Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (15 years 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3175 times:
Johan said recently that there is a sort of "express acceptance" procedure, mainly for when he is out of town, where he will approve batches of pics from people who have already have a long "history" of good uploads, where those pics will not be scrutinized that much (if at all).
I have to admit that I am probably a beneficiary of that policy. Of my last 200 or 300 uploads, I don't think a single one has been rejected. I now have 875 pics here, which puts me in 27th place, in terms of the number of photos on the database. Granted, I had a hell of a time getting my first 500 or 600 in. I finally figured out how best to scan and what needed to be done.
Lately, I've taken a lot of pics in bad weather. I went ahead and uploaded them. Some were good, and some were so-so, and I figured that Johan will bomb them if they are not good enough. (I think my good weather pics are very good, but in bad weather you have low shutter speeds, terrible colors, exposure compensation errors, etc.)
Now that I know that he doesn't really check mine too closely, I've started wondering if some of my pics shouldn't be in the database, if judged as closely as everyone else's. Like this one, which I find to be a bit blurry, as it was taken in the rain.
Would that have been accepted from someone with less of a history?
I appreciate the effort that Johan puts in to ensure that photos are added daily, but I would like to know that my pics are judged to the same standards. I used to look forward to getting that upload confirmation e-mail, where some were accepted with or without warnings, and some rejected. I was proud of the ones that got through the scrutiny, and would maybe rework those that didn't make it.
Knowing that they'll be accepted more easily (if not automatically) kinda spoils the fun. There's less of a challenge. Although I'd love to be the number 1 contributor in terms of pictures, I would like that to mean that I know what I'm doing. Quality should count more than quantity.
So, Johan, even though it means that I'll have a harder time uploading pics, and will mean that you'll have a very limited amount of shots that you can approve over your remote access, and that the upload queue might be a bit longer, I'd like to ask you to treat all our pics equally.
Jan Mogren From Sweden, joined Dec 2000, 2043 posts, RR: 45
Reply 1, posted (15 years 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 2996 times:
I'm not shure how to say this without sounding arrogant, but why did you upload pix that you don't think are good?
Instead of wanting to be number 1 in numbers of pix on here, wouldn't you wanna be known for a good-pix-consistency ?
Just my thoughts
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (15 years 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2980 times:
I don't particulary want to be #1. There are a number of better and/or more prolific photographers here, like AirNikon and Pixair and a lot of others. I would like to establish a good reputation for quality, although admitedly, I've probably uploaded pics that I should have kept back, although originally those didn't get accepted.
So, in the future, I'll try to be more selective - and won't even bother shooting pics unless the conditions are good (unless it's something of particular interest). But at the same time, I would like to know that my pics would be held to the same standards. It makes things more of a challange, and would force me to be even more selective.
I'm not accusing Johan of being a poor administrator. I understand why he does this, and it is a valid reason, IMHO. However, it diminishes somewhat the value of those pics that got loaded without scrutiny. If I wanted all of my pics on the web, I'd put them on my own web page. Part of the fun of the idea of Airliners.net, in my opinion, is making your pics competitive enough to be loaded - to have an impartial judge saying "Crap, crap, good, crap, excellent, crap, crap, warning..."
From now on, you can expect me to load a bit less often, and in less volume - my contribution to helping to make this site a site for fine aviation pics. At the same time, I would ask Johan to judge all the pics fairly, regardless if one has 3 pics or 3000 pics on the site. I think that can only improve his already excellent site.
Mikephotos From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 2923 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (15 years 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2968 times:
I'd have to agree with Jan, it's better to question yourself before uploading. I don't shoot in no sun/low sun conditions, unless it's for a specific purpose (ie. artsy photos). I try to be very strict with my uploads and pick-out the best shots. I only have 361 pics on a.net which I think are quality shots, which I find better than having 1,000 pics with some so-so shots and quality shots combined. Nothing against you and don't take it the wrong way, just trying to answer your question without insulting anyone.
Scooter From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 878 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (15 years 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2960 times:
Thanks for starting this thread, Charles. I too have have seen some crap shots from the better photographers being uploaded lately, and it makes me wonder. You're right though...if a no-name photographer tried to upload that same 777 you gave as an example above, there would be a pretty good chance of it being rejected. Don't worry charles, I know you're capable of FANTASTIC photography, so I hope you don't mind me agreeing with you on this one.
Johan: because of the low frequency of uploads lately, I wonder if it's time for you to "pass the torch" onto someone else for uploading pics? I know it's a huge job, and I personally would have lost the drive to do it two years ago. Congrats for keeping up on it for so long, but it's quite obvious you don't have the time to tackle this every day. Just take a look at the poll you have on your front page; most people (myself included) agree that it's the photos which should be the focus of this site. Screw everyting else...lets get to a million high-quality pics!
Nope...I'm not nominating myself for a possible new uploading position. It's a shit job, I know, and I don't want it. But there HAS to be someone out there with a strict eye like yours that has the time for this task.
Thomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 4248 posts, RR: 24
Reply 7, posted (15 years 3 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2938 times:
Over the last 3 years or so that I have been uploading to this site, I was so set on becoming one of the top 5% of photographers that had 2000 or more images on this site. While even way back then while I scarcely got a reject, I stared to compare my work to others......I came to the painful concusion that many my 600 or so photos were garbage! Most due to a low grade scanner(flatbed/trans adapter) and others due to the photographer(yours truly), poor composition,lighting,blur, repetive subject matter. It was a bitter pill to swallow, but I had no choice but to rescan those images that were salvageable and to trash those that were not. I shoot stock as well, and I should have used the same editing techniques that I use for the my stock work and applied them to A.Net as well, but my ego got the better of me. I am happy to say that I am at a comfortable 316 images here, and while I have done quite a bit of shooting lately, I feel that I have nothing more to contribute to A.net at this time. I do not believe in repetive shots.... I mean seriously, how many times can one view a CO 737/777/767 on final or roating, taxing ?
I guess what I am trying to say is that you have to be your own worst critic. Cut until it hurts!
BO__einG From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2771 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (15 years 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2895 times:
Airline sites are for our pleasure to view works by the many.,
You pros/veterans out there,
All I can say is: Keep it up.
Do what you think is the most proper.
CFalks idea of beign more aware of photographic opportunities sounds good as most of you others may also have similar things in mind,
May the Airline Force be with you..
Follow @kimbo_snaps on Instagram or bokimon- on Flickr to see more pics of me and my travels.
Tguse From Germany, joined Jan 2001, 108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (15 years 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2902 times:
I have got the same opinion like the most of you: Quality is better than Quantity!
Few days ago a friend of mine asked me, why I upload my pics to airliners.net with mass of pictures in low quality and that I should spend the time for keeping my own homepage updated.
But I think airliners.net is still the best database and forum for aviation pictures and there are many photographers who supply only high quality pictures!
But there have to be high quality standards and I can't agree to the opinion that a low quality picture of an "standard" high quality photographer is accepted while pictures with a higher quality of less known photographers are going to be rejected.
Please keep on uploading only high quality pictures - like I do (I hope) - and let airliners.net stay the best aviation photography database!
Seriouslyfunny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (15 years 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2877 times:
im glad someone finally spoke up about this! ive stopped uploading because of the inconsistancy here. id love to share my photos with everyone again, and see other photos that shouldnt have been rejected.
Administrator From Sweden, joined May 1999, 3251 posts.
Reply 12, posted (15 years 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2882 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW SITE ADMIN
I have list of photographers that have uploaded photos for a long time to Airliners.net and for who I feel great trust. From months of experience, I know they shoot great photos and I know (well, I thought I knew) that they would never upload a photo of low quality as their standards are even higher than mine. This list is my refuge when I just don't have it in me to go though the two thousand or so photos waiting to be processed. Like when I'm traveling and using a slow modem or when I'm busy with other things for the day. I don't have to view the large version of every photo as I trust the scan quality is top-notch. I just open a random few and of course check the small version of every photo. There is no way I could add new photos to the database every day if I did not have this list and it's a great help for me when I'm busy.
You want to take that from me Charles? Why would you upload photos that are so-so? Please don't go for quantity instead of quality.
>I'd like to ask you to treat all our pics equally
99% of the photos uploaded get a correct treatment. The remaining 1% are border cases that goes one way (rejected or accepted) when they really should have gone the other and photos that I missed (like the one from Charles Falk). I can't do it any better than that, it requires too much work for me.
If you think you can do it better, let me know. If I can find a dedicated person with high skills in photography that would be able to spend two hours a day every day processing photos, I'd hand it over faster than you can say "mama".
Working on the site from morning 'till night that's livin' alright (1997-2007)
Milt From Netherlands, joined Jul 2005, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (15 years 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2842 times:
It's indeed a questionable photo. It's in focus but blurry because of the too low shutterspeed. I also note some vignetting around the corners which I really dislike and that alone would be a reason for me to reject it.