Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Less Daily Uploads Than A Few Months Ago?  
User currently offlinejaktrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3072 times:

Another one for conjecture and debate.....

I've noticed that on average there are only about 600-700 images per day waiting in the queue, compared with upwards of 1,000 only a few months back. A couple of months after the new rules, etc. were implemented the queue remained steady, then as I thought it started to rocket frequently into the 1,200 and 1,300s. Now the trend appears to have dropped off and we're seeing a pleasant (for us photog's!), manageable figure once more. I can't see why this would be, so to start a healthy debate I'm asking for your thoughts and opinions.

I must admit I wasn't a huge fan initially of the 'improvements' but the queue never rocketed to the extent I thought it might. I wasn't happy about having my hard-earned upload slots taken away and rewarded to the less experienced but looking back now the whole system seems to have worked pretty well. I thought the queue would swell to gigantic proportions and be full of mediocre shots, making more work for the screeners, and although I think this happened initially (after some hesitant caution from all parties) the 'honeymoon period' seems over. The more experienced here still have sufficient slots to bulk up the queue without over-loading it and the less experienced, newer folks have perhaps become less enthusiastic about trying to fill their allocations with just about anything they can lay their hands on. I think people have realised that, while we are less fussed about putting borderline shots in the queue, rejections are still somewhat of an issue and don't help boost the number of one's images - i.e. a rejection is still detrimental. Perhaps also the realisation has dawned that a bad shot will always be just that and it's simply not worth uploading something that stands little chance. Finally, it's probably been realised that the extra workload for the screeners resulting from a large queue is just slowing things down and preventing the decent images from enjoying free and easy passage into the database.

Cheers,

Karl

23 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 1, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3065 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Because it's cold out.  


Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9653 posts, RR: 68
Reply 2, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3065 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Less uploads are a result of it being winter in the northern hemisphere, increased queue length, and usability issues with the site. The queue is coming down and the site is improving.

Perhaps you can start another thread in a few months if the numbers don't go back up  


User currently offlineJaktrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3053 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 2):
winter in the northern hemisphere

But by that same token it's summer in the southern hemisphere.....

Also, we've already seen that people go through old images and upload those when they have no new material to put in. Strange I of all people should be praising the new system but I think it is partly responsible for the queue reduction. It seems to have struck a good balance for all uploaders, old and new.

Of course no-one can say for sure what's brought the queue down and it's all only speculation - but worth having a debate about I think.

Karl


User currently offlineboeingfreak From Germany, joined May 2005, 398 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3040 times:

The site had (not correct), still has many many bugs, some of them even date back to late 2007. I was sick of it a long time ago and stopped uploading, maybe people are finally starting to realize that there are other aviation-photo sites that offer a better service than this site does. I'm actually surprised it took them this long to realize. Maybe the Acura ad has been the final slap into the uploaders face.

Just my thoughts.
Florian


User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4844 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3019 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I agree with Florian. The ongoing bugs and the routine clashes with DM over their management practices have no doubt detered a lot of photographers from uploading. SANs top uploaders don't upload for various reasons, but they have mostly lost interest because of the evolving strict standards for acceptance. No doubt that plays a role as well. When established mass uploaders are suddenly told their photos are not good enough, they might get offended and say screw this place.

I upload very little these days. I have a large backlog of stuff ready to go when I feel confident they can be uploaded with little risk of being negatively impacted by site issues. I have been putting a lot more effort in sharing my photos at other sites, which involves very little hassle and effort compared to this place.

Times have changed. Airliners.net may have peaked in terms of it's reign as the best aviation site on the Internet and a decline may be underway.

Just my two cents...



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineTravelRalf From Germany, joined Jun 2004, 111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3012 times:

According to alexa.com the overall site traffic is up over the past months. But in the same time frame I noticed a significant drop in views of my photos.

It seems to me that this site is becoming more a chat room if I look at the civil av forum and that the photographers are moving to other sites. As long as the site traffic is up and generating profit DM couldn't care less about some whining photographers as me.

After all no one forces you to upload here and there are much better choices for aviation photographers available on the web. I'm about to stop uploading here because it is simply not worth the effort anymore. After more than five years and 1800+ photos in the database it's quite hard to leave this site which I really enjoyed back in the old days.

But there is still this naive hoping that DM will someday remember that it were the aviation photographers who made the site in the first place.

Ralf


User currently offlineJaktrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3010 times:

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 5):
clashes with DM over their management practices

To be honest I thought the political-correctness that was killing the site had vanished, however a thread yesterday was deleted for unacceptable reasons. I'm sure some of you will remember it - someone was asking whether the light-pole obscuring the tail section of the new 747-8F was a reason for a motive rejection. Without warning and before any representative of the crew could clarify the thread was shut down. Voices stifled. I wouldn't have minded but the thread contained no offensive or derogatory comments; just people's opinions.

So the PC brigade are back and to be honest it's pretty unacceptable. Very similar to a government regime not listening to its people. I have stayed with this site because of the many great poeple here and because my images hopefully give pleasure to viewers. I'm certainly not here because I love the way things are done!

How many more big names will leave before anyone upstairs notices the trend?

Karl


User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9653 posts, RR: 68
Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2996 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

It is a ridiculous statement to say that no one "upstairs" is listening.

Karl, the 747-8 thread was moved to the pre/post screening forum. It seems like your question, "Why less uploads?", has become more of a rant that isn't even valid.

Ralf, it would be sad to see you go. I know many on the screening team, specifically Gary Watt and Mick Bajcar, have spent countless hours helping you. It is unfortunate that you would leave after that.


User currently offlineJaktrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2964 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 8):
It is a ridiculous statement to say that no one "upstairs" is listening

Royal, you only have to look at a couple of the above posts to see that this opinion is widely-shared. Yes, my thread has gone slightly off-topic but I wouldn't call it a rant. THREE times now I've tried to get clarification on what sort of obstruction will likely result in a rejection. My penultimate attempt resulted in a thread being deleted. I sent example images to the screeners (including yourself) and still a wall of silence.

But all that's a different story. In fact, if as some have said above the uploads are down because more and more people are leaving (which I don't personally think is the case) then this isn't too much off-topic after all. I'm not the only one 'ranting' (as you put it) in this thread but I'm the one being targeted with the grief.

Karl


User currently offlineTravelRalf From Germany, joined Jun 2004, 111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2956 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 8):
Ralf, it would be sad to see you go. I know many on the screening team, specifically Gary Watt and Mick Bajcar, have spent countless hours helping you. It is unfortunate that you would leave after that.

mmmh, thanks Royal, I really do appreciate the short comments in my rejection emails. Honestly I never realized that I caused so much work especially for Gary and Mick. I really avoided to bother the screening crew with questions in "pre screening" threads or other forums. And I never send any personal mails nor received mails from the crew. Are you sure it was me causing this workload?
Don't get me wrong I really do appreciate the work of the screening and support team. I know what it means to do voluntary work as I do voluntary work by myself.

I'm simply fed up with the way things are handle on this site by the paid crew. I still recall those enthusiastic announcements about great things to come when DM took over the site. Two years later I'm still waiting. I do not have a problem with the high standards for photographers here but I expect the same from those who run this site.


User currently offlineJaktrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2940 times:

My apologies by the way Royal - I see the thread has indeed been moved and not deleted.

Karl


User currently offlinecpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4880 posts, RR: 37
Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 2932 times:

Quoting Jaktrax (Reply 3):
But by that same token it's summer in the southern hemisphere.....

It's far too hot to take decent photos here at the moment. Unless you like lots of heat haze and severe sun-burn. The bugs obviously are still impacting things a bit, but they are getting them sorted out slowly so it seems. I'm slowing down on uploading at the moment and just leaving what I have in the queue to go through, and basically not uploading anything else. I can wait until everything is running smoothly.


User currently offlineJaktrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2888 times:

To be fair the bugs haven't ruined or even affected my enjoyment of the site lately. I have an almost full queue and my recently-screened images have been accepted without problems.

Karl


User currently onlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2639 posts, RR: 17
Reply 14, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2869 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Like it or not, complain if you must but....there is just no other aviation photography website out there that attracts as much hits per photo on average as much as this one. You can upload a shot here, JP, PP and 5 others and it's almost for sure going to get the most clicks here. After all, you are uploading for people to see it right? I know there is someone that is going to come in and say "I don't care about the hits blah blah blah" but a majority of people that upload enjoy it if more viewers see the photo after the work of getting it and editing/uploading it. Yea the site has bugs but so do the others. Don't get me started on the "other site's" crappy search engine or countless annoying popup ads....

User currently offlineAussie18 From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1756 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2864 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting cpd (Reply 12):

We did have about 9 days straight of heavy rain & cloudy weather mixed in with the hot weather,I hav'nt taken any photos for atleast over 2 weeks....Means more time screening 
Quoting Jaktrax (Reply 9):
Yes, my thread has gone slightly off-topic but I wouldn't call it a rant. THREE times now I've tried to get clarification on what sort of obstruction will likely result in a rejection. My penultimate attempt resulted in a thread being deleted. I sent example images to the screeners (including yourself) and still a wall of silence.

Karl,

Did you forget starting this thread?
When Does An Obstruction Become A Motive? (by JakTrax Nov 24 2009 in Aviation Photography)

Two screeners took the time to reply regarding whats acceptable & whats not so Im not sure what you dont understand,


Motive Okay For Such An Unusual Shot? (by JakTrax Aug 17 2009 in Aviation Photography)

How about this thread aswell,Serval screeners took the time to reply to this thread regarding the motive & even offered advice on how to fix the shot where it might than stood a chance.


So 2 threads you've started in the last 6 months regarding motive obstructions and I see serval screeners replies in those threads,Its also been asked 1000 times before by other photographers so if you've read any of those threads Im sure you would understand whats acceptable...Where is this so called "Wall of Silence"?


Cheers Mark


User currently offlineJaktrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 16, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2853 times:

Quoting Aussie18 (Reply 15):
Where is this so called "Wall of Silence

Mark,

I discussed off-forum obstacles in images and when they're acceptable, etc. with a couple of screeners, who asked me to send example images so they could give me a satisfactory respone (i.e. clarification). I got one email back saying, "Mistakes are sometimes made, we'll investigate" but subsequently never heard anything - despite me following up with another email. Would you not call that a wall of silence? I still haven't had an explanation as to why one of the most common aircraft in the database has a cone blocking part of the undercarriage. The cone was completely avoidable (I know as I shot it on the same day from a different angle).

The responses from the team in my threads you refer to were succinct - but an image like the one I mention above contradicts those succinct rules.

The reason I investigated was because I had a couple of shots of rare aircraft but small parts of the wheels were blocked. There was a thread at the time about an image that had the tiniest bit of the nosewheel obscured by a cone, and it was deemed unacceptable, which is fair enough (I HATE obstructions of any kind!). But it would be a bit of a kick-in-the-teeth should that guy come across some of the images that have made it into the database recently. A 'no obstructions' policy should be just that, with few exceptions. In fact the only exceptions should be if the 'plane is ultra-rare (like the only image online) or if the shot was a one-time-only opportunity.

I happen to like the acceptance standards here and I often don't see why people moan about it being too hard to get images in the database. If I can do it, anyone can! I know the team is only human but sometimes I feel there's been a temporary slip and quality is being affected.

Karl


User currently offlineJetmatt777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 2832 posts, RR: 33
Reply 17, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2837 times:

The United States had some decent weather over the past few months, but since January it seems everyone has been overcast and snowy in the United States. That might be a reason. I know it is a reason for me, I couldn't find the sun even if my camera did work.  
-Matt



No info
User currently offlinecpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4880 posts, RR: 37
Reply 18, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2795 times:

Quoting Aussie18 (Reply 15):
We did have about 9 days straight of heavy rain & cloudy weather mixed in with the hot weather,I hav'nt taken any photos for atleast over 2 weeks....Means more time screening

And I fed up with walking out my door and having the glasses fog up! Is this Sydney or Singapore?   Some of the days this week have been very uncomfortable. Arrive at work melting. However, you can keep your photo screening. As much as I might like taking photos some times, I dislike processing them or looking over heaps of images.

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 14):
You can upload a shot here, JP, PP and 5 others and it's almost for sure going to get the most clicks here.

I've lurked around the other major site, and - well, it's just not the same. At the moment, I have little consistency in my uploads due to a dodgy screen - but once it gets replaced, I think my enjoyment of uploading photos here might improve. I have a little quiet goal of getting a higher acceptance ratio. It was 58%, but my recent efforts with a few junk images stuffed that up big time.

[Edited 2010-02-12 01:00:52]

User currently offlineboeingfreak From Germany, joined May 2005, 398 posts, RR: 5
Reply 19, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2783 times:

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 14):
Yea the site has bugs but so do the others.

   

Oh really? Haven't noticed any for quite some time (at least at the website I'm uploading my pictures to).

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 14):
Don't get me started on the "other site's" crappy search engine or countless annoying popup ads....

Haha, that out of the mouth of someone who pays $5 a month to avoid banner adverts.

What really baffles me though is that the screening-crew, all great photographers with lots of experience, is still willing to do their work for free while the incompetent site management continuesly upsets the uploaders, releases a bugfix that creates another 10 new bugs etc. Must be true dedication!


User currently offlineSulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2037 posts, RR: 32
Reply 20, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2772 times:

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 8):

Ralf, it would be sad to see you go. I know many on the screening team, specifically Gary Watt and Mick Bajcar, have spent countless hours helping you. It is unfortunate that you would leave after that.

Royal, I know you tend to take these things personally, but the majority of contributors are grateful for the help they get, as I'm sure this gent is. That doesn't change the fact their are always improvements to be made.


James

[Edited 2010-02-12 01:30:28]


It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
User currently offlinecpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4880 posts, RR: 37
Reply 21, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2768 times:

Quoting boeingfreak (Reply 19):
$5 a month to avoid banner adverts.

Just get Firefox and some addons - simple!

Quoting boeingfreak (Reply 19):
releases a bugfix that creates another 10 new bugs etc.

What you've described is what we call regression issues. You avoid that by:

1. Developers doing sanity tests: A release list of functions going to the QA environment is checked on QA to make sure the functions work, and a general once over end-to-end test is done to make sure nothing else has inadvertantly broken. If something is broken, it gets fixed immediately and the QA team doesn't start testing until the release is declared fit and ready for testing

2. QA: QA testing against test-plans. More rigorous than sanity testing - this pushes the functions to the limits before things are ready for final stage, UAT.

3. User acceptance testing: The final fine-checking and tuning, all the tiny little issues (that border doesn't look right, the background is bleeding out of the frame slightly, etc) get picked up.

Even with all that, things can still slip through. But I guarantee the trend of bugs will go down, and keep going down. This takes a lot of effort and plenty of staff.


User currently onlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2639 posts, RR: 17
Reply 22, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2668 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting boeingfreak (Reply 19):
Haha, that out of the mouth of someone who pays $5 a month to avoid banner adverts.

Actually I do a lot of surfing airliners.net at school where I don't log in and I never get so annoyed as I do on the other site. Banners or not. The other site has a ton of popups and the search engine is horrible


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 23, posted (4 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2515 times:

Well folks, looks like screening is back on track and has been for a few days and except for Sunday (inevitable), and for some reason yesterday, queue numbers are still reasonable. Obviously the recent bugs haven't been deterring anyone much, if at all. Weather possibly but like I noted above people simply wade through old archives looking for things to upload if they have no new material.

Let's hope the queue stays low. Guess we'll see for sure very soon if there's a new pattern developing.

Karl


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...
Critique On A Few New Uploads Please posted Mon Apr 24 2006 20:28:13 by Linco22
Who Has Less Than 20 Pic In The DB? posted Tue Sep 13 2005 17:59:02 by LIPH
Why So Few Centrair Photos? posted Wed May 25 2005 16:43:40 by Ariis
Why So Few Simulator Cockpit Shots? posted Sat Feb 5 2005 18:02:24 by CaptainTim
WHY FEW CO Pics IN Italy? posted Mon Jun 28 2004 08:10:28 by COEWR2587
Best Digital Camera For Less Than $250.00 posted Tue Feb 24 2004 05:22:40 by Maiznblu_757
Ebace 2003 In Less Than A Week: Anybody Coming? posted Tue Apr 29 2003 22:31:58 by Boieng747-400
From Upload To Post In Less Than 10 Minutes! posted Sat Dec 7 2002 20:12:16 by Alphazulu
Why No New Photo Uploads In 2 Days? posted Sat May 4 2002 03:03:49 by Dragon-wings
Why So Few Widebodies In BRU...? posted Thu Mar 21 2002 21:22:57 by Xenon