Ander From Spain, joined Jan 2005, 367 posts, RR: 21 Posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4490 times:
I would like to have the opinion of my fellow A.net photographers regarding this matter: let us please assume a hypothetical situation; you have just received your last rejection e-mail and it includes a screener's personal comment that says just this: "Poorly cropped". Would you consider that to be constructive criticism? Or maybe an insulting comment? Or maybe none of those?
Looking forward to your replies,
I appreciate the comments coming from the screeners as it could help to see that flaws and do it better next time. Poorly cropped is not the politest way to say that it is not a good crop but it is not insulting at all.
The screener put in a lot of time for the screening and adding a comment takes some times as well, so I would say, keep them short and simple, but clear what is meant. With "poorly cropped" the photographer should get the idea that the crop isn't perfect, so would be fine for me in that case.
For further help or assistance one can use the feedback forum to get other suggestions for a crop.
Fly-K From Germany, joined May 2000, 3154 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 4471 times:
Depending on the rejected motive, to me a comment like "poorly cropped" wouldn't add too much value as it basically just repeats the rejection reason (centered or motive). What would be more helpful is a suggestion how to crop it in a better way. Having said that, I appreciate the screeners taking their scarce time to add a comment now and then.
Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been...
You need to be very sensitive to understand a personal message such as "poorly cropped" as an insult.
We (hopefully) all know that rejection reasons express what the screeners think does not 'fit' in the database - nothing more. Their meaning (with exception of the more objective reasons, for instance 'level') is strictly limited to the context of airliners.net.
Personal comments are always meant to be constructive and helpful to the photographer. However, it is not always easy to explain certain things, especially motive rejections, with a few words so that it can happen that the message is not explicit enough or in the worst case not helpful at all. For this case there are two possibilities: First is a post in the feedback forum and second is an email to the screeners.
alevik From Canada, joined Mar 2009, 1036 posts, RR: 8
Reply 8, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4401 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
I think the hypothetical situation is difficult to discuss without context. In this case, the situation isn't really hypothetical, and there really is an image associated with the rejection and the comment.
I would argue that many photographers who see the image that was associated with the "poorly cropped" comment would not find the two things - the image and the comment - undeserving of being together in the same rejection email.
There was a discussion amongst screeners sometime ago about the use of the term "poor crop", and it was generally agreed that it was not a bad thing, and that most photographers are mature enough to interpret it correctly, seeking more information from several sources that are available to them as Stefan has pointed out.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 10, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 4364 times:
Some comments, while appreciated, are unhelpful. I know the workload is high but if taking the time to write something personal it's often nice for it to be specific.
I had one a few months ago (contrast) which just said, "Bad contrast". It would hardly be good with a contrast rejection would it? I fumbled trying to figure out whether to apply more or less contrast and not seeing a great deal wrong with it I added more - only to face another rejection and be told that the original was for excessive contrast. If I'd known that in the first place it wouldn't have gone back in the queue as it did and ultimately screeners' time wouldn't have been wasted.
airkas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 4000 posts, RR: 55
Reply 13, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4268 times:
I consider everything the screeners write as personal text to be helpful. I appreciate the screener taking the time to guide me in the right direction. A comment like "poorly cropped" will immediately focus my attention on the way I cropped the image and I will usually see what I've done wrong (according to them). By no means do I find a comment as "poorly cropped" insulting.
vikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10047 posts, RR: 26
Reply 15, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 4179 times:
Quoting Ander (Reply 14): And what direction is the right one Kas?
The direction that results in a less poor crop
Nah, seriously, yes it's an ambiguous comment, but I don't find it insulting at all. We upload to Anet knowing that the site has certain photographic requirements, and also knowing that the screeners have a huge number of photos to edit at all times, and can't spend too much time on any one.
"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
The right direction as to where they think my photos is flawed. So if my photo were to get rejected for motive and a screener writes "poor crop" (I've had that happen to me too), I know the problem is with how I cropped the photo. Usually I see fairly soon what the problem might be, with the remark from the screener in the back of my head as a guide. If I agree is another discussion though
ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 743 posts, RR: 16
Reply 17, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 4108 times:
For me this is one of the big problem areas of A.net. If we assume that an image is otherwise technically fine, then the crop is an aesthetic choice, or in other words, a matter of personal opinion.
I think when a photographer of the proven ability of Ander chooses to crop an image in a certain way, I think we can take it that this was a thought out decision. Whether or not I, a screener, or anyone else doesn't like the crop is not relevant. Indeed I think that some of the strongest images can provoke negative and positive responses in equal measure.
Insulting? Perhaps not the right word (but then neither is 'poor') - but I think there is a certain arrogance in this sort of comment, in that it says "my aesthetic values are better than yours". I don't suppose that was intended, but, in cases where the rejection is essentially a value judgement, then the photographer should be accorded enough respect to be given a decent explanation. Time, in a case like this, should not be a factor - perhaps the screener didn't spend enough time looking at the picture in the first place - not all images are immediate attention grabbers ... some are more of a 'slow burn'.
Of course all that is hypothetical - maybe Ander had an off day, and it really is a 'poor crop'!
cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 38
Reply 19, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 4070 times:
We'd have to see the original image here to determine - but the crop is something very personal, I may not like the look of the image, but that's not to say I'm right, and the photographer is wrong. I'm not going to say the screeners are right or wrong either.
I just hope this remains civil and certain people don't come here with the "tough guy" attitude to villify the photographer, who can back his words with many great images.
All said, everyone needs to remember that words written on a forum or in any other similar medium don't have the same meaning as when we are talking to each other in person - so it's easy for the "innocent" comment of one person to be misunderstood by another.
If they can write "poor crop" they also could write "crop tighter" / "crop less" without any additional effort... One of these surely wouldn't be seen as somehow "insulting" and it would help the photographer to solve the cropping-issue itself a lot more than a "poor crop"...
Ander From Spain, joined Jan 2005, 367 posts, RR: 21
Reply 21, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3990 times:
Quoting ckw (Reply 17): I think we can take it that this was a thought out decision. Whether or not I, a screener, or anyone else doesn't like the crop is not relevant. Indeed I think that some of the strongest images can provoke negative and positive responses in equal measure.
Exactly my thought, Colin. Thanks
Quoting EliaLechner (Reply 20): If they can write "poor crop" they also could write "crop tighter" / "crop less" without any additional effort...
I would dare to say that writing "poorly cropped" is truly a "poor screener comment"
Wilco737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 9054 posts, RR: 76
Reply 22, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3988 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD MODERATOR
Looks like we are again at a point where the screeners can only lose. I mean, they do add a comment, a lot more than they used to be and people were happy about it. Now the comments aren't good enough. Well, what should they do then? Not adding a comment at all? Or writing a longer comment? But then the screening takes a lot longer and the queue will be longer? Or we all can use the feedback forum a lot more. Many use it already and some good feedback is given there.
dendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1668 posts, RR: 62
Reply 23, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3973 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
Quoting Wilco737 (Reply 22): Looks like we are again at a point where the screeners can only lose. I mean, they do add a comment, a lot more than they used to be and people were happy about it. Now the comments aren't good enough. Well, what should they do then? Not adding a comment at all? Or writing a longer comment? But then the screening takes a lot longer and the queue will be longer? Or we all can use the feedback forum a lot more. Many use it already and some good feedback is given there.
You cannot make everybody happy
Touche Phil, touche!
It is pretty obvious to anyone reading this thread that there is a specific image that the thread relates too, not one of Ander's but that of another photographer. It has never been shown in this forum and I am not prepared to link it here. However, I will point out, something not mentioned by anyone else that the personal 'Poorly cropped' was not the only rejection reason, something that perhaps even the thread starter was not aware of.
It was rejected, NOA_motiv, NOA_soft, NOA_centered, NOA_personal (not by me I hasten to add)
We are now doing a lot more personals and screening is a lot better for it. I see no reason to change anything because someone does not like a too brief personal.
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (3 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 3934 times:
I too think the current personal message situation is in the main fine, but I have to say again that a hastily put together and/or vague sentence won't do anyone any good as the uploader doesn't really have a clue what he/she is supposed to do. Subsequently the image ends up back in the queue and therefore screening - and if it's rejected again the whole process has been a complete waste of time.
My point is that sometimes (and I mean only sometimes as it doesn't happen often) a little foresight and two extra seconds can save a whole lot of time later down the line. Speculate to accumulate.
I know this doesn't have much to do with the direction in which this thread's gone but it is a good thread in which to bring it up.
: vs. I understand Wilco737s point but then again, you can write "poor crop" in the same amount of time as "crop tighter"... And like Karl stated, mayb
: Yes, that is true. But many rejections (especially motive) cannot be explained in one or two words, not even sentences. And if a screener would take
: Here is a screener comment I received today which is much more useful than the infamous "poorly cropped": "high in frame, too much space between top a
: Sure... And 'motive' is another issue... I could write a book about that! That's the way it should be!
: I think the other guys have nailed it in that you really need to see a specific case. It could be an aesthetic disagreement whereby the screener doesn
: I think there will always be a certain " arrogance" implied in whatever the screeners write. After all the very fact that you are a screener means tha
: Well said Tim.. Now are you ready to come back? Hope you are doing good. --Nate
: Probably the most useful contribution to the thread, because you are aware of the procedures. So, it's a process problem, essentially. I've always fo
: I remember when I was a screener, we -as a team- stressed to 'instand-add' more photos to keep the screening time shorter. Personally, I used to ofte
: Hi Ander and All, Nice to see again some familiar faces . Well, this is probably how you perceive the process, but it's definitely not how it's done!
: I too hate the term 'creative images' at least in the context of images on this site. A.net had pretty tight controls on what was and what was not acc
: Nice indeed I have read the many contributions to this thread with interest and the one idea that comes into my mind is that often we all forget that