Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why Accepted?  
User currently offlineKarlok From Netherlands, joined Mar 2002, 839 posts, RR: 1
Posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 3159 times:

To screeners:

Why are these accepted, I thought that the quality to get pictures accepted are really high.

I can clearly see the white border and Jpeg compression.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jurgen Radier



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jurgen Radier



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jurgen Radier





38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineManzoori From UK - England, joined Sep 2002, 1516 posts, RR: 33
Reply 1, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3101 times:

Sour grapes perhaps?

:D

Why not just be happy for him?

Rez



Flightlineimages DOT Com Photographer & Web Editor. RR Turbines Specialist
User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3955 posts, RR: 22
Reply 2, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 3081 times:

Hey putz..... Angrywhats it to you ? You got a problem with these pics ? Then take it privately to the screeners or Johan. Don't drag some else's effort through the mud. Angry

You gotta luv these know-it-all newbies! Nuts Personally I would still like to see this forum restriced to contributing shooters only!

Thomas



"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently offlineGlenn From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3062 times:

Wassamatta. Afraid that someone with an obvious defect is better than yours  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Obviously an error, it all works itself out in the end. We'll ensure that the next Instant Priority add has a wrong box ticked. And yes I have done that before  Smile/happy/getting dizzy Didn't see anyone complain then. well except the person who then didn't get his photo online  Smile/happy/getting dizzy



User currently offlineKarlok From Netherlands, joined Mar 2002, 839 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3047 times:

Ofcourse... I'm happy for him and glad to see a picture that doesn't exists in the database.

The picture itself is pretty good, but for the photographer it's very easy to crop the white border out.


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 3037 times:

Oh no! Disaster! There's a photo with a border in the database.

The world is going to stop rotating! People are going to fall off the side of the planet! No one will be able to take pictures of airplanes again! airliners.net as we know it is going to implode into its own contradictory standards!

[NOT]


User currently offlineScooter From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days ago) and read 3023 times:

I probably shouldn't write this, but since we're talking about these pics anyway:

Compare some of Bo's recent attemts from his thread yesterday to some of these shots above. Explain to me again why Bo's got rejected?







User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days ago) and read 3009 times:

Firstly, I'm pleased Jurgen has had his pictures added to the database and I wish him well with his next uploads.

Now, assuming for just one moment that pictures with borders are not generally accepted, what percentage of errors should the screeners be allowed to make in a month??? Is 10% errors acceptable, is 1% reasonable???

In the last 30 days, 34925 photo screenings have taken place. 10% errors would mean 3492 pictures on the database that shouldn't have been. 1% errors would mean 349 pictures on the database that shouldn't have been. Three photographs represents 0.01% errors, IF indeed the three pictures referred to here do represent errors.

I suggest people here STFU unless they think they can do better.

Andy


User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 34
Reply 8, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days ago) and read 3001 times:

I'm not to sure about the first two. I don't know how rare they are in the database (d/b isn't working for me), but the photographer said himself that there are alot of them about, and tbh I think they are a little soft and i've seen better rejected.

Doesn't really make sense, we all make mistakes but sometimes i wonder how?


User currently offlineSkymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days ago) and read 3002 times:

Dan,

It doesn't do to criticise too loudly when you yourself have got pictures in the queue - strange things might happen! Big grin Big grin

Andy


User currently offlineDee-see-eit From Spain, joined Jan 2000, 435 posts, RR: 24
Reply 10, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2930 times:

Ok, ok, sorry guys for adding those pics! It was my fault. Trying to cope with the queue and going through hundreds of pics, as somebody said, errors may happen.

I don't know how it comes that I didn't see the borders on the thumbnail or on the big image, but...it just happened.

Speaking about this big inconsistency thing: As long we are doing this for fun, taking time from our spare hours and going through up to 8000 pics a week, I think at least people should concentrate on moaning on there own pics rejected and avoid claiming on shots from others being in the database. As long as we are about 14 screeners and human beings, I think that there are and will be some different points of view even if we try to be as consistent as possible, errors may happen.

Again, I want to apologise to all of those who might be offended for adding those badborder pics.

Have a nice week!

Marlo
A.net Screener











User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 34
Reply 11, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2912 times:

Andy - its lucky that my last photos in the que just got accepted  Laugh out loud.

Marlo - no problem, it happens to everyone!

Dan (still making no sense).


User currently offlineB-OTCH From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 139 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2902 times:

Well, considering my friend just had a photo rejected for having a white border around it WHEN IT DIDN'T, I'd say this type of acceptance isn't a step in the right direction.

It is good to know however, that the standards are being lowered from the next to impossible to attain level they were at.


User currently offline704tangoalpha From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 58 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2850 times:

one word:

PolishAir42


nuff said


ta


User currently offlineManzoori From UK - England, joined Sep 2002, 1516 posts, RR: 33
Reply 14, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 2804 times:

Ok 704tangoalpha, you lost me there. Just had a look at PolishAir42's shots and they look ok to me....

Rez



Flightlineimages DOT Com Photographer & Web Editor. RR Turbines Specialist
User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2793 times:

Seems to me that petty sniping detracts from the professionalism of the site. I"m asking the moderators to delete the whole thread. Threads such as this should not only be deleted, but the posters should be as well.

This forum is to DISCUSS photographs, not to bag out the screeners. Additionally, it's highly OFFENSIVE to the photographer who's pictures have been targetted.

It seems to me that these type of threads are childish and silly and simply have no place here.



VH-ADG


User currently offlineEGFF From UK - Wales, joined Sep 2001, 2201 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2788 times:

Congratulations to the guy, just you remember when you had your first pics added .... i bet you were chuffed to bits, i bet this guy is too ... don't spoil his hard work  Sad
Well done Jurgen
EGFF - 15 Days



All together or not at all
User currently offlineSerge From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1989 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2790 times:

I won't comment on the original subject of this thread other than: Well done Jurgen!  Big thumbs up

Now that thats been said..
704tangoalpha: Can you please let us know what you meant about PolishAir42's pics? I'm just wondering if it involved the awful F707 left side darkening problem or if its something else Big grin. LOT, are you listening? Send in your camera now to Sony!  Big grin  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

...Serge


User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 34
Reply 18, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2772 times:

I think he means about the angle...

User currently offlineEGFF From UK - Wales, joined Sep 2001, 2201 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2747 times:

Poor Roley, he's not that bad a guy either  Laugh out loud
EGFF



All together or not at all
User currently offlineLOT767-300ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2746 times:

Camera is going to be shipped to Pennsylvania tomorrow guys.

704: Its not my fault those bozos at Sony messed up  Sad)


User currently offlineB-OTCH From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 139 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2700 times:

No. Not congratulations. Those pix shouldn't have been accepted. I mean really...

You guys wonder why there are so many complaints.


User currently offlineGlenn From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2700 times:

And a lot of them appear to have the name B-OTCH at the beginning of them.

Curious why you call your self Botch but complain when others do.


User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 23, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2697 times:

As we say where i am coming from
Errors can only happen where work is done
Peter



-
User currently offlineSabena 690 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 12 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 2676 times:

Well, considering my friend just had a photo rejected for having a white border around it WHEN IT DIDN'T, I'd say this type of acceptance isn't a step in the right direction.

It is good to know however, that the standards are being lowered from the next to impossible to attain level they were at.


And it is again B-OTCH who can't stop complaining  Insane  Insane

You really can't see that a picture of another one is accepted, isn't it B-OTCH?

You still remember the AZ topic that you started? Now you are again pissing off the screeners...

Two sorts of people are looking through the accepted pictures everyday, 99% is like me and other aviation fans who like the pictures here, and who want to see the new shots, and than there is 1% left of people like you, who are browsing through the newly accepted pictures, not to admire them, but to complaint about the shots that should not have been added, to start topics about those shots,...

Get a life dude, don't forget that aviation is still a hobby...

@Peter:
Errors can only happen where work is done

I couldn't have said it better! Big grin

Regards,
Frederic




25 704tangoalpha : 704tangoalpha: Can you please let us know what you meant about PolishAir42's pics? I'm just wondering if it involved the awful F707 left side darkenin
26 B-OTCH : Well, I hate to answer a question with a question, but why bother having rules and standards when you guys aren't gonna follow them? I mean really! Th
27 Post contains images PUnmuth@VIE : @ B-*TCH I bet you do everything perfect and never do mistakes am I right? You seem to be that concentrated on beating the screeners that you dont ev
28 Post contains images Skymonster : B-OTCH, I've just reviewed your past contributions the photo forum... Pretty much all of them are negative in one way or another. I actually wonder wh
29 Post contains images B-OTCH : Peter...You really need to take a chill pill buddy. Is this really such a big thing in your life that you get that pissed? If things like this aren't
30 Post contains images Ckw : TA - I think what you're saying amounts to "raise the standards". I will not refer to any photographer in particular, but there are many shots (includ
31 704tangoalpha : TA - I think what you're saying amounts to "raise the standards". No, not really... interesting thought but I think perhaps what I am suggesting is no
32 Post contains images Serge : TA: I agree with you that there are a lot of people that agree with you that don't want to say it on this forum. ...Serge
33 LOT767-300ER : 704: WTF is wrong with the parallel parked RV comment? I dont give a rip what you put in your photos.
34 LOT767-300ER : Ai the F707 went to Pennsylvania to Sony. Let them worry about it. I had to battle out with the customer support for a good month to convince them it
35 Skymonster : TA - big problem with changing the standards, especially to encapsulate something about aesthetics like I think you're suggesting, is that screening w
36 Post contains images Sabena 690 : B-ITCH err... B-OTCH, may we see your pictures in the database please? You are insulting AND the work of the screeners AND the work of the photographe
37 ADG : The term "botch" in australia means misake.. guess the guy is aptly named. Botch, these people don't need to take a chill pill, you need to grow up an
38 Hkg_clk : An answer with explanation has already been given for the original question and further discussion is not going to be productive and is likely to get
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...
Accepted Shot Removed From Database - Why? posted Tue Feb 13 2007 13:32:16 by Viv
OK Folks Why Wasn't This Photo Accepted? posted Tue Mar 18 2003 04:28:47 by Alaskaairlines
Why Did This Picture Get Accepted? posted Mon Mar 17 2003 21:22:20 by Flyingbronco05
Why Won't My Picture Get Accepted? posted Wed Jul 3 2002 01:55:27 by BigPhilNYC
Why Was This Cockpit Shot Not Accepted? posted Fri Jun 22 2001 06:49:54 by CYKA
Will This One Be Accepted posted Mon Aug 27 2007 23:33:04 by Ehvk
Why Is This Photo So Popular? posted Sat Aug 25 2007 05:57:55 by StrandedInBGM
Why Double? posted Thu Aug 23 2007 22:06:38 by Javibi
Does This Shot Stand A Chance Of Getting Accepted? posted Tue Aug 14 2007 19:56:31 by KLM772ER
Category Rejection - Why? posted Sun Aug 12 2007 13:30:21 by Frippe