Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A.net Recovering/recovered?  
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3818 times:

I know we still all encounter minor bugs from time-to-time which is rather irritating but I think the top brass at A.net must've listened recently as things seem to have improved lately. Things have been shifted and changed slightly on the front page and in the options menus - subtle changes but monumental for ease of navigation - and I've also noticed that view numbers appear to be recoverning to something like what they were six months or so ago.

Maybe there's still a way to go yet to bring back everyone's faith but I think we're well past the half-way mark here. I'm not sure if absent photographers will return but my will to upload has returned recently; and I'm seeing some great work from new photog's (I'm actually relatively new, only having been uploading for just over 12 months) who obviously have the potential to be just as good as the big-shots.

Like someone said before, today's elite may leave but there are plenty more budding and enthusiastic young photog's out there who are ready and willing to rise to the challenge!

Congrat's to the A.net team - let's just hope DM feel the same way about supporting the site.

Karl

125 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCodeshare From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3800 times:

Looks like the views are slowly getting back to normal. I haven't uploaded for a month and the queue is the same to me.

KS/codeshare



How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 20
Reply 2, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3774 times:



Quoting JakTrax (Thread starter):
A.net Recovering/recovered?

Hmm, top of the last 24 hours with just over 1,000 views.

Recovered? Not IMO.


User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2046 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3754 times:



Quoting Aero145 (Reply 2):
Recovered? Not IMO.

 checkmark 

And I still run into all the bugs that bugged me...

- photo ratings don't work
- adding images to albums is tedious, because a.net keeps telling me I'm not logged in
- adding members to RU list impossible
- frequent "no photo with this ID" messages
- "nice try, hacker"



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3717 times:



Quoting TransIsland (Reply 3):
- photo ratings don't work
- adding images to albums is tedious, because a.net keeps telling me I'm not logged in
- adding members to RU list impossible
- frequent "no photo with this ID" messages
- "nice try, hacker"

When I came up with the thread title I included the question mark to collect YOUR opinions, not necessarily to voice my own. 'Recovering' or 'recovered' leaves the thread open for suggestions and/or debate - I never actually said that A.net had fully recovered but some may think so. I do however think things are slowly on the mend (from what I've seen lately), although the problems you highlight in your post still blight us.

Still, things ain't as bad as when everyone was kicking off on everyone else and we were all threatening each other with this and that. At least some sort of law and order has been restored within the community (whether that's 'cos everyone's pulled their images and left I don't know........).

Let's hope, however slowly, that things continue to improve as of late.

Karl


User currently offlineQantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3703 times:

Definitely not recovered. I hadn't uploaded at all since DM's big changes, until a couple of photos the other day, and they've reminded me of just how unfortunate the state of A.net remains. And no, I'm not just disappointed by the significantly lower hits. It's a matter of individual exposure, overall coherence and visibility as a gallery of photos which once existed, but certainly hasn't returned post-DM.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: no, bugs are not the problem. Any new site will have such bugs; it's normal, and I really don't mind. The real problem is one of fundamental design. A lot of changes DM made to the front page in particular are fundamentally flawed, and I don't think this site will ever recover from that unless they're reversed.


User currently offlineWhappeh From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1563 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3701 times:

The biggest issue to me right now is the queue. I'm getting roughly the same amount of views as I was before, I just want to be able to upload my work faster. This two week stuff is insane.


-Travel now, journey infinitely.
User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1980 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3693 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Maybe not recovered to its best days, but definitely steadied itself on a somewhat lower plane. As for now, the hits, number of photographers and everyday uploads, and the number of visitors seem to be fairly constant day in and day out. Even the queue - it is not diminishing, but not growing either; apparently, the screening achieved some (happy?) equilibrium... Whether there will be any improvement to all these - remains to be seen.

Andrei


User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2046 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3690 times:

actually, the Q seems to have sped up a little, even if the number of images in it remains constant. screening my last bigger batch took 13 days, the ones that got screened today only spent 11 days in the Q.


I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3149 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3685 times:

Funny, the day when I was thinking that it got worse on Anet I found your thread. A few hours back I wasn't able to view a single image as I always got the "No pic with that ID message" and also the Top24 wasn't loading properly. Adding a photo to an album also needs about 10 clicks b/c I'm not checked in again and again when being checked-in.......

When surfing Anet on such days it doesn't make any fun at all.

georg


User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 10, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3670 times:



Quoting QantasA332 (Reply 5):
The real problem is one of fundamental design. A lot of changes DM made to the front page in particular are fundamentally flawed

I cauld not have said it any better.
Thats spot on the money but looks like no one wants to do anything about it.
Lets get back to the old layout and see the site get back to its former glory and if we dont i think it will die a slow death.
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1980 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3651 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting JumboJim747 (Reply 10):
Lets get back to the old layout and see the site get back to its former glory and if we dont i think it will die a slow death.

There is no return to the old layout, unfortunately... The site may never "get back to its former glory", but it won't die, either, provided the site administration give more upload slots to new photographers. I know one of them; he has just started uploading, very keen, and he doesn't care that the site is different now form what it once been; he just wasn't around it much then. On the other hand, if they fail to do it - the new photographers will just end up at the competitor's site.


User currently offlineQantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3607 times:



Quoting Chukcha (Reply 11):
There is no return to the old layout, unfortunately...

Of course. But it's not like this current solution is the end of the road, either. It requires modification for the better, and I feel that modification may, just may, change it back in the direction of the old site to some degree.

Quoting Chukcha (Reply 11):
The site may never "get back to its former glory", but it won't die...

What a sad complacency. Why settle for "not dead" when you could have something really special?


Quoting Chukcha (Reply 11):
...provided the site administration give more upload slots to new photographers. I know one of them; he has just started uploading, very keen, and he doesn't care that the site is different now form what it once been; he just wasn't around it much then. On the other hand, if they fail to do it - the new photographers will just end up at the competitor's site.

I don't follow this argument at all. How will new photographers save the site? What the administration really needs to be thinking about is how to get the veterans back and uploading regularly again.


User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 13, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3581 times:



Quoting QantasA332 (Reply 5):
A lot of changes DM made to the front page in particular are fundamentally flawed, and I don't think this site will ever recover from that unless they're reversed.

A very succinct and accurate description of the nub of the problem.

Given DM's mindset which precludes abandoning the new homepage, I fear that finding an equally succinct and accurate remedy will not be so easy ...



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineZakHH From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3565 times:

Quite a few of the recent "improvements" were nothing more than restorations of the former state. The front page logo, to name just one. So the overall state of the site was certainly improved compared to 2-3 months ago. But was it improved to, say, 1 year ago?

The question of how the relationship between user community and site management / administration is defined remains open. There is no vision statement for the site. Site views are on a slow, but constant decrease.

The critical dialogue about the further development of the site has almost died (which is not surprising, as critics were either silenced, ignored or reprimanded as 'handful of constant complainers'), and so have productive suggestions on how to move forward.

Shortly before her leaving, Monique tried to encourage constructive criticism, but during the following discussion, I did not feel that the attitude towards critics had really changed.

The question if a.net will 'recover' (whatever that would mean) is closely linked to the question what visions the site management has in mind, and by what means they will try to transcribe and implement it to the site.

As we don't know that, all we can do is sit back and hope for the best.


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 15, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3552 times:



Quoting Chukcha (Reply 11):
I know one of them; he has just started uploading, very keen, and he doesn't care that the site is different now form what it once been; he just wasn't around it much then. On the other hand, if they fail to do it - the new photographers will just end up at the competitor's site

I agree that new photog's have a hard time since the rules changed to allow them only two initial uploads, but wasn't that done under Johan? I don't agree, though, that new photog's will give up on this idea and move to the 'other side'. I am relatively new here and I too was only allowed the poxy two uploads, however it sent a message to me that I'd better learn fast and make sure my images were screener-proof. It motivated me to upload more and more until I could get to the point where I could stick 20 in the queue without hassle. It's kind of like a reward that gets bigger and more prestigious as your upload quality increases.

Quoting QantasA332 (Reply 12):
I don't follow this argument at all. How will new photographers save the site? What the administration really needs to be thinking about is how to get the veterans back and uploading regularly again

New photog's will save the site in the same way as veterans. Can we say with any certainty that the veterans here are miles better than the new folks? Maybe the veterans have more experience but that at least means the new kids have the potential to be as good, if not better. I dare say there are already some new guys here making big impressions. This site needs new blood, and new blood should be welcomed by all - especially the veterens who they will learn from and eventually replace.

No, the site has definately NOT recovered, but I think it has taken small steps this past few months towards a recovery. I remember a month or so ago the 'other' site was getting more hits per image than here (similar images), but again it's mainly the other way round now.

Karl


User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1980 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3496 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting QantasA332 (Reply 12):
What a sad complacency.

It is not complacency; more like lack of optimism, based on experience. Unfortunately, for A.net now it is not about being "something really special", it is about survival.

Quoting QantasA332 (Reply 12):
How will new photographers save the site? What the administration really needs to be thinking about is how to get the veterans back and uploading regularly again.

The veterans have been leaving the site as long as I can remember, for various reasons; it hasn't just first started under DM. Have you seen many of then return?

Where there is an outflow, there should be an influx as well. The site will always be loosing photographers for one reason or another; it should be acquiring new ones to replace them. No photographers = no A.net, simple as that.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 15):
the rules changed to allow them only two initial uploads, but wasn't that done under Johan?

The site under Johan could afford it - it's stature and reputation was much higher then, and the other site was regarded by many as second rate. Now it is swiftly catching up; they have a lot to offer, including 20 slots for a new photographer versus 2 here.


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3479 times:



Quoting Chukcha (Reply 16):
Now it is swiftly catching up; they have a lot to offer, including 20 slots for a new photographer versus 2 here.

I agree the 'dark side' is catching up but maybe the queue limit of two for new folks is an indication of the supreme quality demanded by this site compared to others. I think it motivates people to really make their photo's the best, and to get acceptances here is still probably a prestige; something that many consider only the so-called 'elite' can manage. I think this site is slipping for the veterans but is an inspiration to the newbies - it sets a precedent for them. The two-queue limit also prevents over-enthusiasm, whereby an individual will hit his maximum limit within half-an-hour, only to face great disappointment a week or so later when he gets the whole lot rejected. It also promotes taking care in both capturing the image and editing it, and will lead to people pre-screening their images to a much more detailed degree. I started with the two-queue limit and as I say, it lead me to be more careful. It also made me really want to do my best to get accpetances here.

The overall quality of images on the 'other' site isn't yet up to A.net standards (don't mean to sound funny but that's my opinion) so it's not surprising that many want that 'prestige' of displaying their photo's here, alongside the work of very best.

If this site doesn't continue its recovery with haste it simply won't ever recover, and the 'dark side' will inevitably overtake.

Karl


User currently offlineSFO2SVO From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 399 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days ago) and read 3451 times:

Most of the threads on "a.net is doomed" or "a.net is back" seem to look at the big picture. I think there are three fairly distinct areas where people see problems. Sure, they are connected - but I would separate discussions into:

- technical bugs
- long queue/few slots
- DM site management policies/purge of old crew and forum contributors

I do see improvements with at least first two.

BTW, Karl, you should be entitled for "A.net founder" seal since you are "First Class since December 31, 1969"   Big grin

[Edited 2008-08-06 11:10:00]


318-19-20-21 332 343 717 727 737-234578 743-4 752 763 772 D9/10 M11/8x/90 F70 RJ85 ATR72 SF340 E120 TU34/54 IL18/62/86/9
User currently offlineOpso1 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 527 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 5 days ago) and read 3442 times:

The only thing IMHO that needs sorting now is the queue length- 2 weeks is too long to wait. No-one can ever find this acceptable, so don't say you do! Everyone has worked hard to solve most of the bugs now, but there is still a long way to go so let's get back to normality soon by screening...

OPSO1


User currently offlineDendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1668 posts, RR: 62
Reply 20, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 3419 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER



Quoting Opso1 (Reply 20):
The only thing IMHO that needs sorting now is the queue length- 2 weeks is too long to wait.

Absolutely true.
It is the holiday season for us too and quite a few screeners have been away.
The queue length is now the biggest problem though I think that will start to decrease shortly.
But then, just watch the uploads increase too !

Mick Bajcar


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 21, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3414 times:

Yeah, the queue is off-putting but I don't think it's THE major issue; although I understand that for the new guys only allocated two upload slots two weeks must seem a bit of a p*ss-take.

I think that's the only issue affecting talented new photog's, however I'm sure their enthusiasm will overcome the hurdle. Would benefit everyone though, veteran and beginner alike, if the queue was shortened.

Karl


User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1980 posts, RR: 7
Reply 22, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3363 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Opso1 (Reply 19):
The only thing IMHO that needs sorting now is the queue length- 2 weeks is too long to wait.

You are right - if the turnover was only a couple of days, even the 2 slots limit wouldn't be a problem. But.....

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 20):
But then, just watch the uploads increase too

Exactly right. Mick, if you read one of my posts above, you might have noticed that I used the word "equilibrium". What I meant was the balance between the number of uploads versus the screeners' productivity. We all have seen the "big cleanups", when the queue length went down dramatically to only a couple of days, but, with the more slots available, the everyday uploads doubled or eved tripled. For a while, the screeners would struggle withe the larger number, but eventually the queue would creep up again until the uploads would reach a comfortable (for the screeners) number. For a couple of weeks now, we see the uploads hover around 600, and the queue stopped growing. That basically means that at present time the screening productivity is about 600 a day. The rate of uploads equals the rate of screening, and that's "equilibrium".

To keep the queue two or three days short, the screeners would have to screen about 1,000-1,500 pictures a day. But then, the queue would start creeping up again, as the quicker turnover would attract more photographers, and the existing new photographers would get more slots through having more pictures in the DB. A bit of a "vicious circle", really. I think, in the end it would work out roughly like this: the double increase in screeners productivity would cut the queue length, time-wise, by maybe only a third or even a quarter.

Andrei


User currently onlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 23, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3349 times:

FWIW:

Quoting QantasA332 (Reply 5):
I hadn't uploaded at all since DM's big changes

I haven't uploaded for a few months too. I now have three in the queue. We'll see how they do. If the views are super low, I'll hold back for another few months...

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 2):
Hmm, top of the last 24 hours with just over 1,000 views.

Also, even the last few photos on the top of the 24 hour page used to get at least 800-900 views. Right now it's under 500!!! We're talking about half the hits they would have normally be getting...

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4811 posts, RR: 25
Reply 24, posted (6 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3329 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Chukcha (Reply 11):
On the other hand, if they fail to do it - the new photographers will just end up at the competitor's site.

I agree. I believe this is already happening. The competition offers a more "hassle-free" experience right now. I can't see how a new photographer would be enticed to stick around long enough to get any kind of system down for consistent acceptances. To much work involved, and with such a slow queue, getting through those first few rejections takes too long to make it worth the trouble. The slow queue, especially it's impact on rejections, is frustrating for a lot of us regulars!! If some of us are being put-off, wont it also happen to the new guys too?

I think the beginners, and the casual enthusiasts around the airport fence these days are becoming more and more familiar with the competition.

Quoting QantasA332 (Reply 12):
I don't follow this argument at all. How will new photographers save the site? What the administration really needs to be thinking about is how to get the veterans back and uploading regularly again.

True, but some of those new photographers may be the future big names of aviation photography becoming just as important to this site as the veterans.

Quoting ZakHH (Reply 14):
Shortly before her leaving, Monique tried to encourage constructive criticism, but during the following discussion, I did not feel that the attitude towards critics had really changed.

The whole situation strikes me as odd. I wonder what led to her departure... I also find it very interesting that the subject has gotten little attention. Either the Mods have been working some major over-time trying to keep her thread squeaky clean, or no one gives a damn anymore.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 15):
I agree that new photog's have a hard time since the rules changed to allow them only two initial uploads, but wasn't that done under Johan?

Yes, but with the current queue situation, upload limitations are more frustrating than ever. I think it can drive new folks away. I believe in the need for such limitations, so I think what needs to be address and fixed (any day now!) is the SLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW queue. That will help relieve a lot of frustration, while still keeping the necessary limits on uploads.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 21):
Yeah, the queue is off-putting but I don't think it's THE major issue; although I understand that for the new guys only allocated two upload slots two weeks must seem a bit of a p*ss-take.

I believe the queue problem should be the top priority around here and the site will not have a chance at recovering until it is fixed.

Quoting Jorge1812 (Reply 9):
it doesn't make any fun at all.

 checkmark  I agree. Not much fun around here these days...I've lost a lot of motivation.

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 20):
It is the holiday season for us too and quite a few screeners have been away.
The queue length is now the biggest problem though I think that will start to decrease shortly.

Mick, we have heard this response almost word-for-word from various screeners for almost 5 months now. How many more months before either:
a. These screeners return from holiday
or
b. Something is done to ensure that screening gets done at a reasonable pace while allowing the screeners to enjoy their lives outside of airliners.net.

I realize you probably don't have that answer. But as we all know, something needs to be done.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
25 Javibi : In my point of view the site has improved a bit, as I encounter less bugs lately, but what is still putting me off uploading is the cluttered and unpr
26 NIKV69 : I think what you see with the homepage is what you get. DM made some token changes but for the most part the old layout is gone. I disagree and think
27 Sovietjet : Why did she leave? Sorry, I've been out of the loop.
28 Bjcc : This isn't going to be popular, but think about it, it may well work. Close the upload queue, yes, I know, thats been suggested before, clear it to ze
29 Silver1SWA : Well, the problem with that idea is, the queue isn't dealing with a huge number of uploads. It is just very slow. So I don't think your idea would ch
30 JonathanJet : I also seem to have seen a bit of an improvement in A.net recently. Things are working better, fewer bugs, and the homepage is manageable, although I
31 Bjcc : Silver1SWA In fact it would, resolve the issues, the queue, by vertue of everyone being limited would be shorter. In terms of total time to upload say
32 NIKV69 : Good reason it won't be popular, it's not pratical and we don't need to restrict everyone's uploads just so you don't have to wait.
33 JakTrax : I'm not sure I like the site politics at the moment - myself and another user (I forget who) have had our posts deleted from this thread because we da
34 Aero145 : I do remember the days when the top 5 were at least 5000
35 SNATH : We're not that far off it today, but it seems to be the exception rather than the rule... Tony
36 JumboJim747 : Hi Nick That is a shame i think i speak for the majority when i say the old layout was more appealing Layout is the answer to that Cheers
37 Jid : Who said that comedy was dead!!!
38 Psych : People still talk a lot about this homepage - it shows the impact that whole experience had on many. Whilst I am still no fan of what I see there, it
39 Paulinbna : When you say the queue length is because the because of people of holiday. Why is the other site screening 8200 in a little over 5 days. Do they take
40 ZakHH : Well said, Paul. But how do we reach such a 'functional community'? Over the past months, I could not fight the feeling that only blind supporters an
41 Silver1SWA : Excellent post ZakHH This has been the biggest issue that has set the depressing tone lately, IMO. Much of the negativity and resentment towards the s
42 WILCO737 : Hello everybody, don't rip my head off when I am posting here as a crew member I was reading through this thread a bit and I want to put in my 2 cents
43 Sulman : You can never call volunteer work a 'job'. It's unpaid - there is no reward, either monetary or materially and therefore, by extension, no consequenc
44 INNflight : totally agree. See, another problem....I encounter it right now. If I'd write what I think *cough*myspa*cough*ce my post will be gone in a second and
45 WILCO737 : Uh oh, I need to renew it in 2.5 months, I should be worried then On a serious note: I know there are still bugs, but not really big ones like right
46 NIKV69 : That is not exactly free speech. Posting a message that was sent to you privately is not a good thing to do or discussing it. It's a private conversa
47 Post contains images Javibi : May I dissent? The queue at A.net has been long as far as I can remember, in Johan's time as well as now with DM. Several measures have been taken ov
48 WILCO737 : Yes, you may It was just my feeling from reading here and in site related that photogs are frustrated about the long queue and that seems to be (part
49 INNflight : Oh absolutely I first visited this site in 1999 or 2000 if I recall correctly. I grew up with it, had my first photos accepted long time ago, had my
50 WILCO737 : Not bad, not bad but wouldn't it be great if the queue would only be 2-3 days long? To be honest: i don't know. The only thing I can think of: to sha
51 Jid : What a load of rubbish! They have a more technical way to screen - that might be in development here, I don't know. Standards are different that's al
52 INNflight : Absolutely, and I think it's nice to offer photographers a choice where to take their photos to. Just for the record, I don't upload at letter-betwee
53 WILCO737 : I totally agree with that sentence! I hope A.net or DM can re-establish yuor trust and you can get your dusty pictures out of your HDD and upload it
54 JakTrax : Yup! If these forums were a country we'd have a dictatorship! Sorry, disagree. This message could have easily been posted in the thread as several th
55 NIKV69 : Fact remains they don't scutinize pics as closely as here. I keep hearing how their screening times are so much faster than here. Well when you have
56 Psych : Nice to read a thread like this again - might be a bit painful for some, but there's no gain without pain, as they say, and I see this kind of debate
57 Jid : Stop talking about something you know nothing about. The pictures are looked at in a different way to how they are here. They have a more technologic
58 JakTrax : Nik, it's just a matter of opinion, neither one of us is right or wrong and I'm not gonna fall out with anyone over it. But when you get a message tha
59 Viv : By and large, posts to this thread have been constructive - this is very good. One of the key issues seems to be the length of time it takes from uplo
60 JakTrax : Looking at the way things are going Viv I think this would just lead to complete pandemonium, and would result in one hell of a backlog to clear once
61 AC320 : Absolutely incorrect. We don't usually discuss this in the forums but we do not want others getting the wrong impression: "Referenced post deleted" d
62 Dendrobatid : Viv That suggestion is, I am afraid, a nonsense and I can speak with authority on that as some of what gets uploaded has to be seen to be believed. T
63 Viv : Well, I can accept that - I obviously do not see the worst of the uploads - I had naively assumed that most were at least close to acceptance quality
64 JakTrax : Well OK, but that sounds mighty coincidental. I may be wrong but in all honesty the politics of the site of late suggest my initial theory is correct,
65 JakTrax : Just check out some of the (unofficial) pre-screen threads - the folks who start these have the sense to ask if they're OK before uploading (when 9 o
66 NIKV69 : A more technological way? Keep telling yourself that. Yes it does, if a pic doesn't have to meet the criteria that this site does the screening will
67 ANITIX87 : When I got a Top of Day two years ago, it got around 24,000 hits. We are nowhere NEAR the amount of traffic we used to have. The fourth most popular
68 Silver1SWA : Alright, poor choice of word. I was basing it on the following definitions of "job". "anything a person is expected or obliged to do; duty; responsib
69 Spoogle : Not only has it been suggested before ... it was actually implemented before ! it worked , but then again it was full again around 2 weeks later , wa
70 Jid : I don't have to tell myself because I know how both processes work. I doubt you know how either work so stop talking about things you know nothing ab
71 Acontador : Hi Guys, One of the (many) tasks of the Headscreeners is to supervise the screening team, and to periodically review the result of the screening of ea
72 Post contains images Spoogle : A very fair answer , thanks for that . When i was screening it was a very good facility to view who was doing what over 1day , 1 week and 1 month & a
73 Acontador : Hi Spoogle, Actually that's not correct. Please remember that screening whatever number of pics doesn't translate into getting out of the queue that s
74 Dendrobatid : On paper, yes, though two are currently inactive for reasons that I cannot elucidate on. One is also working at a very reduced capacity due to anothe
75 Spoogle : Unless of course you split into 2 maybe ... new screens & hq ? Use the direct add as much as possible (if it still exists) , i think all the screeners
76 Aero145 :
77 Silver1SWA : Mick and Andres, thanks. Fair answers indeed.
78 NIKV69 : I know a bit more than you want to believe but I can tell you that the pictures here get screened more thoroughly and hence take longer to screen. Pe
79 JakTrax : Surely the way the site's going you have to speculate to accumulate? Something needs to be done, whether it's hiring (if that's the right word?) more
80 Chukcha : Well, I also clearly remember that, two years ago, EVERY TIME I clicked on a picture (even on the most obscure one that nobody but me was likely to l
81 Silver1SWA : Well put Karl.
82 Paulinbna : You make it seem like they take awful pictures at the other site, like they take pictures out of focus and unlevel and things like that. Yes they hav
83 JakTrax : I must admit I've seen VERY unlevel pictures accepted there. Whether it was a slip-up I don't know but if it was it's quite a big one! I agree the st
84 Codeshare : Concerning jp.net quality is not that far off to be honest. Some of the photos that make it on to here basically should not be accepted according to t
85 JakTrax : Indeed it does. Karl
86 Spoogle : I have thought that on images I've seen over here ... JP does not and should not even be discussed on this thread ... why should it ??? Title : A.net
87 Vishaljo : Well if you shut-up with your constant Anti-JP nonsense these folks here can have a more meaningful discussion. I have seen some of the most beautifu
88 NIKV69 : No that is a spin you are putting on it. I never said they take garbage but their standards on quality are lower than this site. Nothing more nothing
89 EZEIZA : I've been reading this very interesting thread as closely as I could, but I may have missed something so if what I post has been mentioned I appologiz
90 Silver1SWA : I agree, and I will be testing that by uploading two of my favorite "unworthy" shots over at the other site. Everyone I know is able to see the shots
91 NIKV69 : Oh my this sure is part of a meaningful discussion. This is extremely subjective. I find it funny how you automatically assume they will just keep ge
92 EZEIZA : Sorry Nik but I disagree. Yes, there will be cases where one can get the first shots accepted at the first attempt, those are not the problem, but th
93 Silver1SWA : Honestly Nick, I think the majority of first time uploaders are not fully aware of what it takes to get a photo accepted here. How many times do we s
94 Chukcha : That's what I've tried to bring up several times here and in a separate thread that was first posted here, then moved to Site Related; but there seem
95 Dendrobatid : From a screening perspective, Silver1SWA hits the nail on the head here. It is unbelieveable some of the rubbish that we see, largely from first time
96 EZEIZA : Mick, not too long, but too slow, that's the main issue.
97 Kukkudrill : Credit where credit is due ... the queue appears to be gradually coming down. Charles
98 Post contains images Granite : Hello Yeah, right: Regards Gary
99 Dendrobatid : Gary makes my point in reply 95 above. I have not checked but I bet it was one of two images uploaded. You have seen the image but I wonder what the i
100 Walter2222 : So, the site is recovering! At least some of us take the time to have fun while on the forum, and that is - to me - the most important reason to be h
101 Viv : Indeed, I was clearly wrong. My approach to most things is to read the instructions, learn what is required, and do my best to reach the standard. Th
102 Granite : Walter Over the weekend I have changed many uploads for wrong information, categories etc. This takes time but if the image is nice I don't mind doing
103 Dahlgardo : With the risk of sounding like a broken record, I have to question why a.net hasn't chosen to expand the screening team to at least 30 screeners (or w
104 PUnmuth@VIE : Wrong. Different standards do NOT mean a pic takes less time to screen. It's just a different approach to the whole thing. Again wrong. I can only re
105 PUnmuth@VIE : Nik is always right and the others are wrong
106 Walter2222 : I agree, that's why I suggested to leave the "penalty of -2%" (as if the shot was rejected). I am sure I had a few where a tiny bit of info was wrong
107 JakTrax : I could not have put that better myself. Seems to happen a lot lately. Letting all-and-sundry post here encourages laziness in beginners in my opinio
108 NIKV69 : Keep telling yourself that. How do you figure? If a screener looks at it, or has 2 more look at it and scrutinize it, by all means it is going to tak
109 Jid : You just don't get it do you Nik .. You know neither of the processes but you claim to be an expert and be able to have an opinion on both. Let me te
110 PHJPC : Shame that this thread is again moving into a childish 'I have to wait so long for my photos to be screened' discussion. The thing that worries me mos
111 Bjcc : PHJPC I think that the 2 things are, at least partly connected. Like many people, I upload to both here and the Other Place. Again, like many people,
112 JakTrax : Some people like this kind of shot though. To many they are not as boring as you suggest. I find a nice side-on sunny image pleasing to my eyes. But
113 Bjcc : Jaktrax Yes, they can be, but not several 100 of the same aircraft. Sadly the current formula does not encourage experimentation, and thus more of the
114 Silver1SWA : Well then, under Viv's proposal, you guys would just have step it up to make sure that does not happen!!
115 SNATH : I second this (and third, and fourth, and fifth, etc. you get the idea). This is something that I also proposed in the past. Apart from cutting down
116 PUnmuth@VIE : Try to read (and understand) again what I have written. I am not talking about your upload experiences, I am talking about your screening experiences
117 Dendrobatid : This idea of having a sort of partial rejection for information has been suggested before though it is not as straightforward as it seems. Correcting
118 Granite : Hello Yes, quite so. A few screeners (including myself) have worked our buts off this weekend to get some stuff cleared. Weather was not that great wi
119 Granite : Tony Yes, agree.......but could be done while the photographer is uploading Cheers Gary
120 Granite : Hi all Just a polite request, could Nik and others take their arguing offline please? Regards Gary
121 Silver1SWA : Gary, thanks to you and the other screeners for putting in some OT over the weekend. I did notice a shrink in the queue. Awesome job. No rejections fr
122 INNflight : A valid point, but as it's been said before, screeners go on vacations or get ill, and also some screeners decide to leave the team from time to time
123 EZEIZA : So you probably got my two shots (out of two slots!) accepted Thanks! Yes, for the first time I got 2 out of 2, but in my last uploads I have been ge
124 McG1967 : For Category and Info, it would make sense to allow the photogrpaher to be able to edit the data once a photo has been put in the queue. If a photo en
125 Diamond : This thread contains so many rule violations (by people who claim to have the site's best interests at heart) that we've lost count. It's being locked
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...
A.Net Photos/AN-124 Featured In Orlando Sentinel posted Thu Mar 6 2008 15:56:28 by CitrusCritter
Your A.net "goals" For 2008 - Already Reached? posted Fri Feb 29 2008 06:35:11 by Jorge1812
Are Any Of These A.net Worthy? posted Wed Feb 27 2008 23:17:19 by BoiseAirport
First Picture On A.net? posted Sun Feb 17 2008 07:48:06 by Jetfreak
Your A.net "goals" For 2008 posted Wed Feb 13 2008 09:31:03 by TimdeGroot
How To Delete Pictures From A.net posted Sun Feb 10 2008 08:46:13 by Deradere
Sealiners.net posted Sun Feb 3 2008 09:37:05 by Jamesbaldwyn
Does This Photo Meet The A.net Standards? posted Sat Jan 26 2008 14:19:42 by Sfilipowicz
A.net Worthy? posted Wed Jan 23 2008 09:56:13 by Raoulr
Appropriate For A.net? posted Tue Jan 22 2008 21:48:17 by DavestanKSAN