JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 2398 posts, RR: 7 Posted (1 month 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2194 times:
Hi all,
Have dropped from a limit of 25 to 20 in the last half-hour or so. I guess the new queue limits have been applied?
Good for our newer members I suppose but seems a bit harsh on those of us who had a decent ratio but not so many shots in the database. Still, if it helps matters I'm all for it, although some advance warning would've been nice.
1 Dazbo5: Looks like it Karl. If you click on the 'why' on the upload page for number of uploads permitted, it's all there. I can have 40 now without maintainin
2 NIKV69: It's a shame that the people that upload high quality shots have to suffer at the behest of people that continue to rant about how they can't get pho
3 Dvincent: Ah, but for that brief period of time when I had 30 slots a month ago... I've been mostly around 20 slots so I went from 20 to 15. It'll be a long tim
4 Clickhappy: And there you have it. No matter what is done someone will complain.
5 Chuck9941: Didn't realize it would be changing either. My limit was dropped by 2 but I've never maxed out my limit so not much lost. At least this way I might be
6 JakTrax: It has plus and minus points Darren. At the moment it's a minus for me but probably a plus for you. At least I can upload what I consider creatives wi
7 Moose135: But how many times have you heard people say they don't want to upload a "creative" shot because if it's rejected, it will hurt their acceptance rati
8 Silver1SWA: No complaints here. I never have more than 3 or 4 in the queue at one time anyway. Always afraid of an entire batch getting rejected... Doing just
9 Dvincent: I think, overall, it's a good change. The hit that some take (going from 20 to 15 slots, for instance) is minor overall when most people probably stan
11 NIKV69: So? There is just as many that won't try other type of shots like night and cabin shots because of this but it's a cop out. If you look at most with
12 Whisperjet: Sorry, but that's the worst thing that could have been done. Just imagine everybody tried to fill up his slots within a few days... Stefan
13 JakTrax: I agree. At least I can boundary-push now! I don't know. Those with proven records could've filled their slots if they stood to lose, while newbies w
14 Clickhappy: Karl - I get the sense you would not agree with us either way. You are a very vocal, and very minority, opinion. Keep that in mind.
15 Silver1SWA: Wait, wait, WAIT a minute here. Wasn't the argument that pushed for this change that the old system was too harsh on the newcomers?!
16 JakTrax: It has ups and downs - I never said I wouldn't get used to it. In fact I've said several times above that it'd be interesting to see if it pans out o
17 StealthZ: That is the part that scares me, or at least makes me think it might scare the screeners. I hope they don't get inundated with thousands of badly lit
18 Conoramoia: Are you guys blind? It means hat there will be no more moans and groans about borderline images,acceptence ratios AND there will be more variety becau
19 JakTrax: I personally never considered it harsh on newcomers. I know a lot of newcomers (new'camers' actually ) who've progressed here and whose slots are/wer
20 NIKV69: Of course they will, you just threw the acceptance ratio out the window. What do you think is going to happen? Bigger queue with less pre-screened sh
21 RonS: Karl - leaves you less worry about ratio and more time to work on killer shots, right? Scared of that too.. But, good job by the powers at be that ar
22 JakTrax: I fear this may happen but we don't yet know. Similar systems work effectively elsewhere. I personally don't mind (too much) a longer queue so long a
23 Conoramoia: Not so much wrong but it can be very boring to see 20 odd pictures of (example) a ryanair taxing in overcast conditions. Certainly not for a.net and
24 JakTrax: More attention paid to the pre- and post-screening threads could effectively prevent the queue from getting insanely long. New folks with newly-award
25 Dvincent: Don't forget that, at least to us in the public, we don't know the total allocation of slots and whether or not they shifted up or down. Given that s
26 NIKV69: That shot would probably not get accepted so non issue. That is not what you said. You said many shots of a 737. You do realize that it was the 50mm
27 StealthZ: I am going to go out on a limb here.. whist wearing a flame suit!! More attention learning the craft, more attention to the process both before and af
28 Silver1SWA: Karl, there is nothing wrong with being vocal. Speaking out is key to making things happen. However we have to be smart about it and stay consistent.
29 Jetmatt777: Some simple arithmetic. Let's say it takes 30 seconds (conservative number) to reject an obviously bad picture. Let's also say by the end of this wee
30 Conoramoia: I understand how it started, but what I said was that it wasn't started purely for uploading some 20 pics of the same type of plane,airline,location(
31 JakTrax: Yes, good point. I hope however that we won't see a dramatic increase in bad shots clogging up the queue. If 70% of the queue can be instantly disreg
32 Cpd: I'm not really bothered by the new limits. I've gained a few slots - but I rarely upload any more than 3 or 4 images at a time. So I won't make use of
33 Chuck9941: Now I'm going to go out on a limb here... at least with my thinking if I have a bunch or new upload slots and am working to increase my photos in the
34 Cpd: I don't know about that scenario. I've uploaded 4 at a time and usually 3 of them get through provided I've done a reasonable job of the photo and pro
35 RonS: Ahh, Ryan...the voice of reason. Just chill out and relax. Give the change some time and see how it goes. Ron
36 LOCsta: i just filled all my slots with blurry, backlit side-on's with the noses cut off Can't wait for them to be rejected so I can do it again! Seriously th
37 GPHOTO: Karl, The team have ways of dealing with persistant abusers and are capable of telling the difference between those who abuse the system and those wi
38 Bruce: I dont really have any complaint with it but how does it differ now than before? What were the old limits? Bruce
39 NZ107: I must say this new uploading system is different.. But the limit might just be to stop people from racking up plenty of rejections. That's my feeling
40 Fly-K: For me personally, no complaints, I always have a limit of 40 now, whereas it would drop to 35 or even 30 when my acceptance ratio went down. Now I ca
41 Raedervision: The nice thing about change is you can change back if it doesn't work. I don't know what my acceptance ratio is and I don't even care. I push on the i
42 Zbot69: Hey Conor... was that some underhanded comment about my photos? Ha ha ha.... Wow... talk about hacking through a Gordian Knot... nice going guys. I'm
43 NIKV69: How original but the fact remains that photogs that worked hard to upload quality pics just got screwed for the sake of those who don't. I still am s
44 Eadster: It shows if anything that the site actually does listen to concerns of the people that make the site what it is. I can't see what difference it'll ma
45 Psych: Nik - I am starting to resent the use of language here - 'whining' really does have pejorative connotations. I will hold my hand up and say that I wa
47 Dendrobatid: Nice response from Paul too ! One facility that we have, one that we seldom use, is to warn or even ban someone who consistently submits images that
48 Viv: Please', let us give the new system a chance before rushing to judgement. Personally, I think it will be an improvement.
50 ThierryD: Guys, the system has been changed following a request by many to get more interesting shots into the db and to be fairer to newcomers. I don't think i
51 JakTrax: Indeed. If it fails we can go to plan B (the other system heavily-discussed when the changes were proposed), and should that fail plan C (revert back
52 AC888YOW: All I have to say is, wow. If one's ability to upload images being diminished by five per week (avg. screening turnaround) causes them so much grief,
53 Ivandalavia: REALLY GOOD IDEA Thanx all Airliners crew people
54 NIKV69: There are plenty that do. I used to upload in batches of 20 and I know some that did 30 and 40 etc.
55 Legoguy: I've been flickering between 5 and 10 picture limit for a while now, however I'm grateful to see I now have 10 positions, regardless up rejection rate
56 Granite: Thierry Ahem, you haven't seen the queue sometimes Regards Gary Watt - Granite Airliners.net Head Screener www.airliners.net http://twitter.com/airlin
57 Dvincent: I do, but not all the time. And then, I could upload 10 one day, and 10 the next day. That said, losing 5 slots does not bother me.
58 TACA300C: I welcome the new changes...thank you Anet team...keep it up.
59 Chukcha: Good move, screeners. I hope it'll give a break to the new photographers. I've been advocating the change from 2 slots to 5 fir the first 50 shots in
60 ThierryD: Ok, but in that case they'll be at 15 upload slots pretty fast anyway if the quality of their photos is adequate (if it isn't they don't deserve that
61 Chukcha: Something was brought up on another A.net related forum. Some photographers think that with the acceptance ratio gone, some of the thrill of the uploa
62 NZ107: Very hard. But IMO they didn't really need to increase the upload limit for those who have less than 10 photos on here.. 5 seems too much when you on
63 StealthZ: The acceptance ratio hasn't gone anywhere. The only thing that has changed is the direct link between acceptance ratio and upload slots. Getting your
64 Chukcha: No, but when not linked to anything, it becomes meaningless.
65 Silver1SWA: Not for everyone. Boosting my ratio is still something I will strive for as always. Like I said above, I never worried about upload slots. I pay atte
66 StealthZ: Does it really? Is that where we are in the 21st century, everything has to have a prize or reward. When I upload I like it when the acceptances impr
Maybe not. What you are saying does make sense. When once I reached 100% (which I wanted to do just once for the accomplishment sake), I thought that after that my acceptance ratio wouldn't mean much to me, as I always have many more slots than I care to fill. Surprisingly, when it fell below a certain point, it felt as if I had failed myself .
Cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 1602 posts, RR: 25 Reply 68, posted (1 month 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 1168 times:
The acceptance ratio is still there, so you can, if needed - use it as your personal reward.
To me, it's not that important. I'm driven to get my name on the list of photographers. I'm not far from that at the moment (6 images away) - so once I get my computer back, I should achieve that pretty quickly - but I won't dump 10 or more images in the queue at once.
I haven't really got anything more to add to this discussion that would be of value.
Quoting Chukcha (Reply 61): Something was brought up on another A.net related forum. Some photographers think that with the acceptance ratio gone, some of the thrill of the uploading process will be gone, too, that it will now be too boring.
I don't know how the acceptance ratio could be thrilling.
Cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 1602 posts, RR: 25 Reply 70, posted (1 month 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1158 times:
Quoting Chukcha (Reply 69): Thrilling was the gamble to put, say, a photo that might bring a 'motive' rejection, in the queue, risking losing the slots.
Replace losing slots with the image going into the rejected list - surely that's good enough?
I'm so far happy with changes that are occurring now. The change to queue limits may well be a positive, and we can see now that it is possible upload otherwise lovely photos with a lot of grain/noise in the image and get them accepted, where previously they might have been rejected immediately because they had about 0.1% visible noise.
GPHOTO From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 601 posts, RR: 25 Reply 71, posted (1 month 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 1160 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
Quoting Chukcha (Reply 67): When once I reached 100% (which I wanted to do just once for the accomplishment sake), I thought that after that my acceptance ratio wouldn't mean much to me, as I always have many more slots than I care to fill. Surprisingly, when it fell below a certain point, it felt felt as if I had failed myself
I know what you mean, I think I was exactly the same, though I only ever made it to 98% acceptance (so far). For me, achieving some level or standard or number is a part of the fun here - but nothing more serious than that. A trivial pursuit if you like, just like any hobby. People can choose to stand anywhere they like on how seriously they take a hobby, how much commitment they want to put in or how they feel about any results they obtain. Myself, I don't take such things too personally but have no problem with those who like to be a little more, shall we say, enthusiastic or who set themselves very high standards of achievement. Just because I don't take things too seriously does not mean I do not wish to achieve goals. I'd like my photographs to get better, I'd like them to be accepted, I'd like them to be viewed (or sold!), I'd like the Editors queue to be as short as possible and for every airframe in the database to have a construction number.
No matter how seriously (or not) anyone may take things though, some things are universal. An acceptance is nicer than a rejection. More hits is nicer than less hits. Top of the day is nicer than being 2nd or 10th or 245th. And so on and so on. There are many such measures of 'achievement' that an individual can judge themselves by. It is important to remember that not everyone shares the same targets however - the pusher of photographic boundaries and creative shots is likely to have a lower acceptance ratio than the average and will probably be quite happy with that. If it was too high they might feel they are playing too safe.
The real pleasure comes (or should come) from being in a community of individuals bound together by an interest in aviation. There are many shades of aviation enthusiast here, from airline pilots to reg collectors, from professional photographers to keen beginners, from anoraks to suits. They each have their own motivations and opinions - soemtimes at polar opposites to each other! But we all have one thing in common - we are all here, for whatever reason.
Aussie18 From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1305 posts, RR: 8 Reply 74, posted (1 month 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1117 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Good to see some well thoughtful posts in this thread amongst the negativity being posted...
Lets give the new system ago atleast before criticizing it.
Codeshare From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1626 posts, RR: 2 Reply 75, posted (1 month 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 1115 times:
With or without the acceptance ratio makes no difference for me. However, for those who tried to get a better ratio it can be a setback. At least trying to upload creatives will not result in the drop of %.
I think at this moment the queue isn't that much larger or smaller.
KS/codeshare
How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
Eadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2193 posts, RR: 23 Reply 76, posted (1 month 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1083 times:
Quoting Aussie18 (Reply 74): Good to see some well thoughtful posts in this thread amongst the negativity being posted...
Lets give the new system ago atleast before criticizing it.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 2398 posts, RR: 7 Reply 77, posted (1 month 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 944 times:
I've been pretty silent in this thread of late; just keeping watch from the corner of my eye, waiting to see what happens.....
The queue doesn't seem to have changed at all so my first fear has been eradicated. It doesn't look like a huge influx of below-parr shots will clog things up. Perhaps there is a good balance - old hands (who I'm guessing submit the most images per head) can't submit as many and newbies are still reluctant to go all gung-ho and fill their allocation.
So far, so good.....
I have to agree with some here however that I'm still not overly keen on the insignificance of the ratio. For me it no longer serves any useful purpose except perhaps being a silent personal trophy. I liked one week having 15 slots, then the next having 20 or 25 - it was always up and down irrespective of how many shots you had in the database.
On a more positive note, I think overall it's been a pretty subtle change and I don't think it'll have the impact first anticipated. It does bolster creativity so this can only be a good thing.
Ivandalavia From Russia, joined May 2007, 49 posts, RR: 0 Reply 78, posted (1 month 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 934 times:
Quoting JakTrax (Reply 77): JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 2244 posts, RR: 6
===============================================
Dear Karl
Seems to me on this site you pursue Two Tasks - to load as much as possible photos and the second task - as much as possible to write any "dust" at a forum
Silver1SWA From United States, joined Mar 2004, 2916 posts, RR: 21 Reply 83, posted (1 month 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 864 times:
Quoting JakTrax (Reply 77): The queue doesn't seem to have changed at all so my first fear has been eradicated. It doesn't look like a huge influx of below-parr shots will clog things up. Perhaps there is a good balance - old hands (who I'm guessing submit the most images per head) can't submit as many and newbies are still reluctant to go all gung-ho and fill their allocation.
Do you think every photographer is even aware of the change? I haven't seen much of an announcement other than this thread and the one sentence about it in the bug fix thread. What percentage of the photographers have seen them? I bet most uploaders, especially newer ones, aren't aware that there is no longer a link between ratio and slots.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 2398 posts, RR: 7 Reply 84, posted (1 month 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 856 times:
Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 83): Do you think every photographer is even aware of the change? I haven't seen much of an announcement other than this thread and the one sentence about it in the bug fix thread. What percentage of the photographers have seen them? I bet most uploaders, especially newer ones, aren't aware that there is no longer a link between ratio and slots
I suppose it lessens the impact and keep things subtle. Although at first I asked why it hadn't been widely broadcast I think in hindsight it was perhaps a better move not to.
Jalap From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 181 posts, RR: 1 Reply 85, posted (1 month 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 773 times:
Quoting Chukcha (Reply 67): When once I reached 100% (which I wanted to do just once for the accomplishment sake)
That's the goal I'm working on myself lately and I have a very nice streak running, currently at 94 but 100 remains very achievable. This new limit system won't affect my little quest, I still want to achieve 100 for a moment.
As for my thoughts on this new system, I don't think I care, at least not when the queue is as short as it is right now.
Silver1SWA From United States, joined Mar 2004, 2916 posts, RR: 21 Reply 86, posted (1 month 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 754 times:
Quoting JakTrax (Reply 77): The queue doesn't seem to have changed at all so my first fear has been eradicated. It doesn't look like a huge influx of below-parr shots will clog things up.
Actually, now that I look...anyone notice the number of uploads over the past couple of days? Compare with the days preceding.. Yikes!
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
Dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 970 posts, RR: 11 Reply 87, posted (1 month 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 750 times:
Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 86):
Actually, now that I look...anyone notice the number of uploads over the past couple of days
Easy explanation: weekend. More time for uploading I guess. Check it out, it's a regular pattern. I guarantee you there won't be 1300+ uploads for today (Monday).
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 2574 posts, RR: 17 Reply 88, posted (1 month 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 752 times:
Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 86): Actually, now that I look...anyone notice the number of uploads over the past couple of days? Compare with the days preceding.. Yikes!
Since around when this thread was posted, it seems like the queue has just maintained 6000 pics.. Not doing a bad job of clearing the queue by the look of things.. I didn't see what the queue was like before though - was it way lower?
Que has gone up about 800-1000 images in the last week,was around 5200 last week but now 62-6300,Guess in the coming days we'll see what the quality of images is like...
Jalap From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 181 posts, RR: 1 Reply 90, posted (1 month 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 743 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 88): Since around when this thread was posted, it seems like the queue has just maintained 6000 pics.. Not doing a bad job of clearing the queue by the look of things.. I didn't see what the queue was like before though - was it way lower?
It has been steady around 5800 since the long summer queue was cleaned up.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 2398 posts, RR: 7 Reply 91, posted (1 month 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 694 times:
Quoting Aussie18 (Reply 89): Que has gone up about 800-1000 images in the last week,was around 5200 last week but now 62-6300,Guess in the coming days we'll see what the quality of images is like...
Mark,
Obviously no naming and shaming (don't want my name in this post unnecessarily!) but would you mind keeping us up-to-date on this, i.e. letting us now over the next week or so whether the quality in the queue has beem maintained? I personally would find it interesting to know.
Of course I've no doubt quality of acceptances will be maintained but I wouldn't want to see an extra and needless burden on the screeners.
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 2398 posts, 
From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 662 posts, 
.
From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 1635 posts, 
From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1626 posts, 
From Russia, joined May 2007, 49 posts, 
From United States, joined Feb 2009, 419 posts, 
From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 181 posts, 
From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 970 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 2574 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
