Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
How About Telling Me Beforehand?  
User currently offlineDeradere From Germany, joined Aug 2005, 84 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2437 times:

Hi guys, hi a.net screeners,

I have an idea how to reduce workload on the screeners. But first the pictures:


First one: oversharpened (only reason)
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20080118_LYRUNb.jpg

Second one: soft (and again soft as only reason)
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20080124_abcedef2.jpg

Third one: centered (ok, so now sharpening is right?)
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20080129_test3.jpg

Since I can't do anything about the centered issue because the plane just is too high in the frame in first place. Thus giving that rejection reason on the first or second try would have held be back from trying. Kind of frustrating to me and to the screeners...

It seems like when I solve a problem another rejection reason pops up, and again the shot isn't a.net worthy. But how come nobody marked that as a rejection reason in first place?

@ the screeners: Please mark ALL the problems. That way I can work on solving them or I can decide not to work and not to upload just to get out there an get the basics right. That would save stress and time.

Thanks,
Lars


Using Nikon equip.
6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 39
Reply 1, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2433 times:

I also agree that a centre rejection should be very obvious and marked if it is appropriate - it's not as fine an art as sharp/soft etc.

However, in their defence, they probably look at thousands of images so they are trying to do their best to get through the queue. Marking all the reasons will likely make the queue larger and it will take more time for them to get through it. But also, the same person may not look at it the second time around.

I won't say to read the psproc.pdf document, as you've probably already done it - and it'll just take time to pick things up.

[Edited 2008-01-30 02:19:14]

[Edited 2008-01-30 02:20:16]

User currently offlineCodeshare From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2421 times:

@Deradere: get used to it. Unless the same screener, who previously rejected it, looks at the second version of your photo, another one will have a completely different opinion. At times this is good, at times it's bad.

The photo is badcentered from the start.

KS/codeshare



How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
User currently offlineDeradere From Germany, joined Aug 2005, 84 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2421 times:

I do certainly not want to attack the screeners. I do appreciate and respect their work.

So don't get me wrong, I don't want to protest my pics into the database, I do agree with the rejection reasons. I just wand to kindly ask them to mark (if possible) all the obvious reasons.

It's just a frustrating game to get a rejection reason, improve the picture, re-upload it... then getting a totally different issue that has been there in first place... correcting, re-uploading... etc.

Lars



Using Nikon equip.
User currently offlineDeradere From Germany, joined Aug 2005, 84 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2407 times:

Here I have another one:

http://www.lars-tretau.de/forumbilder/neuDAT.jpg


Your thoughts on this one, please.

Lars



Using Nikon equip.
User currently offlineAcontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 30
Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2369 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi Lars,

Sorry to see this! Please note that we really try to avoid this kind of things happening by trying to point out as many problems as we see, but unfortunately it doesn't work all the time  Sad . But if we do it, then some people complain that they get a rejection email with 7 different reasons...
Anyway, yes, the second/third picture is too high in the frame (a different one from the first). The quality is now much better, also much better than your last one, which seems to be slightly out of focus/blurry (tail, reg, titles). Any chance you can recrop your third one?



Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
User currently offlineDeradere From Germany, joined Aug 2005, 84 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 5 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2341 times:

Hi Acontador,

it just comes out to be my fault...

Here is the original file, just re-sized so it won't explode into 12 mega pix on you screen.

http://www.lars-tretau.de/forumbilder/datoriginal.jpg

If I apply that CW rotation that it truly needs it's way too high in it's frame to crop it a way that lowers it. Staying with 3:2 proportions the one I have posted is the best outcome. (I would need a wider format to lower it, but the way I understand the rules there is no wider format allowed then 3:2)

I should just take it as a motivation to get out there again and get a better shot. Now I know what to improve. (A little "that's way to high up in the frame" comment would have saved me a week trying to overcome a sharpening issue.

This should not be understood as an allegation towards the screeners.

There is probably no way to get everybody satisfied with the screening process, neither 7 different reasons are a motivation nor 7 reasons popping up one by one with each new upload.

That's just the way it is. I have to conquer my problems and get some better material out of it for post processing.

Lars



Using Nikon equip.
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...
How About Exif In A.net Pictures? posted Thu Jan 17 2008 10:30:34 by Thijsz1
How About These? posted Sun Jan 13 2008 16:41:39 by MaxStar
How About This Gulfstream IV? posted Mon Jan 7 2008 22:27:54 by Jawed
How About This One? posted Sat Dec 29 2007 13:18:51 by Jawed
How About These? posted Thu Dec 6 2007 15:29:13 by DeltaAVL
How About Some Help? posted Mon Nov 5 2007 18:50:35 by FLYB6JETS
How About This Shot? posted Sun Sep 2 2007 00:48:24 by Acroflier5
How About This Shot? posted Thu Jun 28 2007 19:36:45 by DM
How About This One? posted Tue Jan 30 2007 18:35:07 by Lufthansi
How About This One? posted Mon Nov 6 2006 21:53:20 by Stil