cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4880 posts, RR: 37 Posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 5200 times:
Obviously, acceptance ratio has no real significance anymore - but does it still matter to you?
It does to me at the moment, because I'm on my little quest to get a 100% acceptance ratio - it was 72%, then I uploaded 10 images, 1 was accepted, 2 rejected and the other 7 accepted - so despite all that, it only went up to 74%. Those two rejections killed my efforts! I thought it would have gone up more than that...
Enough of my ramblings and over to you to discuss.
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4838 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5154 times:
I still pay attention to it. My ratio peaked at 80% right at the time of the change to where acceptance ratio no longer matters. I still hate how one rejection lowers your ratio, but getting that 2% back can be a royal pain in the a**! I'm stuck at 78% right now.
I still use it to guage my performance. Plus I have considered trying for screener in the past and I know the ratio factors into that. It's kinda like an academic GPA...lol.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
Viv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5142 times:
It matters to me, but only to a limited extent.
It matters in the sense that it is a measure of my success in meeting the screening criteria. However, since some of those criteria (notably those relating to Level, Centre, Grain and Sharpness) are not relevant to non-Anet photography - and indeed go against normal and commonly-accepted aesthetic and compositional standards - my acceptance ratio does not matter outside the limited context I have mentioned above.
At the moment it is at 68%, but will no doubt fall when the 15 shots I currently have in the queue are screened. Some of those are museum shots involving flash, unusual angles and crops, parts of aircraft obstructed, etc.
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
ThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2072 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 5129 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SUPPORT
It still matters to me in a way that I consider it as a personal challenge to reach and maintain the 90%+ limit, though I'm unlikely to achieve this with my often borderline photos that I upload.
The way is the goal...
dazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2922 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 5117 times:
It's a personal challange for me to keep my acceptance ratio at a reasonable level. It's currently 90% and has been around that for the last few months. It obviously has no bearing on the number of upload slots now, so it's just the challange of keeping it high for me these days.
Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
JohnKrist From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1399 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 5096 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SUPPORT
Yes, I care, but I haven't really started to upload until now. My ratio is 50%, and most of the rejections was from a few years back when I didn't know better. I have only uploaded 50 shots in 4 years and have 26 of those accepted. Had I started this year it would be 85%.
It was tiresome when I only had 2 slots and the screening took 12-14 days, so I just didn't bother and only uploaded those I really wanted to show. But, main reason to try and up the ratio is because I expect that the ratio will play a factor again in the future.
And, you can never reach 100% if you've had a rejection, even if it is one out of 10.000 upoloads
5D Mark III, 7D, 17-40 F4 L, 70-200 F2.8 L IS, EF 1.4x II, EF 2x III, Metz 58-AF1
Dvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1745 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 5037 times:
I get a few bounces here and there, but it's been between mid 80s and 90% for a long time now. It doesn't matter as much to me anymore, but it's a nice piece of statistics.
What I'd like to see is better hit tracking stats... like, I'd like to know how many total hits i've gotten every day and such... admittedly I'm wondering if I'll get a million hits by the end of the year.
What do mean? I'm still a relative hack as far as this goes.
I still have a lot of images I never uploaded - so I'm looking through them to see what might be good - as you probably noticed from the old dates of some of my recent uploads. I'm not going to do anything particularly different - just take pictures of what I want, the way I want to do them.
I'm actually not that motivated at the moment - because around Sydney airport, what is there to photograph that hasn't really been done to death. Perhaps if you hire a helicopter or annoy the powers that be to get you onto the tower observation deck for those high angle photos - that's a bit different, but that has already been done many times too.
When airport watch comes into play (if it ever happens) - then we might get some better opportunities, provided someone doesn't do something silly.
Quoting Dvincent (Reply 10): What I'd like to see is better hit tracking stats... like, I'd like to know how many total hits i've gotten every day and such... admittedly I'm wondering if I'll get a million hits by the end of the year.
Yeah, I wouldn't mind that - along with some stats on the countries of people who viewed our images.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (4 years 6 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4930 times:
I'm not bothered at all because...
a) It doesn't affect my available upload slots
b) I've pushed through quite a few 'daring' shots I wouldn't have submitted before the change
...and perhaps most importantly...
c) I do this hobby for me and no-one/nothing else.
I must admit however that it's made me a little more complacent. Before I would double-check my edits to make sure every last little detail was fine; now I just whack 'em in the queue and hope for the best! My ratio hasn't been helped lately by a change in both camera and monitor either, although I'm beginning to really get to grips with them now.
Over the last couple of weeks I've had about 25 straight rejections and my ratio tuimbled to 50% - the past few days however I've had 12 in a row accepted; but the curious way in which the ratio seems to work (it's a conspiracy!) has ensured that I remain at that figure. I was at one time working towards a 90% ratio but every time I got to 88% something would go wrong (another conspiracy!).....
derekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 913 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4464 times:
Just as well it doesn't matter to me. 20 uploads, 20 rejections. It isn't quite an all-time low but near enough.
I think the probelm is a gap in uploading. These would have been accepted a year ago (probably) but because I haven't had any rejections to gauge my editing skills (??) then the bar must have been raised in the meantime.
I must try harder - Oh wait that's what I just did - Oh well.....
JohnJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1662 posts, RR: 2
Reply 19, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4413 times:
I still enjoy seeing my acceptance rate, particularly since it's at an all-time high just now. I'm usually a 60%-70% player, but I hit 94% a few weeks ago and after a few rejects, am still at 90%, boosted by a number of side-on, easy-to-get overhead shots I uploaded. We'll see how long that lasts.
baldursveins From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 115 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (4 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4403 times:
To quote the upload page:
Based on your 50 most recently screened photos: Accepted: 45 Rejected: 5
Acceptance Ratio: 90%
One of the reasons the ratio will sonetimes stay still for a long time is this. Lets say you got a ratio of 100%, which means that all your last 50 uploads got in. Then you get 10 rejects in a row. Your ratio drops to 80% (40 right out of 50). Even if your next 40 are all accepted, the ratio will stay at 80% untill all those 10 drop out ot the last 50. At least this is the way It must work.
cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4880 posts, RR: 37
Reply 22, posted (4 years 6 months 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4291 times:
Is there any more details on how the ratio works. For instance, 40 accepted, 10 rejected based on last 50 equals 80% ratio. However, I just had another image accepted, so shouldn't that be 41 accepted, 9 rejected and 82%?
Maybe it doesn't update right away, or more likely - I'm not understanding the logic right.
ThomasWarloe From Norway, joined Jul 2008, 265 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 6 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4281 times:
Quoting cpd (Reply 22): Maybe it doesn't update right away, or more likely - I'm not understanding the logic right.
Well, I think it works this way. Say i begin to upload to a.net, and get 10 rejections in a row and then 40 acceptances. Highly unlikely, but lets just say that. But when I get my next rejection (photo upload #51), then my acceptance ratio stays at 80%. Why? Because the acceptance ratio only counts for the last 50 pictures. So, in reality, the first of the ten rejections dissapeared, and was replaced by another rejection, so my overall acceptance ratio did not change. In your case, you probably replaced an acceptance with an acceptance, so your ratio did not change either.
[Canon EOS 60D + Canon EF 70-200 f/4 L USM Lens + Canon EF 17-40 f/4 L USM Lens]
: I was asked a long tme ago how the system worked and I explained it like this :- If you imagine a tube containing 50 discs so that one drops out of th
: Understood now. Argh - that 100% is going to take a long time to achieve.