR: 58
Reply 7, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2174 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This issue highlights significant process, procedural and communication issues which I really do hope all will be able to learn from.

I quote from the beginning of Peter's (Invader's) initial thread of January:

Quote:
As there have been some discussions lately about the categories "Special" and "Hybrid/Special Marking", their descriptions have now been revised to solve the issues.


No-one in the photography community could be blamed for assuming therefore that this meant that the category definitions had been changed and implemented. Though many raised concerns about the changes, nothing was said at the time to indicate that they were either only proposals or that, following feedback, they would not be implemented. I recall a great many comments relating to the fact that the help menus had not been changed in light of Peter's thread, but the opportunity was not taken to clarify that things were under discussion and, until this was resolved, the status quo would hold.

In Frippe's more recent thread following his rejection Peter bravely came up - the only Crew member prepared to comment - and said the following:

Quote:
Because there was a lot of discussion, both within and outside the crew, on this complicated and controversial subject, the final implementation was postponed to see if something better would come up. An agreement had not yet been reached however, and then other priorities took over.

As far as I recall, this was the first time there had been some clarification offered as to events behind the scenes. Prior to this it had appeared to many that it was equivocal whether the changes were implemented or not. It did seem that some screeners were adopting a 'relaxed' attitude to uncertainties that uploaders legitimately had about this - hence Frippe's legitimate upset at his rejection.

Be that as it may, I felt aggrieved on Frippe's behalf that his initial rejection and subsequent appeal were processed without the offer of any feedback to him - as though he was left to read minds to know what was expected of him.

I am glad to hear that this matter is under further discussion, and look forward to reading the conclusions. I, for one, fully accept that mistakes and inconsistencies happen - that is impossible to avoid. What is more possible to control is the way the issues are handled and how communications occur about them.

All the best.

Paul


User currently offlineLasham From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 226 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2145 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting TZ (Reply 5):
If you are going to pick on a photographer (based upon a grudge from another thread) then please use valid examples to do so

Hi TZ

He was only trying to find the Best examples!!

Tony



No sun no fun
User currently offlineJaspike From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2008, 1 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2121 times:

Quoting TZ (Reply 3):
In the meantime, that scheme is a "Hybrid/Special Marking" and not an entire "Colourful Scheme".

In the meantime, wouldn't it be easier to stick to the current rules? These extra markings (I'm talking about Ryanair here) have always been classed as COLORFUL_PAINT and it seems a bit bizarre to change the rules temporarily while it's being discussed by the crew - when the rules may change again anyway? Are there any other unannounced and temporary changes to the rules that haven't been mentioned?


User currently offlineTZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2083 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Jaspike (Reply 9):
These extra markings (I'm talking about Ryanair here) have always been classed as COLORFUL_PAINT and it seems a bit bizarre to change the rules temporarily

I am sorry - you are wrong Tom. This is a perfect example of "Special Markings" as the screeners have always understood it.

What I do agree with is Paul's lengthy description above, and the simple fact that we've had differing views within the crew and published in different places on the site. That is precisely why we're revising the situation, and whatever the outcome may be, it will be clearer and easier to understand for all.

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 6):
was just interested if all white aircraft (the lower two examples as the Flightline was a wrong choice from my side) are to be uploaded as Hybrid. And furthermore if an airliner in a standard sheme of an airline but without titles also falls under Hybrid. I think yes but a statement based on facts from the crew would be appreciated for sure.

A sensible question deserves a sensible answer. I have not checked what categories those in the dbare in, but it is my belief that the 146 is not in any category - it's not operating for any airline, so it's no special scheme at all. The Excel is a "Hybrid" because it's operating for them, but only in a partial scheme. This is my understanding of the rules the screeners are working to, and I completely agree that that's not the same rules that Peter V published some months ago. Again, that's precisely why we're having the internal discussion at present.

In the meantime I have reminded the screening team not to reject on the basis of COLORFUL vs OTHER_PAINT.

TZ



TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3064 posts, RR: 58
Reply 11, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2074 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting TZ (Reply 10):
In the meantime I have reminded the screening team not to reject on the basis of COLORFUL vs OTHER_PAINT.

Hallelujah!

Can I make a plea to those changing the rule. PLEASE get rid of this unnecessary confusion between the use of COLOURFUL_PAINT vs OTHER_PAINT vs OTHER when you look up in the cross data search, and yet these categories are referred to as 'Special' vs 'Special/Hybrid' vs 'Normal' in the uploading process. If anyone can give me any sensible rationale for that recipe for confusion I would be interested to hear it. Surely the use of different terminology for the same thing has got to go?

Paul


User currently offlineTZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 52
Reply 12, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2068 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting TZ (Reply 10):
In the meantime I have reminded the screening team not to reject on the basis of COLORFUL vs OTHER_PAINT.



Quoting Psych (Reply 11):
Hallelujah!

There is a caveat - if it's blooming obvious, then they may still get rejected. Uploading a standard BA scheme as COLORFUL_PAINT or the Malaysian Hybiscus(sp?) 747 as "OTHER_PAINT" may still get a reject. The confusing borderline ones should not though, until the matter is resolved.

Quoting Psych (Reply 11):
PLEASE get rid of this unnecessary confusion between the use of ...

Trust me Paul, the forthcoming solution WILL be simple.

It would also be nice if the "Government" category were not called GOVERMENT. I think a youthful Johan was not as good at spelling as he is today!  Wink

TZ



TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
User currently offlineFrippe From Sweden, joined Sep 2005, 185 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2035 times:

Hello again,
And many thanks to you all for your input here. At last, it seems, we will have this matter settled, hopefully in a very short time.

Best wishes to you all,
Frippe

PS
When correcting GOVERNMENT, can you please also start using the spelling COLOURFUL?


User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 14, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 2026 times:

Quoting TZ (Reply 10):
it will be clearer and easier to understand for all.

Good news!!!

One more point: What about the combination of Military and colorful. Is this still valid or is this also under discussion and therefore not executed for the time being. I think i can remember that special shemes on military aircraft also had to be marked as COLORFUL when uploading them. But NOT if it was a display team.
So for example:
Not colorful because of being a display team:

Colorful because being a one off


Is this still valid or also back to the original where Military never had the colorful applied to?
Thanks



-
User currently offlineJaspike From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2008, 1 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 2012 times:

Quoting TZ (Reply 10):
I am sorry - you are wrong Tom. This is a perfect example of "Special Markings" as the screeners have always understood it.

I'm actually right, it just looks like part of the rules where there must be a misunderstanding amongst some screeners.

The editors will have a lot of work to do if those are to be OTHER_PAINT, as the majority of those images are currently COLORFUL_PAINT - which is what Peter V said they were meant to be when I first standardised various UK airlines with these slogans (e.g. VS, FR, U2). Most photogs usually uploaded those images as COLORFUL anyway, it was quite easy to keep these airlines standardised.

COLORFUL_PAINT/special:
aircraft with slogans (but not things like "Qualiflyer", "UNICEF" (on JAL planes), "IATA member, etc). Qualifying for this category are e.g. the "No way BA/AA" or "Do not forget our POW" slogans for these photos
http://www1.airliners.net/discussion...ation_photography/read.main/216276

I don't see how this fits into hybrid/OTHER anyway, these are special/intended markings, not a mixed up/incomplete livery.

That's the main difference between the 2 categories. Special/COLORFUL are intended, special, additional markings. Hybrid/OTHER are hybrids, mixed up, not standard (incomplete) schemes. That's why these ones don't currently fit in OTHER_PAINT.

Anyway, hopefully you understand what I mean and these won't end up in OTHER along with hybrids after the discussion.

Glad images aren't going to be rejected for these categories for now  Smile


User currently offlineFrippe From Sweden, joined Sep 2005, 185 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2003 times:

Thanks a lot, Jaspike, for this post, as you give me back my confidence in my ability to read and understand.

I refer here to Invader's thread,
http://www1.airliners.net/discussion...tion_photography/read.main/216276/
posted in January, where he explicitly stated what was to be uploaded as COLOURFUL.

Never could I then dream of what happened during this summer when apparently some screeners diverted from his rules and no official explanation was given.

Now, at last, we can hope for clarifications, and thanks a lot in advance for that,
Frippe


User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 17, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2001 times:

Quoting TZ (Reply 10):
I am sorry - you are wrong Tom. This is a perfect example of "Special Markings" as the screeners have always understood it.

TZ is correct on this. Before January 2006 those always where special markings.



-
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3064 posts, RR: 58
Reply 18, posted (7 years 12 months 1 day ago) and read 1994 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The above few discussion points between crew members past and present illustrates my point about process and communication - clearly there has been a difference of opinion between some in the screening team and others in the database editing team - as shown by Jaspike (previous database editor) and TZ being unable to agree on this example. Now such things are inevitable and understandable in such an 'organisation' as this. That is not my complaint really - it is the length of time this has been allowed to remain unresolved, and the apparent disinterest with photographers understandably getting completely confused by what they have read and what they see accepted. This came to a head for me with Frippe's failed appeal and thread without any explanation, guidance or formal support.

But hey - in the end there are more important things in life, and it does look as though finally this may be resolved. But it does feel to me unnecessary and avoidable.

Paul


User currently offlineTZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (7 years 12 months 21 hours ago) and read 1971 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Frippe (Reply 16):
Thanks a lot, Jaspike, for this post, as you give me back my confidence in my ability to read and understand.



Quoting Jaspike (Reply 15):
I'm actually right, it just looks like part of the rules where there must be a misunderstanding amongst some screeners



Quoting Psych (Reply 18):
clearly there has been a difference of opinion between some in the screening team and others in the database editing team

Yes, yes, and thrice yes. For the third time I am going to reiterate that we dropped the ball on this. The process of amending the rules back in January was not handled well, and if anybody should take the blame then it's me. I disagreed with Peter V's publicised rules and instructed the screeners to continue with business-as-normal until the matter was resolved. Because it's hardly the most exciting issue (and indeed the number of rejects generated for these reasons is almost insignificant - less than 0.1% of all rejections) it has not got attention until recently. In the meantime the screeners have got the queue down from tens-of-thousands to 4000, screened several 100,000 images, trained new screeners, the editors have corrected 100,000s of images, etc.

While it is true that a perfect model screener would do everything and demand no thanks or no pay, that's not life. In the same way that a perfect photographer would never submit a photo which required careful screening and would never allow bogus info into the db for it to require correcting.

Life's imperfect, but we do admit our mistakes and work to fix them.

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 14):
Is this still valid or is this also under discussion and therefore not executed for the time being.

Good question Peter. My perception is that NO military images should be listed as COLORFUL, and you will never see a rejection if you stick to this rule for now. Again, this is a temporary situation until publication of new simpler rules soon. These are being worked on now, as we speak.

TZ



TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
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...
Which Category (paint Scheme) posted Fri Oct 13 2006 11:25:02 by KAWA
Name On Winglets = Special Paint Or What? posted Thu Aug 10 2006 20:21:08 by Frippe
Special Paint Scheme? posted Fri Jun 23 2006 14:05:41 by 9VSPO
"Paint With Light" posted Sat Apr 22 2006 07:02:09 by JeffM
Help Please - Which Paint Scheme? posted Thu Dec 22 2005 20:25:40 by Psych
What Paint Scheme Would This Be? posted Mon Oct 10 2005 03:44:34 by Vasanthd
How To Make The Most Of Paint Shop Pro 8 posted Fri Aug 5 2005 00:29:17 by ZSOFN
Question, Manufacturer Paint posted Thu Jul 21 2005 12:33:34 by ChrisH
Is This A Special Paint Scheme? posted Fri Jul 15 2005 01:26:02 by Fiveholer
AC Hybrids? Special Paint Scheme Or Not? posted Wed Jul 13 2005 17:26:51 by VinceYUL