I have put over 3100 photos on this website and I now wish I hadn't.
The bullshit level on this website has now become high enough that I will no longer be submitting to Airliners.net. Three years ago when I found this website it was a source of pride for those involved in our hobby. Now it has become a disgrace. I have devoted hundreds and hundreds of hours of my time contributing to this website. No more. I will take my time and interests somewhere else. These are my reasons in no particular order:
1. I am tired of the constant United States bashing in ALL of the forums. We cannot have a photography or civil aviation topic without it degenerating into a How America Sucks discussion.
2. I recently had an 85% rejection rate on a batch of 65 photos I submitted over a week's time. Few people on here have more photos than me. I think I know the quality standard here.
3. I'm tired of the screener inconsistency. Not just a little inconsistency. A LOT.
4. My latest upload took over 3 weeks to be processed. During this time other users were bragging that their everyday, garden variety photos we're accepted and added to the database within 24 hours of submission.
5. The screeners on this site have a real ego problem. I do not believe these screeners use objective judgment in screening photos. Some of the screeners I have met out at the airfields I have genuinely enjoyed meeting and speaking with them. There are too many screeners that if I ever see you I don't want a God damn thing to do with you.
6. The Airliners.net forums have become a major source of misinformation. Most users don't have a damn clue what they are talking about. A lot of industry professionals used to frequent these forums and they were a good source of information. Sadly, they have left long ago. I guess they had a lower tolerance of bullshit than I do.
7. There are too many users who post that are rude and/or extremely immature. Unfortunately, this is what the internet has brought us: A bunch of cowards who hide behind their computer. Airliners.net seems to have put the welcome mat out for these people.
8. There are too many users who play the role of antagonist on here. They have nothing of quality to contribute to the forums. Their only purpose here is to create discord. Topics which are of interest to many become very disinterested because of these people.
9. The site administrator should be worried more about raising the quality of his website rather than adding hotel and airfare bookings, respect rating, and other stuff that doesn't add anything to the overall quality of Airliners.net.
10. There is absolutely no way I will pay Airliners.net for the pleasure of visiting their website without annoyances. With the amount of time I have put in to this website, Airliners.net should be paying me.
11. When I first discovered this website back in 1999, I could name at least 12 of my aviation acquaintances that also frequented Airliners.net. At one time that number was at least 2 dozen. This website was sort of a social gathering place. With me gone now that brings the number down to one. Again, I guess they have a lower tolerance of bullshit than I do.
The purpose of this post is to let some of you that keep up with my work know that I will be submitting photos elsewhere from now on. Between the screeners and the punk ass, immature 14 year olds that seem to dominate this website I have had enough. The quality of this site is such that I cannot tolerate or enjoy any longer.
AvroArrow From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 1044 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (10 years 9 months 10 hours ago) and read 12959 times:
Sorry to hear about the decision you felt you had to make. It kind of bums me out that a few accomplished photogs and contributors have left in the last while, just as I'm really starting to get into this site. I intend to stick around for a bit and try and contribute quality photos and postings, although I may eventually get tired as well and contribute to the rot and decay by quitting myself. But I think I personally have enough patience to stick it out for a while longer.
Give me a mile of road and I can take you a mile. Give me a mile of runway and I can show you the world.
Loki394 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 18 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (10 years 9 months 10 hours ago) and read 12948 times:
I am all the way with you Mark. I have friends that I converse with nearly everyday about aviation. The screeners do have their favorites as it appears. It is a shame that this wonderful aviation site, has turned into what seems more to be like one of the Enron, MCI WorldCom hush hush under the carpet insider acceptance kind of site. I have seen many pictures accepted that have no business getting accepted, and many pictures far surpassing the quality of those who "sneak through" that have been denied not only in prelim scanning, but in appeals as well. This is the view of an outsider as I have no pictures here on airliners.net. If it appears this way to an outsider, then what does it feel like and look like to a photographer?
It is a shame to hear of your departure, Mark as I have for many years admired your work. Radar service terminated, squawk 1200, frequency change approved, hopefully to happier, bluer skies.
JayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 17 Reply 6, posted (10 years 9 months 10 hours ago) and read 12951 times:
I agree 110% with you Mark on all your points.
I no longer upload to this site as I too have gotten so tired
of the rejection rate I had been receiving lately. I don't have
310 photos on here, but I do think I have around 150 to 200
so I know too, what a good photo is and the screeners are
I've started to load my shots at other sites and I know for
a fact that Josh Rawlin has also quit uploading his stuff here
and as bad as I hate to admit it, Josh is a much better photographer
than I am, so he shouldn't be receiving as many rejections as I do
and he's fed up with it.
Johan REALLY needs to take a serious look at the way this web site is
going or more and more people like you, myself and others will no longer
upload shots to this site.
I've met you personally Mark and you are a great guy and I enjoyed very
much shooting with you at DFW. Your work is very good and high quality
so I can certainly see why you are upset with the rejection level. It isn't
worth my time to upload good, quality shots to have them rejected by
the whims of some inconsistent screener.
I too have a feeling this subject topic will be deleted after a while but if
Airliners.net can't take "constructive criticism", it just shows how weak of
a site this has become...............
Res From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 417 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (10 years 9 months 10 hours ago) and read 12918 times:
I'm going to say something, because I have the balls to say it. You nailed it right on the head, Mark. I've got some of the exact same feelings, but do I think a.net is now a bad places? No, not really, but there are a few inconsistencies, like you said.
I really think a.net has turned into a popularity race. The big name phogogs are praised and have their photos added with priority to the "little guys." For example, take "Guy #1" and "Guy #2." #1 is well known, well published, and certainly, well admired. #2 is a guy/that has never had a publishing, and if you said his name on a.net, less than a handful of people may recognize him/her. In a.net's case there are about ten to fifteen "guy #1's" and enough #2's to fill up a train.
Where I'm going with that example is this: Rather than making this a database name-race, and race for "tons of pictures on a.net" lets keep the screening process the same for everyone, and not just upload a picture from Guy#1 because his name is so big.
I see so many pictures that break one or more of the reasons for rejections, and think to myself, "what the F is going on here?" I see photos from the big name photogs with planes so off-centered and oddly-cropped, it just isn't fair to the lesser known guys. Consider me lesser known, I don't care. I'm certainly not a big name. But when I see my OWN pictures rejected that look similar to other shots on a.net, I don't know what to think about the screeners except they're not being fair.
All I feel like saying for now before the verbal bashing occurs.
Dazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5472 posts, RR: 52 Reply 9, posted (10 years 9 months 10 hours ago) and read 12910 times:
Mark, it was a pleasure meeting you in S. Fla this past winter. Sorry to say, I feel the same as you. I shot 8 rolls of film, and so far most has been rejected for stupid reasons, such as "badcommon". All the digital guys got their shots up before me, so it seems mine isn't welcome. I pretty much gave up on uploading for now. Good luck, and talk to you soon.
JayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 17 Reply 10, posted (10 years 9 months 9 hours ago) and read 12906 times:
I'm just glad that Mark has the balls to say what he said!
Yes, he won't be back and I am sorry to see him go. Will his leaving
make the demise of Airliners.net happen, no. But, just as he has left
and no longer uploading, many others, including myself and others I have
mentioned by name are doing the same thing.
What will be left is about 10 "Guy # 1's" who continue to get their
photos accepted no matter what the quality and a lot of "Guy # 2's" with
a few photos on the database............
Some of my friends are "Guy # 1's" on this site and they are great
photographers, no doubt about it, what I cannot stand is the
inconsistency of the screeners and their "standardized" rejection
notices..........I'll get a rejection and it will say that the scan was
bad or something like that and that maybe I need a better scanner.
What a joke! I've got a top of the line slide scanner!
I doubt Johan will even comment on this entire thread, personally.
Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9549 posts, RR: 70 Reply 11, posted (10 years 9 months 9 hours ago) and read 12901 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
is there really cherry picking among which photos get added? I don't think so. If I remember how the que works it would be pretty hard and time consuming for a screener to pick thru photos and add certain ones but ignore others. I'm not saying it does or doesnt happen but I don't think it does.
If you look at a couple of the posts in this forum lately I think you would see evidence that there is a failry level playing field. Joe Pries, who in my mind is a "top shelf" photographer had (what I thought was) a great cockpit/inflight shot rejected. At the same time new submitters have had stuff added.
And who would compare screening photos of a hobby to something as terrible as Enron or MCI? Give me a fucking break.
Rsmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (10 years 9 months 8 hours ago) and read 12866 times:
My only gripe is that after 50+ rejections and only one acceptance to the DB has been that it seems like unless the weather is greater than FEW on a METAR your photos haven't got much of a chance of making it to the DB.
I spent the better part of the weekend skimming through a good portion of the DB and honestly ill say that 99% of them were shot in SKC conditions. Living up in SEA especially this time of the year limits your shooting days greatly, I think the local traditional weather should be taken into consideration by the screeners.
I guess I have one more gripe as well......I understand the BAR around these parts are higher than two other similar Photobases there are many of us who are learning and are investing a lot of time and $$$$ with the desire to be recognized here on Anets data base these standardized rejection notices are not much of a help for me as I have made the recommended corrections such as photo needs a little more SHARPEN so I have done that to where it looks good on my monitor and then resubmitted it then get a rejection notice stating now the Image is to dark or is out of focus...yes there is inconsistency's. Why not instead of raising the BAR on the whole community raise the bar on individual bases and let some of these newcombers have chance to get a start and only require that they show growth in knowlege as the continue to submit.
Planeboy From India, joined May 2005, 199 posts, RR: 1 Reply 15, posted (10 years 9 months 8 hours ago) and read 12825 times:
I am callin' (Colin) on you to do what the other "Abbott" on this site does
SHOOT DIGITAL !!!!
I have witnessed other photographers remarks in this forum where they have become disenchanted such as you. Then, they start shooting digital - and the quality of their photos goes through the fu_ _ing roof !! (so to speak)
Technology is on the move Mark. Don't give up now...
PS - I shoot with a cheap digital- mostly planes not on Airliners.net - so screeners criteria is not so harsh...
Tu154m From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 672 posts, RR: 6 Reply 16, posted (10 years 9 months 7 hours ago) and read 12818 times:
Glad to see someone else has noticed that there seems to be a little favoritism here!!! I e-mailed a screener about a reject a little more than a year ago and their reply stated they never looked at the photographer.......just the photo. My friend in the UK stated that it was impossible to get something on this site unless you know somebody in "the clique". I have over 10,000 slides at home, alot of prints and a stack of CDs with digital stuff. I will not upload to this site. In the 1990s I used to get stuff in some magazines from time to time, and I have been complemented on my shots. My friend in the UK regurlarlyn shoots with a well known photog who has many books out. It just bums me that I cannot share with everyone some of the 80+ rolls from Kai-Tak and China I have, as well as some of the odd aircraft and one off paint schemes. I'm most likely going to get a Digi SLR sometime soon. Is it to upload here.........NO, it is my personal preference.
Rindt From Germany, joined May 2000, 930 posts, RR: 14 Reply 17, posted (10 years 9 months 7 hours ago) and read 12811 times:
Randall writes :
"I spent the better part of the weekend skimming through a good portion of the DB and honestly ill say that 99% of them were shot in SKC conditions. Living up in SEA especially this time of the year limits your shooting days greatly, I think the local traditional weather should be taken into consideration by the screeners."
And I live in Vancouver, where it doesn't just rain, it pours 90% of the time this time of year. But, I don't head out to the airport in spite of shit weather. It's when you do other things. I don't expect screeners to go easy on me because the weather is crap in Vancouver. Uh, no... thanks for coming out. That's not how it works...
So, you either go digital or you learn how to properly edit photos. Fair enough? Give up on the #1 Guy and #2 Guy theories please, you're wasting your time.
What other people think of you is none of your business!
Flygga From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (10 years 9 months 7 hours ago) and read 12807 times:
Hey Mark, Welcome to the family of former Airliners.net photographers. I came to many of the same conclusions that you did and stopped uploading back in June of last year. It was a hard choice since over the years I have met many great people (including yourself) as a direct result of my photos being posted on this site. For me shooting is a hobby and something I do for fun. Uploading to airliners.net was no longer fun for me. I still love to share my photos with others and that is why I have started uploading to some of the competing sites. You might want to look into doing that as well. That way people can still have the joy of viewing your photos.
Dazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5472 posts, RR: 52 Reply 21, posted (10 years 9 months 7 hours ago) and read 12782 times:
Moving with it is one thing (I wish I could right now), but for most of us it's just a hobby. We don't need to be blowing a fortune ($3k+) on new digital SLR's and expensive glass. If this site is headed down that path, expect to lose a lot more people. A.net will have to be renamed the Joe Pries/Peter Unmuth collection
Rsmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2 Reply 23, posted (10 years 9 months 7 hours ago) and read 12775 times:
I have gone digital to the tune of $1500.00 and I have submitted Images where as the Aircraft is perfectly exposed and sharp from nose to tail and have received rejection notices stating that the photo was rejected because in essence the weather was effecting the quality of the shot.
The way I see it is the weather should be part of the image after all there seems to be a lot of nice snowy images in the DB what makes rain or BRKN to OVC any different.
I guess what get my goat is that I have sent out some of post processed jpg that have been rejected to a digital lab for a print and it always looks sweet in 8x10 and could go larger with no problemo so what seems to be the problem here..........Is this a fair weather only aircraft database...???
AA61hvy From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 13977 posts, RR: 58 Reply 24, posted (10 years 9 months 6 hours ago) and read 12761 times:
I agree with all you guys. I haven't uploaded pictures in here for a long time. I have some real solid shots, but after talking to Josh Rawlin this past weekend, he convinced me to take my shots elsewhere.
Go big or go home
25 Joge: I have some real solid shots, but after talking to Josh Rawlin this past weekend, he convinced me to take my shots elsewhere. He did that long time ag
26 Shawn Patrick: Sad to see you go Mark, oh well, c'est la vie. Planeboy, I see no reason why anyone, especially Mark, needs to "go digital" just to please the screene
27 Planeboy: Shawn, I believe digital is the way to go in this day and age. My grandfather used to ride on a horse and buggy to market. I never knew my father. Fil
28 Planeboy: wonderul = wonderful - I guess I should go to sleep...
29 Boeingholiday: Brick, nice topic, sooner or later we must handle the truth It's sad that nothing changes here, many stay behind their opinion, but that's all. When w
30 Res: Yeah, whatever Shawn...I dont think so. Royal is a good man.
31 ADG: You know, i'm sick to death of this whinging from so called photographers. If you can't get a picture online you have to blame everyone but yourselves
32 Bruce: Wow...Mark, that's a loaded post! I've been a fan of a lot of your shots and think you do good work. I joined a.net about 3 months or so before you so
33 Unique: Why doesn't somebody split a.net into a digital upload base and a slide scanned upload base? There you can compete with each other on a fair basis! I'
34 Timdegroot: Wow this thread has turned ugly I don't beleive screeners have any personal preferences, we see even the big names like Joe Pries get pictures rejecte
35 Wietse: Well.. If there are 2 sides in this war, I'm with the site! I cant see any inconsistency amongst the screeners, and I think the site is becoming more
36 JetTrader: To all who dismiss Marks comments, No names, no pointing at sample images, but if you really think that the screening process here is totally without
37 Joge: Why doesn't somebody split a.net into a digital upload base and a slide scanned upload base? That would be great! However, that can be decided only by
38 Alaskaairlines: And from my point of view - digital doesn't mean a.net will accept all the photos you shoot, perhaps none! Its the photog what matters. Lots of new gu
39 Ckw: Like most of my fellow screeners, I prefer not to get involved in screener bashing debates but I will not tolerate accusations of corruption and playi
40 Sunilgupta: Mark, I can feel your pain… but maybe you can reconsider and upload only selected photos. Also, don’t let the stupidity of the forums influence yo
41 Cx flyboy: BINGO Mark, Despite justifications I generally don't buy, I agree with you 100%. I have stopped uploading to this site and some of my photos are among
42 Skymonster: Well, having just come back from a holiday to this, all I can say to those who make accusations about biased screening and a lack of level playing fie
43 ADG: No names, no pointing at sample images, but if you really think that the screening process here is totally without bias or favour then you really are
44 JetTrader: ADG, We'll have to agree to differ on most points. I'm with you 100% though on the matter of uploading poor quality stuff - a crap shot is a crap shot
45 Skymonster: Just to widen the scope a little, some time ago I uploaded a bunch of pictures of fairly rare subjects to another photo site. Most of them were reject
46 EGGD: I will agree that to get a photo accepted now, it has to be REALLY good, quality so high that not even slide shooters can get regular acceptance anymo
47 Joe pries: A.net will have to be renamed the Joe Pries/Peter Unmuth collection ==================== Justin, You know i'm a straight shooter- dude, im getting mad
48 Clickhappy: The reason I swore is because it is lame to complain a hobby website to the kind of fraud that went on @ Enron and MCI. I lost a large 5-figure sum of
49 Shawn Patrick: Rob said Grow-up eh? We're on the brink of a war that's crippling our hobby, but we have time to complain. Good to know the vocal minority is still ou
50 Paulc: I can see the frustrations people have on here - I would guess that all contributors have had rejections that make them annoyed. A recent one of mine
51 JayDavis: After reading all what has been said through this thread on the forum, I continue to support Mark 110% with his post. He is a very good photographer a
52 Skymonster: Forums - I think one of the fundamental flaws of airliners.net is that it has become more than just a photo database. Whilst the other sites use their
53 AA61hvy: I am sticking with my normal old school film. I am wondering, if soon enough the A.net standard would be raised so high that no one can get pics on he
54 Joge: What comes with the DSLR, I rather spend the money of a Nikon F100 on spotting trips, as I would get 3-6 trips with that money, excluding of course th
55 Flygga: Jay, Believe me Joe P gets plenty of rejects. I have to hear about them all the time! As for me, I still say that inconsistencies in the screening pro
56 Mirrodie: Mark, I agree with some of your points but then again, your post was equally rude to those that volunteer their time for this site. A bunch of cowards