Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Well, Now That The Queue Limit Has Been Lowered  
User currently offlineGraphic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4787 times:

And daily uploads have dropped down to about 800-900, it seems as though wait time has nearly doubled lately. Whats up with that?

35 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBmiBaby737 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1817 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4624 times:

Currently less than 100 photos are in screening... with over 7,000 photos waiting! Earlier this year it went down to 4,000 and there a huge hype over it, but they didn't manage to keep it that level!

Don't get me wrong, the screeners are a fantastic bunch and they do a marvelous job!

bmi

[Edited 2007-04-22 12:26:33]

User currently offlineEDDL From Germany, joined Dec 2002, 738 posts, RR: 15
Reply 2, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4522 times:

I don't care if I have to wait five days or two weeks to get my pictures screened. Actually I really appreciate if a screener leaves a personal message explaining a rejection. That slows down the screening process somewhat, but it's worth it.

Phil / EDDL


User currently offlineStil From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 345 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4503 times:

Quoting EDDL (Reply 2):

 checkmark   checkmark   checkmark   checkmark   checkmark 

I agree 100 %

Stil



....... Gueropppa! ......
User currently offlineBmiBaby737 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1817 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4486 times:

Quoting EDDL (Reply 2):
I don't care if I have to wait five days or two weeks to get my pictures screened. Actually I really appreciate if a screener leaves a personal message explaining a rejection. That slows down the screening process somewhat, but it's worth it.

I do find that when an image is in the queue for a long period of time, I have more chances to study the image and pull it if I see fit!

Having the personal messages are fantastic! Screeners are doing a very good job indeed.


User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 4355 times:

Quoting Graphic (Thread starter):
Well, Now That The Queue Limit Has Been Lowered

Zzzzzzzz.....  Wink

Quoting BmiBaby737 (Reply 1):
with over 7,000 photos waiting! Earlier this year it went down to 4,000 and there a huge hype over it, but they didn't manage to keep it that level!

I couldn't care less how long it takes to get my photos screened. A week is fine for me. Its going to be interesting this summer however. With the 'Q' at well over 7G now, imagine what it will be like in July/August!?!?

 boggled 


User currently offlineGraphic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 6 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 4334 times:

Quoting EDDL (Reply 2):
Actually I really appreciate if a screener leaves a personal message explaining a rejection.

That would be fantastic! It only takes 2 seconds to do, in fact...


User currently offlineRotate From Switzerland, joined Feb 2003, 1491 posts, RR: 16
Reply 7, posted (7 years 6 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4239 times:

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 5):
With the 'Q' at well over 7G now, imagine what it will be like in July/August!?!?

What I dont get is that the Q is much higher during summer time than during winter time. I really hate shooting in summertime the light is so much worser than in wintertime - not to mention the heathaze ....

Robin



ABC
User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3149 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (7 years 6 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4217 times:

Quoting Rotate (Reply 7):

But it's warmer in summer and more people go out e.g. with the family for spotting and we have more light available during the long summer days. You're right, winter pics are very nice too but I prefer to shoot in 30°C and not in -10°C.

georg


User currently offlineSpartan13 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 207 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (7 years 6 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4176 times:

Quoting EDDL (Reply 2):
I don't care if I have to wait five days or two weeks to get my pictures screened.

Im with Phil on this. I didnt like when they were uploading photos in the masses after being screened. With smaller amounts of photos it just makes it easier to see them all, so im hoping the screeners continue screening as they are.



Ralph Duenas - Jetwash Images (Charles Barkley said it best "Oklahoma is a vast wasteland")
User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (7 years 6 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4149 times:

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 5):
I couldn't care less how long it takes to get my photos screened.

 checkmark 

Quoting Graphic (Reply 6):
That would be fantastic! It only takes 2 seconds to do, in fact...

Realistically, it probably takes 30 seconds to put together an intelligent thought and type it out. If a screener goes through 50 photos per session, that's 25 minutes of their time per session or two hours per week of their personal, volunteer time.

Quoting Jorge1812 (Reply 8):
But it's warmer in summer and more people go out e.g. with the family for spotting and we have more light available during the long summer days.

Don't forget it's airshow season too...

B


User currently offlineStevenL From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4113 times:

Question for the screeners about the actual process...
How long does it take to screen one photo? Are you looking at a special screen or something?
I just think it would be really interesting if a screener posted something similar to a blog about the step by step process a photo goes through to get accepted, or denied.

Thanks,

Steven L


User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 4109 times:

Quoting StevenL (Reply 11):
I just think it would be really interesting if a screener posted something similar to a blog about the step by step process a photo goes through to get accepted, or denied.

One of them did a few months back including, IIRC screenshots.

B


User currently offlineBubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1195 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4096 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting StevenL (Reply 11):

Please check this out.

RE: Screeners View Of The Upload Que (by Deaphen Mar 30 2007 in Aviation Photography)

_Hongyin_


User currently offlineGraphic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4091 times:

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 10):
Realistically, it probably takes 30 seconds to put together an intelligent thought and type it out. If a screener goes through 50 photos per session, that's 25 minutes of their time per session or two hours per week of their personal, volunteer time.

I screen 50 photos a day at a certain brand x, and I don't buy that. If it takes thirty seconds to put together a well-thought out comment on a photo rejection, then you're either A) trying too hard to come up with a rejection reason, or B) the rejection is so obvious its not worth the comment.


User currently offlineLanas From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 978 posts, RR: 13
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4089 times:

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 10):
Realistically, it probably takes 30 seconds to put together an intelligent thought and type it out. If a screener goes through 50 photos per session, that's 25 minutes of their time per session or two hours per week of their personal, volunteer time.



Quoting Graphic (Reply 6):
That would be fantastic! It only takes 2 seconds to do, in fact...

First, I believe that with the new queue limits, the fact that the screening process is a little more delayed calls my attention. I guess that maybe many people obtained good results with their acceptance ratio and are, therefore, uploading more pics per day. I don´t care how much it takes for the pic to be screened, and I really appreciate the personal comments on rejected pictures. It surely helps a lot when reviewing your edit.
Second, I agree with Graphic where he says that it would take '2 seconds' to add a comment. Actually, I don´t know if it takes as little as 2 seconds, but I think that if you´re screening a pic and you see an important flaw you want to comment on, the idea of what you´re going to write is already in your mind, so I think it doesn´t take a lot of time to pour your thoughts down.

Cheers!  Smile
Lanas.-



"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens." J.R.R. Tolkien
User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3992 times:

Quoting Lanas (Reply 15):
Second, I agree with Graphic where he says that it would take '2 seconds' to add a comment. Actually, I don´t know if it takes as little as 2 seconds, but I think that if you´re screening a pic and you see an important flaw you want to comment on, the idea of what you´re going to write is already in your mind, so I think it doesn´t take a lot of time to pour your thoughts down.

First off, people think much more cryptically than they speak or write so we actually go through a translation process which takes time, then we have to type it out, which takes even longer since most people type and speak much slower than they can think. So from the time you think "man this is ugly" to the time you type out a single sentence saying "golly, maybe you could brighten this up a bit, sharpen around the wheels and put a smile on the pilot's face" thirty seconds have easily passed. Since the average person types well under 50 words per minute, that line I just typed is almost thirty seconds of typing time for 1/2 the world's computer-using population, even if some of you could bash it out 2 seconds flat.

The whole point of my comment though was that the screeners have enough on their plates as it is. Even a 10 second response is going to be 30-45 minutes of their own personal time lost per week, or it's time they don't spend screening shots, which means they'll then have to spend time reading and defending themselves from the frequent "why is the que so long" threads... kinda like this one started...

B


User currently offlineJid From Barbados, joined Dec 2004, 973 posts, RR: 31
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3971 times:

Everyone always misses the point on these threads. As a photographer I am not really bothered about the length of the screening process. BUT who do you think looks at all the images you photogs upload? Of course fellow photogs do but that will equate to a very small percentage of viewers. Everyone from Joe Public to Percy Press man views your images and what do you think they want ?? Do they go out in the morning, walk into the newsagents and ask for a 10 day old newspaper? I think not.

Jid



G7EPN is back after 15 years! Operating all Bands 80mtrs -> 70cms QRZ DX
User currently offlineGkirk From UK - Scotland, joined Jun 2000, 24947 posts, RR: 56
Reply 18, posted (7 years 6 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3953 times:

Quoting BmiBaby737 (Reply 1):
Don't get me wrong, the screeners are a fantastic bunch and they do a marvelous job!

They also tend to go on holiday like normal people  Wink



When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
User currently offlineDahlgardo From Denmark, joined Sep 2004, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 6 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3945 times:

When someone complains about the long screening time, it is often regarded as being disrespectfull against the screeners. I don't think, nor hope, that anyone complains about the quality of the screening process, or the amount of work the screeners do for airliners.net. That would not be fair.

The long screening time may not matter for some of you (and that's just fine), but for others (including me) it makes the whole process of uploading too slow/troublesome, and it basically keeps me from uploading at all. I don't think I'm the only one who see it that way.

For new photogs with very low upload limits, the learning process also becomes unecessarily long.

Don't get me wrong, I think A.net is the best site there is of its kind, and one thing that would make it even better, would be fast screening. No matter how I look at it, the long screening time doesn't help a.net in any way.

So, how can the screening time be lowered ? To me it's very simple : Add more screeners. Why not have enough screeners to cope with the amount uploads at all times ? That would never hurt anyone.

Of course it takes some skills with regard to understanding photo editing and photography in general, but I'm sure there's plenty of potetial amongst the photogs of this site for many new screeners.

Take care, and have a nice summer

br
Jakob



Nothing to say
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3052 posts, RR: 58
Reply 20, posted (7 years 6 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3892 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There are many no-win situations about - this is just another of them.

I have always been in agreement with those who argue that a long queue length is not a good thing. For me a couple of days maximum would be ideal. But - as photographers - we all want consistent screening, with more screener input to rejection emails and threads here. If they are doing that they are screening less photos. If screeners are discussing borderline shots and asking each other for second opinions a lot behind the scenes (as many would like them to do) it will slow things down. Wanting more from screeners, and also wanting a fast process, are potentially mutually exclusive demands.

It seems clear that the Head Screeners are not keen to significantly expand the screening team - I think this was said in the good old days when Head Screeners used to be active in the Forum. I guess partly to try to ensure a cohesive team approach from them, but maybe for other reasons too. It is (slightly) easier to get consistent decision making from 25 people than it would be from 50 (with the current system, but that is another debate). Screeners also need to have their own lives outside of A.net, which obviously limits what they - as individuals - can (and should) do here. Also, as a relatively small team, just a few big volume screeners doing less screening for whatever reason will have a disproportionate impact on the queue.

Jid makes a really important point above - if I were Johan (or a Head Screener) I would not be comfortable with the wait that currently exists. I can't see in my time as a member here how the changes to upload limits has really significantly impacted on the overall queue wait. There are definitely a lot less daily uploads, but the queue wait continues to vary somewhere around the week+ length. But there is clearly no appetite to fundamentally re-examine the screening process itself, which might address this issue.

It is a difficult dilemma. The problem here these days is that it has become almost impossible to raise tricky issues such as this with the hope of getting a thorough and sensible two-way discussion. There is simply too much 'us and them' mentality going around, or old timers here feeling fed up with the same old discussions rearing their head, which - in my humble opinion - gets in the way of progress.

All the best.

Paul


User currently offlineGraphic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (7 years 6 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3776 times:

Quoting CalgaryBill (Reply 16):
So from the time you think "man this is ugly" to the time you type out a single sentence saying "golly, maybe you could brighten this up a bit, sharpen around the wheels and put a smile on the pilot's face" thirty seconds have easily passed.

As I said above, if your first thought is "man this is ugly," then its a clear reject, and probably not something that needs comment on.


User currently offlineDendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1671 posts, RR: 62
Reply 22, posted (7 years 6 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3752 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting Psych (Reply 20):
It is a difficult dilemma. The problem here these days is that it has become almost impossible to raise tricky issues such as this with the hope of getting a thorough and sensible two-way discussion. There is simply too much 'us and them' mentality going around, or old timers here feeling fed up with the same old discussions rearing their head, which - in my humble opinion - gets in the way of progress.

Paul,
You raise some interesting points. The us and them mentality is not something that I subscribe to though I guess that is easy for me since I have moved to being on both sides rather that just the contributor. There is little doubt that there are perennial problems, the queue length and screener consistency being the commonest. I have been around on this forum for quite a while and it is not as lively as it was a couple of years ago but I am pleased to say that screener consistency complaints seem to have reduced dramatically. As to the queue length, I doubt that anyone likes it at this length, I certainly don't. I take Jid's point too but not much that is uploaded is actually news and the newsworthy stuff can still get through and be added quickly.
But as you point out there are other calls on our time. I do my best to identify people who need help and offer to help them out with editing, I do a lot of personals that slow me down too as does coming to the forum. Just a few weeks ago the queue length was around 4000 and yet with no changes at all it is double that. That suggests that the problem is a circumstance (several screeners are away) rather than anything being inherrently (too) wrong.
Mick Bajcar


User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (7 years 6 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3745 times:

Quoting Graphic (Reply 21):
As I said above, if your first thought is "man this is ugly," then its a clear reject, and probably not something that needs comment on.

If people knew that it was a "clear" reject, they wouldn't submit the picture.

B


User currently offlineBruce From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5059 posts, RR: 15
Reply 24, posted (7 years 6 months 22 hours ago) and read 3643 times:

Its been this way for as long as I can remember now (very long queues) and for the life of me i can never seem to understand why. it just never makes sense. You have a pretty good number of Screeners, and there are usually less than 1,000 pics added to the queue each day. If I do the math - each Screener doing 100 pictures (i know, some of you do more...) per day I think the queue should be much lower than it is. No matter which way I try to rationalize it, it doesn't make sense. The time needed to get a picture on here should not have to be this high. If a picture has a minor flaw then it could easily take a month to make 2 trips thru the queue.

And no, I dont think the queue limit has had an effect on the wait time.

Summer (and air show season) is coming fast.....the queue is only going to get worse if nothing is done!

bruce



Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
25 Post contains images Chukcha : I think the way to rationalize it would be to acknowledge that the screeners have lives, too. What I mean to say is that it requires a lot of commitm
26 Prat : Maybe an option tick for the screeners should be a "fix and reupload" of sorts. So when a photo rejection was given for example, you'd get LEVEL, OVE
27 Dendrobatid : Bruce If you do some maths, at an average of about a minute each that is a little over 1 1/2 hours per day. Yes some screeners do more than that but
28 Post contains links PUnmuth@VIE : Thats what they have done according to them : the Head Screeners have replaced ineffective and/or unproductive screeners Source: Queue Below 4,000 (b
29 Post contains images Walter2222 : Personally, I don't mind to wait a week, two weeks or even a month to have a picture screened. My slides have been stored for more than 30 years, and
30 LIPH : I miss the point here. This issue of not expanding the screening team has always been a riddle for me...I mean, what would be wrong with that ? Ciao[
31 Post contains images Ptrjong : A small organization is easier to manage. And the more screeners, the more treads about inconsistent screening there will be
32 LIPH : Peter, here you point out another important issue : screening inconcistency. But I think that if the rules would be applied strictly, and less in a m
33 Post contains images Ptrjong : You simply can't make strict rules for most of the upload criteria. Screening is human, and thus, when the team is much enlaged, inconsistency will b
34 EK20 : Er...didn't something like 125 people apply last time there was a job going?
35 Ptrjong : You may have a point. I don't know how many were both serious and considered suitable, though.
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...
Well, I Thought That These May Have Been Ok... posted Sun Sep 11 2005 07:29:55 by Eadster
My Pics Have Been 1mo In The Queue posted Sun Mar 17 2002 12:06:37 by OH-LZA
Queue Has Been Stuck For About 2 Weeks For Me.... posted Fri Feb 1 2002 06:49:11 by Serge
Average/Median Number Of Pics In The Queue? posted Wed Feb 7 2007 02:31:17 by Edoca
Should This One Stay In The Queue? posted Wed Jan 17 2007 23:39:03 by Vice911
Russian AviaPhoto Team Has Been Created. posted Fri Dec 22 2006 10:06:25 by FYODOR
C&C For Two Dusk Shots In The Queue Please posted Wed Aug 30 2006 02:00:18 by IAH777
Should I Pull It From The Queue Or Leave It? posted Tue Aug 15 2006 22:28:06 by NicolasRubio
Throwing In My 2c About The Queue... posted Wed Jul 26 2006 09:08:28 by Newark777
Changing Comments In The Queue posted Fri Jun 2 2006 17:52:44 by Sleekjet