Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Average Accepted/rejected Ratio On Airliners.net  
User currently offlineepten From Macedonia, joined Sep 2007, 184 posts, RR: 0
Posted (11 months 2 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3819 times:

If this information is available elsewhere, or has been discussed before, I sincerely apologize.

What is the average accepted/rejected photos ratio on airliners.net?

32 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (11 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 3774 times:

Does the site keep track? I don't know where to look except the photo upload page, which has me at 72% based on my most recent uploads.

Nice to realise that I've ditched my earlier trend of "daily rejections punctuated by the odd acceptance" 

Cheers
Angad


User currently offlineKaphias From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 301 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 3707 times:

78% here. Really surprised (and pleased) to see it that high!


Flown on: C150, C172, C206, Beaver, Otter, Jetstream 32, Q400, CRJ7/9, E135/40/45, A320, B732/4/7/8/9, B744, B752, B763
User currently offlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6413 posts, RR: 38
Reply 3, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3697 times:

The Screening Process, A Report Or Interview? (by axelesgg Feb 23 2012 in Aviation Photography)

Reply 30 points to an approximate 55% acceptance ratio. I assume the site itself doesn't keep track.



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3692 times:

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 3):
Reply 30 points to an approximate 55% acceptance ratio. I assume the site itself doesn't keep track.

You know what that means? I'm AVERAGE! 


User currently offlineviv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 5, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3642 times:

I would guess around 60 percent.
Could be a bit less.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 909 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3640 times:

I'll soon drag that average down......


Whatever.......
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12462 posts, RR: 46
Reply 7, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3632 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 3):
I assume the site itself doesn't keep track.

The screeners have access to stats that show total screened, accepted and rejected for each screener, so it's a simple calculation to come up with an overall acceptance ratio for the site as a whole.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2069 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3631 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Looking at the acceptance/rejection stats of the last 2 months, I'd set the number at about 60% acceptance ratio, maybe slightly more.

Kind Regards,

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineepten From Macedonia, joined Sep 2007, 184 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 3596 times:

It's me then  I suck.

Thank you all for your answers!


User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 909 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3526 times:

Quoting epten (Reply 9):
It's me then I suck.

No you don't. I've been taking photos for 35 years and have a acceptance ratio of 40%. Not getting photos accepted here doesn't mean you suck at aviation photography.



Whatever.......
User currently offlineCarp12c From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 2 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 3508 times:

Well I'm definitely not doing things right. I've tried sending 4 photos in and all rejected. Though it might have something to do with me only using iPhoto as an editing material...

User currently onlinetrevisan26 From Brazil, joined Feb 2013, 14 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3485 times:

Quoting Carp12c (Reply 11):
Though it might have something to do with me only using iPhoto as an editing material...

Try to use Pixelmator, its much better than iPhoto to edit, in my opinion. Pixelmator cost something like 20$ at app store.


User currently offlineCarp12c From United States of America, joined Aug 2013, 2 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3477 times:

Quoting trevisan26 (Reply 12):

Thanks for the advice, I'll look into that.


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 72 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3475 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There definately is an eye needed for finding that sweet spot of editing. I as well have been photographing aircraft since at least 1980. Shot and traded countless aviation Kodachrome with many compliments on my work.

Today I had 2 rejections, the second actually made it past the first screener according to my email. Then rejected with about 6-7 reasons, contrast, common.... etc.. I guess the second screener thought the image was not unique enough. But c'est la vie.

For most of my images I follow my set approach to editing, but I just don't have the eye for what the screeners see. I am not doubting their judgement, just a bit frustrated in the process.


User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 909 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 3448 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 14):
For most of my images I follow my set approach to editing, but I just don't have the eye for what the screeners see. I am not doubting their judgement, just a bit frustrated in the process.

That sounds like me as well.



Whatever.......
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12462 posts, RR: 46
Reply 16, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 3411 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 14):
Then rejected with about 6-7 reasons, contrast, common.... etc.. I guess the second screener thought the image was not unique enough. But c'est la vie.

It has nothing to do with being unique or not. The 'common' rejection reason is often misunderstood - it basically means that there are already a lot of accepted images of that exact plane, so your image needs to be near perfect in quality terms in order to be accepted. It could be a "boring" side-on shot, but as long as the quality is good enough, it will be accepted.

You would actually get a lot more leeway for a shot of a plane that's not already in the database.

From the rejection reasons page:
http://www.airliners.net/faq/rejection_reasons.php

Quote:
The aircraft depicted in your photos was very common in the Airliners.net database, with many photos of this aircraft already present on the website.
In this case the standards for acceptance are higher than for aircraft of which we have fewer or no photographs on the database, and only photos of exceptional quality will be accepted.
Please understand that this is not a judgement on your abilities, as your picture may be of a technical quality which may be very decent. However, due to the common nature of the aircraft photographed, the highest standard is applied to avoid substantial duplication.
When uploading you should always check our database for the amount of photos we have of the particular aircraft you are uploading. If a particular aircraft or registration is common in our database, you may increase the likelihood your photos of it will be accepted by photographing it from an unusual angle, under exceptional lighting conditions, or with interesting scenery in the background.
Note that the common rejection reason will always be given in combination with another rejection reason. This means that if your image gets rejected for QUALITY and COMMON the image is too common for the quality you provided.
We often get asked when an aircraft is common. This may vary. A general rule could be from about 60-70 images onwards. That number may be lower for an easyJet A319 or Southwest 737 because those are likely to be heavily shot in the future. Similarly that number may be higher for aircraft of which only one example exists and even with 200 images can be relatively rare in our database.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 72 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 3403 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quote:

"If a particular aircraft or registration is common in our database, you may increase the likelihood your photos of it will be accepted by photographing it from an unusual angle, under exceptional lighting conditions, or with interesting scenery in the background."

My rejection depicted the aircraft on touchdown of landing with one main gear smoking it's wheels and the other main gear still in the air. It was taken from a unique location at the airport I work, so to me and the people I showed it to, thought it was a rather unique shot. But I do understand the screeners reasoning as for this was not Wow enough.

Thanks for reading.


User currently offlineJoshu From United States of America, joined Jun 2010, 155 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3372 times:

I have a 76% acceptance rate right now using a T3i and a 55-250 lens. I would attribute this high number to two important factors:
1) Shoot in good light
2) Follow the A.net editing guide. I only have made minor deviations from that guide.


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12462 posts, RR: 46
Reply 19, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3346 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 17):
But I do understand the screeners reasoning as for this was not Wow enough.

I'm afraid you're missing the point.

1 - A shot of a 'common plane' (using this site's definition) doesn't have to be award-winning to be accepted. It does need to be very good in quality terms. It can be a side-on and still be accepted providing the quality is good enough.

2 - The 'common' rejection reason should always be combined with another rejection reason. If there's no other reason to reject the image, then it should, by definition, be accepted. For example, if a shot was rejected for 'level' & 'common', it would likely be accepted if the level part was fixed.

A real example - this shot of a BA A320 was accepted recently despite it being 'common' (with 107 images before mine was accepted). It's not jaw-droppingly stunning, but was of good enough quality to be accepted despite being 'common'.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steve Brimley




Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 72 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3341 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting scbriml (Reply 19):
I'm afraid you're missing the point.

Actually, my point was that the first screener had not rejected it according to my email and the upload was waiting for a second screener. The second screener had come up with so many reasons for rejecting, grainy, contrast, common...,plus a couple more. If it was so bad, I guess I didn't understand how it got passed the first screening, considering the other image of mine screened that day was rejected for just one reason.

I guess I failed to make myself clear enough on this issue.

Thank you


User currently offlineangad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 798 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 3333 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 20):
my point was that the first screener had not rejected it according to my email and the upload was waiting for a second screener

That probably means the first screener was sitting on the fence regarding the image as a whole - it may have been a nice dramatic shot but with technical issues (the other 6-7 reasons you mentioned). The first screener then flagged it for a second opinion from another screener who, when they got the chance to review the image probably decided that the technical issues outweighed the uniqueness of the shot.

I could be wrong, but this is what I've understood from the older "explain the screening process" threads and various screeners' comments in the photography forum over the past couple of months.

Cheers
Angad


User currently offlinePositiveClimb From Germany, joined Jun 2004, 214 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3323 times:

G'day everybody!

I have no idea about the global acceptance/rejection rate on the site, but for me personally I currently stand at a 86% acceptance rate:



I only have a mere 50 images in the db, as I re-started spotting just recently, but I am quite pleased with this acceptance ratio. Nonetheless, I have no illusions at all about my photographic skills, and I am sure that having a good acceptance ratio over here is in no case an indicator for how good a photographer you are.

Shooting in good conditions and having a solid post-processing workflow surely helps in having a solid acceptance rate, but in my case leads to having more 'safe', means non-artistic photos uploaded here. Anyway, I hope that with becoming more experienced, I will one day be able to take some photos which are at least half as jaw-dropping as many of those uploaded by all of you each and every day  

Cheers,
Fabian/PositiveClimb



Proud Airbus employee
User currently offlineeskillawl From Sweden, joined Jan 2012, 96 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3284 times:

I currently have 52 percents, but it varies both up and down.  


Photo equipment: Canon EOS 60D | Canon 70-200 F4L USM | Canon 18-55 3:5-5:6 |
User currently offlinerelic From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 114 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3275 times:

Hi
I am at 62 percent at tne moment.Has been higher.Had a break for about a year,Maybe im just losing that edge to see what is acceptable and what is a no no .
Andy


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 72 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 3274 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I have searched "Photographers Corner"and can't find where to see my photo acceptance/rejection ratio.

Could someone tell me where I would see it?

Thank you


User currently onlinemjgbtv From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 844 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 3274 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 25):
Could someone tell me where I would see it?

As far as I know it only appears on the upload page like Fabian's screenshot above.


User currently offlineacontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 30
Reply 27, posted (11 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 3281 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi Craig,

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 20):
Actually, my point was that the first screener had not rejected it according to my email and the upload was waiting for a second screener. The second screener had come up with so many reasons for rejecting, grainy, contrast, common...,plus a couple more. If it was so bad, I guess I didn't understand how it got passed the first screening, considering the other image of mine screened that day was rejected for just one reason.


Actually, there are a few issues not (necessarily) correct within your statement. That part in the screening email that says something like "You have another 3 pictures which have passed first screening..." means that these 3 pictures have been viewed by at least one screener (we can discuss the poor choice of the word "passed", but that's another story), it does not mean that one screener didn't find any problems with it. For example, it may be that the first screener sees that the pictures has some issues due to the bad light, and thus highlights those for the next one with a comment. At the same time, he may not be sure about the correct information supplied by the uploader, so he also leaves a comment in this respect. Some pictures (usually borderline ones in terms of quality and/or motives) are seen by more than two-three screeners, but that is not the rule.

Also, please note that we always try to include all issues we see in a picture when rejecting as a help for the photographer for him to recognize and try to improve the edit, even if some of these issues by themselves might not be of such a degree as to solely warrant a rejection. As Steve correctly pointed out, "common" is meant to tell the photographer that this particular registration is already well covered in the database, and thus the quality standard required will be a little higher, and is therefore not a stand-alone rejection reason.

Finally, as you may appreciate, screening is a tough task if you want to do it correctly, and within the screening team we aim at the highest possible level. Add the usual time constraint (nobody has spare time these days...), and you'll quickly realize that while we try our best, mistakes can and will happen. The good news is that any uploader can help us, by uploading only their best pictures (don't choose the angle you like but the best quality), by adhering to the few rules we have, and if you happen to get a rejection please realize that this is not personal, nobody thinks that you are a bad photographer, but we only judge the picture as per our acceptance guidelines. In the end, we want to accept you picture, and that is what matters most for us.

Cheers,
Andres



Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
User currently offlineBriceJohnson From Canada, joined Mar 2012, 113 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (11 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 3254 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 25):
Could someone tell me where I would see it?

You can find it on the upload page (like mjbtv previously said).

Happy shooting!

Calvin



Calvin | image120
User currently offlinejoaocs From Portugal, joined Jul 2010, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (11 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 3154 times:

I don´t think the screening process is reliable nowadays. Maybe there are too many photos for the screeners, maybe there´s another reason, I don´t know. Uploading is not a pleasant task anymore; on the contrary, it is very frustrating.

I´m being politically incorrect, call me cynic.

[Edited 2013-09-07 18:37:22]

User currently offlinenpeterman From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 178 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (11 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3133 times:

Quoting joaocs (Reply 29):

I would not be so quick to condemn. Are there photos that sometimes raise my eyebrows a time or two, certainly (although that number spiked considerably during the MAKS priority period for what it was worth). However, as a whole, I certainly see no issues with the screening criteria or process as a whole. Over the past 3+ years I have been uploading I have certainly had to adjust some of my processes to ensure my standards were up to those enforced here, but my acceptance rate has gradually climbed to the mid 70's here, and has hung around there for a while. The appeals process certainly seems to work in my opinion-had a rejection that seemed somewhat iffy overturned just in the last week or so.

Were I to levy a complaint against the process, it would be that I have to wait so long to be screened and upload consecutive batches. We all get rejections, but speaking for myself, I can say that they make me more conscientious in my shooting and editing, and I certainly cannot complain about that!

Cheers,

N


User currently offlinejoaocs From Portugal, joined Jul 2010, 16 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (11 months 2 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3064 times:

You are at mid-70 acceptance ratio; mine dropped to 0% and nothing I try works.

I talk reliabity and that´s reliability I mean. Last week I had a rejection: "soft". Ok, no big deal, I started CS6 and applied a subtle sharpening, saved, sharpened a little more, saved under another name, sharpened a little more, saved again. I reuploaded the first one. Result: "oversharpened".

I think I´m done with plane photography, for some time or for good. I have a buyer for my D800; photography is not important; it´s a simple hobby, no big deal. Today I´ve been shooting racecars with the D300, a camera I like; maybe I´ll sell it also, maybe I´ll keep it, I don´t know.

Airliners.net took me to photography three years ago; now I´m moving to greener pastures. It was a good time, for the first year. Life´s good.


User currently offlineeskillawl From Sweden, joined Jan 2012, 96 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (11 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3051 times:

Quoting joaocs (Reply 31):
I think I´m done with plane photography, for some time or for good. I have a buyer for my D800; photography is not important; it´s a simple hobby, no big deal. Today I´ve been shooting racecars with the D300, a camera I like; maybe I´ll sell it also, maybe I´ll keep it, I don´t know.

Airliners.net took me to photography three years ago; now I´m moving to greener pastures. It was a good time, for the first year. Life´s good.

So for you planespotting is nothing else but Airliners.net? There's no planespotter that's not uploading to Airliners, and everyone that doesn't can't be considerd a planespotter? The majority of the planespotters, Id say do not upload to this site, but they're still enjoying the hobby!

What I want to say is that you should stop focusing on your rejections here and start focusing on your actual hobby.

Eskil  



Photo equipment: Canon EOS 60D | Canon 70-200 F4L USM | Canon 18-55 3:5-5:6 |
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...
Best Cockpit Photo On Airliners.net posted Sat May 28 2011 16:48:01 by thatmattguy21
Aircraft With Most Pic On Airliners.net? posted Wed Apr 6 2011 11:32:04 by rw774477
My 10th Photo Upoloaded On Airliners.net! posted Wed Mar 16 2011 00:32:37 by Dreamliner84
I Am On Airliners.net!I Am Very Happy! posted Sun Dec 26 2010 10:09:19 by yerbol
Youngest On Airliners.net? posted Sun Aug 15 2010 07:45:57 by erikgrinsvall
50 Photos On Airliners.net posted Tue Aug 10 2010 14:55:24 by ThomasWarloe
Resolution On Airliners.net posted Sun Jun 6 2010 23:52:54 by mulletman101
3 Years On Airliners.net posted Tue May 11 2010 07:17:40 by ivandalavia
Your Photo Statistics On Airliners.net posted Mon Sep 21 2009 12:27:17 by WILCO737
Celebrating My 10th Acceptance On Airliners.Net posted Sun Sep 20 2009 04:36:01 by Plainplane