Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Screeners Should Be Divided Into Groups.  
User currently offlinePepef From Finland, joined Oct 2002, 440 posts, RR: 9
Posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3731 times:

I think it's time the screeners were divided into groups. Each group would screen different categories depending on their area of expertize. The screening results would be much more consistent.

You should have at least 20-30 accepted photos in a category before you earn the right to screen photos in that category.

Also, there should be a tick-box on the upload page where you choose "prepared on an LCD-monitor" or "prepared on a CRT-monitor". The screener and uploader should be using the same type of monitor.

-Pepef-

Yes, I got another reject  biggrin 

41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 49
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3722 times:

OK... Well what do you know... The LCD in my office sucks. Any photo looks bad on this one. Do we need an upload tickbox for "prepared on crappy DELL LCD" now?

Great idea...

Quoting Pepef (Thread starter):
You should have at least 20-30 accepted photos in a category before you earn the right to screen photos in that category.

Let me guess, you're aiming at cockpit shots, right? Well, we'll just not screen your photos then, as none of us have 20+ cockpitshots. Too bad, you'll just have to wait until a screener hits 20-30 cockpit photos. The ACCIDENT/INCIDENT/CRASH-category is going to be a hoot too. Big grin

E

[Edited 2007-01-09 14:41:31]

User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3711 times:

Wow, Pepef, I'm sure the screeners would like to have us divided into at least two groups. I think at a minimum it would be 'whiners' and 'non-whiners'.....

I'm sure they love hearing you tell them how they should be doing business.

..another topic for the 'it's not broke, no need to fix it..' bin.


User currently offlineCodeshare From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3700 times:

Pepef, why such ideas? It may seem that you are angry at a few rejections, right? So am I, but it's better to get over it, cause it's just not worth it to lose patience over a few photos that are not wanted here.
Everybody has ideas about 'improving' the site, but I'm sure so do the crew and Johan.

So just calm down  Smile

KS/codesahre



How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3688 times:

Pepef,
pure "flaming" is on its way...
I'm sorry for your rej.

Regards



Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
User currently offlineGhostbase From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 354 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3656 times:

Well, I upload mainly military and wrecks and relics dating back as far as 1985 which I guess is heading towards 'special interest', can't be too many screeners into those. However, I have never encountered any problem caused by lack of "screener expertise". In fact, from the personal messages I occasionally receive, I have the impression that in the case of uploading something quite specialised one of the three screenings has generally been by a screener who *does* have expertise in the photo subject matter.

 ghost 



"I chase my dreams but I never seem to arrive"
User currently offlineChrisH From Sweden, joined exactly 10 years ago today! , 1136 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3646 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 2):
Wow, Pepef, I'm sure the screeners would like to have us divided into at least two groups. I think at a minimum it would be 'whiners' and 'non-whiners'.....

I can think of a few more... sycophants come to mind Big grin



what seems to be the officer, problem?
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3646 times:

I'll give him credit it is original. I am surprised this thread hasn't been locked yet.

User currently offlineSkidmarks From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, RR: 55
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3637 times:

For one minute I thought this was going to say "Screeners should be divided into groups and shot" Big grin

But no, just another suggestion to complicate the screening process, which on the whole, works pretty well. JeffM is right - it ain't broke, get your sweaty mitts off it!!  wink 

Andy  old 



Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9603 posts, RR: 69
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3616 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

My advice would be to branch out and try uploading something other than a cockpit shot of a Finnair flight.

While I enjoy looking at such shots, and they are very popular with our customers, you have pretty much saturated the market.

As far as rejections, are you talking about the in flight cockpit shot of OH-LBR? It was rejected for quality, and rightly so, it is very grainy and noisy, also blurry.

I also count at least 7 (!) in flight deck shots of the same reg that you have already had accepted.

Royal


User currently offlinePepef From Finland, joined Oct 2002, 440 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3522 times:

Quoting IL76 (Reply 1):
Let me guess, you're aiming at cockpit shots, right? Well, we'll just not screen your photos then, as none of us have 20+ cockpitshots. Too bad, you'll just have to wait until a screener hits 20-30 cockpit photos.

80% are passed on to Johan anyway. I wouldn't mind if he screened the other 20% as well. It would be a lot quicker.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 2):
another topic for the 'it's not broke, no need to fix it..' bin.

I think it is broke, read on...

Quoting LIPH (Reply 4):
Pepef,
pure "flaming" is on its way...

I don't mind, I'm used to it. People don't want to change anything, so the site won't evolve.

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 9):
My advice would be to branch out and try uploading something other than a cockpit shot of a Finnair flight.


While I enjoy looking at such shots, and they are very popular with our customers, you have pretty much saturated the market.

As far as rejections, are you talking about the in flight cockpit shot of OH-LBR? It was rejected for quality, and rightly so, it is very grainy and noisy, also blurry.

I also count at least 7 (!) in flight deck shots of the same reg that you have already had accepted.

I'll take your advice into consideration. Your advice is that I should learn to take unpopular photos, right.

There's currently 39384 Boeing 757 photos in the database. 304 of those are from the cockpit.
The general viewer comes here to view photos. Most people don't care who the photographer is.

Uploading photos is not important to me. I stopped taking cockpit photos a long time ago. But there is a lot of criticism in the forums. I'm trying to offer solutions.

If there were 2-3 screeners/category, there wouldn't be a lot of inconsistency. With 20 guys going through the same photos, there always will be inconcistencies. Do as you please.

-Pepef-


User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11208 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3507 times:

Quoting Pepef (Reply 10):
If there were 2-3 screeners/category, there wouldn't be a lot of inconsistency. With 20 guys going through the same photos, there always will be inconcistencies.

Yeah, but right now, for most shots, 3 screeners review it at most. If you had a screener pool for each category, you'd need a lot more eyes on it. That, and I'm sure the "blemish" screener could spot "quality" or "contrast" etc. Why spend the extra time on it?

I'd prefer a faster queue over a 100% consistent queue I think.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2042 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3489 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 11):
That, and I'm sure the "blemish" screener could spot "quality" or "contrast" etc. Why spend the extra time on it?

I don't think he meant that each screener should only be checking for one possible rejection reason, but that each screener would have one aircraft category they'd look at, i.e. the "vintage" screener, the "warbird" screener and the "cockpit" shot screener.

However, it appears to me that the thread is here because somebody had a cockpit shot rejected and is now saying the rejecting screener has insufficient expertise when it comes to cockpits.... The whole debate is kinda pointless when it comes along without the photo in question. I do hope that even now screeners who find themselves looking at a photo that they feel uncertain about, ask for second opinions?



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3149 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3465 times:

In my eyes special screeners for special categories would bring only more problems. Then it is harder to get certain pics accepted and more people would start to moan about the then higher standards tehy can't reach.

I have a cockpitshot of an A-310 online which sure would've been rejected by a "cockpit screener" for the windows being blown out.

Georg


User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 49
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3413 times:

Quoting Pepef (Reply 10):
People don't want to change anything, so the site won't evolve

Funny, coming from someone who's photos look all the same, with multiple shots from the same airplane (cockpit) from the same angle, only the back of the heads of the pilots different... If something needs to evolve, it's you.

Ed


User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3413 times:

Quoting ChrisH (Reply 6):
I can think of a few more... sycophants come to mind

According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

Main Entry: sy·co·phant

synonym see PARASITE

 laughing 


User currently offlinePepef From Finland, joined Oct 2002, 440 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3373 times:

Quoting IL76 (Reply 14):
Funny, coming from someone who's photos look all the same, with multiple shots from the same airplane (cockpit) from the same angle, only the back of the heads of the pilots different... If something needs to evolve, it's you.

You're right. You guys have rejected all photos that weren't taken from the same angle. Nice photos by the way:



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eduard Brantjes



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eduard Brantjes



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eduard Brantjes



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eduard Brantjes



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eduard Brantjes



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Eduard Brantjes




-Pepef-


User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 49
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3369 times:

But they are not the same aircraft, now are they?

...and I'm not complaining/whining if I get a rejection...

[Edited 2007-01-09 21:23:53]

User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4670 posts, RR: 50
Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3367 times:

Quoting Pepef (Reply 16):
You're right. You guys have rejected all photos that weren't taken from the same angle. Nice photos by the way:

Counting 5 (out of 6) different regs, and most of Eduard's shots are not KL MD-11 shots, but much more varied.



For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently onlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2069 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3353 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Oh, oops I must have taken a wrong direction somewhere; I've stranded in the kindergarten...
now let's find the way back into the aviation forum I was looking for...

I mean come on guys you all have nice pictures in the db; and if Peter likes Finnair cockpit shots then let him do it. It's not his fault that Finnair has only a limited number of aircraft and thus registrations are limited.

I must admit that I like the idea of dividing screeners into groups; I'd be in favor of 2 groups: one that accepts shots and the other that rejects them. All I need to know then is when which group is on duty.  Wink

Cheers,

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9603 posts, RR: 69
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3333 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Peter likes Finnair cockpit shots then let him do it

Who told Peter to stop taking pictures of Finnair cockpits? Nobody has said that. What was said is that he has uploaded so many that most will be rejected, and that is why they go to Johan.

If Peter, or anyone else for that matter, takes pictures strictly on the hope that they will be accepted here they should find a new hobby. Do you take pictures just on the hope that they will be accepted? Seems pretty silly to me...


User currently offlineSkidmarks From UK - England, joined Dec 2004, 7121 posts, RR: 55
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3317 times:

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 19):
I must admit that I like the idea of dividing screeners into groups; I'd be in favor of 2 groups: one that accepts shots and the other that rejects them. All I need to know then is when which group is on duty.

I'm up for that Thierrry!! Big grin Just post a duty roster and bingo! No more rejections.  scratchchin 

Andy  old 



Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional
User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3149 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3285 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 20):
anyone else for that matter, takes pictures strictly on the hope that they will be accepted here they should find a new hobby. Do you take pictures just on the hope that they will be accepted? Seems pretty silly to me...

 checkmark  checkmark  checkmark  checkmark 

I had to learn that for myslef too. Not here but on the other site I'm getting lot's of double rejections from Dresden simply because we have always the same LH, DE, KIS,... Regs and almost all angles all online. I know that some might say go out visit other airports, but I don't have much time/money/intention to do this all the time so I concentrate on my hobby and the pics taken for me not for .....net

Georg


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5678 posts, RR: 45
Reply 23, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3236 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Pepef (Reply 10):
If there were 2-3 screeners/category, there wouldn't be a lot of inconsistency.

I agree 100%!


Trouble is all the photos in a particular category would be so consistent as to be almost the same, not sure that is the level of consistency we need here.

Cheers



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineWalter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1293 posts, RR: 28
Reply 24, posted (7 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 3195 times:

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 19):
All I need to know then is when which group is on duty.

 checkmark  ... and by the time the shots are at the end of the queue, the other group comes in...  rotfl   rotfl 

just kidding... only to say that I have been lucky - in some cases - to have "less than perfect quality" shots accepted (and I am sure lots of other uploaders will be in the same position) and I am not complaining about it (I even had a cockpit-shot accepted with the flash-reflection slightly visible in one of the screens)! Just to say that I can live with a world which is not 100% perfect, and A.net is only a very small part of this world...

Quoting Skidmarks (Reply 21):
Just post a duty roster and bingo!

... I lost it over the New Year  Smile

Enjoy your hobby!

Regards,

Walter



canon 340d ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l is usm - ...
25 Post contains images Kereru : There are already 3 groups? Screeners Head Screeners Johan As you have said Johan screens most of yours so no need for anymore groups. System is work
26 Post contains images Jorge1812 : Anet is just a part of the internet but for some people it has become part of the substantial life... Georg
27 LIPH : I would correct your sentence in "...some people don't want to change anything...". Others want. But the whole thing is not about who does want and w
28 Mirage : I have a suggestion, not related with this thread but something I've been thinking for a while. If I'm not mistaken a photo needs 3 screeners validati
29 LIPH : Luis, if you read my message, you should understand that such a change is not really in the A.net politic, because at the end it would just lower rej
30 Acontador : Hi Luis, In the past I also thought about that, but now I would say that the only effect of this would be to increase the screeners work, increase que
31 Mirage : I know it would increase the screeners work, I'm just thinking in the fairness of the system to both accepted and rejected images and taking into cons
32 Codeshare : Luis has a point there, but it is very highly unlikely for this to happen. What's more the site is evolving in its own way, but it's the photographers
33 Psych : If you want a scrupulously 'fair' and equitable system for rejections you would go for something like this: * First screener views the shot and makes
34 LIPH : If this would be the real part of the problem, new screeners could be always hired...From my point of view, this is not the point... I don't think th
35 LIPH : Paul, I think you got the point here : as I'm trying to say, every change which will have as a consequence to lower the rejection ratio, and/or to hi
36 Mirage : ok, so be it. Luis
37 Post contains images LIPH : Luis, it's nothing personal, believe me. Regards
38 Codeshare : It's as simple as getting a better camera for example or getting a better photo editing program. KS/codeshare
39 Clickhappy : Paul - it basically takes two or more screeners to reject anything marginal these days, we are only flat out rejecting shots that suck so bad are obvi
40 Psych : I know Royal - as I said: Maybe it may be worth going over some of the pros and cons for some - but I shall leave that to others for now. Paul
41 Clickhappy : A better idea is to not change anything. Maybe we fine tune things, but the system works, and even if it did change there would be people who will com
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...
This Should Be A Big Help To Spotters (Not...) posted Thu Oct 13 2005 02:57:18 by OPNLguy
What Monitor Should I Be Using? What Do You Use? posted Mon Aug 8 2005 14:06:48 by Sfilipowicz
What Should Be In The Title Field For This Plane? posted Tue Sep 7 2004 14:02:06 by Eksath
A Digital And Film Camera Should Be Produced! posted Sat Feb 14 2004 02:53:31 by MartinairYYZ
What Should Be Replacement Camera Be? posted Wed Jul 3 2002 04:29:01 by L-188
The Sky Is White And Should Be Blue!?! posted Sat Jun 23 2001 20:08:54 by Klm744
How Much Should Be Charged For A Slide/print posted Sun Apr 15 2001 00:12:46 by Blackened
Should This Be "dark" posted Sat May 13 2006 00:48:45 by Thowman
OK So Which Category Should This Be? posted Thu Feb 2 2006 17:59:51 by Norfolkjohn
Should We Be Uploading Any Backlit Shots? posted Sat Sep 24 2005 09:56:38 by JumboJim747