Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
My 3101st Photo On Here Is My Last  
User currently offlineBrick From United States of America, joined Aug 1999, 1579 posts, RR: 7
Posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 13601 times:

This photo is the last photo I will display on Airliners.net:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Abbott



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.

Mark Abbott
Denver, CO


A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man...
137 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBrianhames From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 795 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13502 times:

I agree with you on many, if not all, of those points, Mark. See you later.


Brian


User currently offlineContinental From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5507 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13499 times:

I agree, well sorta I guess. I bet this'll get deleted. Mark, sad to see ya go.

co


User currently offlineAvroArrow From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 1045 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13481 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.
Happy spotting.
Ed



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.
User currently offlineLoki394 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 18 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13470 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.

Bryant Blanco
AOPA 03331919


User currently offlineAlaskaairlines From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2054 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13462 times:

Well thats what surprises me the most, photographers who by now should be able to master this site are whinning and moaning.

Myself who has been in this hobby (aviation photography) just over a year has no problems getting pictures accepted, usually.

I have learned from many here, including the screeners who kindly include comments with rejections that take two seconds to fix and get accepted!

I hope this isn't just me, but I truly enjoy this site a lot, uploading and viewing wise.

Mark I wish you the best, and hope you come back.
Even that last photo is off by about a degree or so - comeon man you can handle this!

-Dmitry


User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13473 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
not consistent.

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...............



Sincerely,


Jay Davis


User currently offlineRes From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 417 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13440 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.

-Tim Lachenmaier



FLY NAVY
User currently offlineFotodj From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 87 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13434 times:

I am still hoping that Johan will have something to say ......
before others start to join Mark Abbott.



Polishman in New York
User currently offlineDazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5489 posts, RR: 51
Reply 9, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13432 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.

Justin Cederholm


User currently offlineJayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13428 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.


Jay


User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9603 posts, RR: 69
Reply 11, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 13423 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.


User currently offlineLoki394 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 18 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13389 times:

I was merely speaking of the "suspected" coruption of screening.

User currently offlineRsmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 13388 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.

OK Im done



Did You Ever Think Freedom Could Be this Bad
User currently offlineLoki394 From United States of America, joined Nov 2000, 18 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 13375 times:

RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE! RABBLE!  Laugh out loud lol sorry, had to get that out of my system

User currently offlinePlaneboy From India, joined May 2005, 199 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 13347 times:

Mr Abbott,

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...


User currently offlineTu154m From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 679 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13340 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.
Steve



CEOs should swim with cement flippers!
User currently offlineRindt From Germany, joined May 2000, 930 posts, RR: 13
Reply 17, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13333 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.

-Rob




What other people think of you is none of your business!
User currently offlineFlygga From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13329 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.

Richard Silagi



User currently offlineDazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5489 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13317 times:

Sorry I posted again because I thought my original one was deleted....  Smile

[Edited 2003-03-18 07:09:29]

User currently offlineRindt From Germany, joined May 2000, 930 posts, RR: 13
Reply 20, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13321 times:

Ah yes... a reply from the dubious Bryant "Blanco"... it appears you enjoy shooting "blanks" quite a bit... eh? With a respect rating of 0 and all, your opinion really matters... not.


It's a shame to see people go, but what can we do? Digital has taken A.net by storm, for better or for worse - technology keeps pushing forward, and you've got to move WITH it.

-Rob





What other people think of you is none of your business!
User currently offlineDazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5489 posts, RR: 51
Reply 21, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13304 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  Big grin

User currently offlineSerge From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1989 posts, RR: 2
Reply 22, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13293 times:

I've enjoyed your shots Mark. At least you might be uploading elsewhere...

take care,
Serge (one of those "punk ass 14 year olds")  Big grin


User currently offlineRsmith6621a From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13297 times:



Rob,

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...???



Did You Ever Think Freedom Could Be this Bad
User currently offlineAA61hvy From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 13977 posts, RR: 57
Reply 24, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 13283 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 Post contains images 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 Post contains images 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 Post contains images 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 Post contains images 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 Post contains images 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 Post contains images 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 Post contains images 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 Post contains images 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 Post contains images 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 Post contains images 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 Post contains links and images 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
57 Post contains images LGW : Bye Mark Ben Pritchard
58 Post contains images EGGD : LOL, where the hell did you find that? .
59 Spotterboy : I'd also agree man! I've spent too much time for uploading my pictures to A.net: Most of my pictures were accepted on Jetphotos.net, planepictures.net
60 Skymonster : Flygga said When I was a screener, just as today, some screeners are tougher than others. It should not be that way. They should all be following stri
61 Andyhunt : I will only make one post on this: 1) As screeners, we do this for free. We do it because we want to contribute something back to this site. 2) If you
62 Atco : Guys, You know being a screener is a pretty tough thing to do, as I have found out. I was delighted to be asked to screen at jetphotos, but I can seri
63 Post contains links NonRevKing : First off, ADG can you PLEASE link me to some of your photos on this site? Second, I still believe both the admins (Johan, screeners, and mods) and th
64 Photopilot : Well, its taken me 30 minutes to read all the way down this thread and it's obvious that there is a great deal of passion and emotions on display. Wer
65 Benyhone : "...I have no doubt that the people concerned still produce excellent results out-of-camera, but many of them simply do not translate that output into
66 Post contains links Administrator : Mark, 1. Then don't read the forums. They are moderated by users from all over the world including the USA. I would certainly not allow any bios in th
67 Post contains images Work4bmi : Well, though your photos were great "Mark Abbott"... You go where you feel is "home". For me, A.net is the place to be! Though I am not at the level o
68 Sunilgupta : > Seems like bitching is more fun than uploading for some people. That statement is completely off-base… the bitching and frustration comes when you
69 Rsmith6621a : Sunil Has said it all in his one post. A lot of time does go in to this passion hobby. Over at the flightsim forums it is well known the fun usually
70 Ljungdahl : Well, oh well, here we go again... My first photo on A.net was added January on 12, 2002. Today I have 1189 photos online here. My acceptance rate her
71 Sabena 690 : I agree with the high standards, and this is why I stopped uploading. I worked hard to get my 78 pictures accepted with my Olympus C2100, but now I fe
72 Flygga : Skmonster - I know there cannot specific technical pixel by pixel guidelines for whether or not to accept or reject. What there can be however is more
73 Post contains links and images ADG : Royal, View Large View MediumPhoto © Theadg although I'm not sure of the relevance.... With all the complaining people appear to have missed a co
74 Post contains images Clickhappy : ADG - I wasn't the one who asked to see your picture(s). But, nice picture Royal
75 Post contains images Skymonster : ADG said: The magazine article is moot, magazine rejection rate is much higher than airliners.net. I have 40 pics here and have never had a pic in a m
76 ADG : ADG - I wasn't the one who asked to see your picture(s). But, nice picture Ooops .. sorry about that (not sure how that happened) and thanks for the c
77 Sunilgupta : Comparing magazine rejection rates with those of this site is utterly meaningless. Magazines have limited space. Magazines usually have articles that
78 Post contains images Rindt : Rolf and Tim, Don't put words in my mouth please... you know how much I love Kodachrome slide shooting, it will never change! I said "So, you either g
79 Joe pries : Rob, Rolf, Tim, All, I dont have to explain my affinity for kodachrome. And I also shoot digital now- lots of digital, and lots of kodachrome. You can
80 EricBelgium : Hello everyone, here some words from Belgium. I only joined Anet about three months ago and it has sure brought me some big fun. Just like in the real
81 NonRevKing : That was me. I'd like to see all 40 please. How would I see them? Clicking on your name only brings up the one UA shot.
82 Post contains links United_Fan : I am also sick of the rejections. I'll continue to upload my pics to websites that appreciate what I 'shoot'. Hey,it's not like we're gonna get rich
83 Vafi88 : Mark-sorry to see you leave, I understand why. Hopefully we'll still meet at DEN once in a while, it was a real pleasure meeting you. Planeboy - Under
84 Staffan : "I think that unless you are a professional with ramp access with a $2000 camera you don't have a prayer getting accepted here. Just my 2 cents." All
85 JeffM : This site still beats the crap that goes on in the forums at some other sites. Practically overrun with kids with no true interest in the hobby, and a
86 United_Fan : I don't mean to be rude,but what 'huge dividends' are we talking about here ? And the other sites don't accept 'everything' sent to them. They just r
87 Photopilot : To EricBelgium: I agree 99% with what you say. Creativity and Attitude are #1. However I do strongly disagree with your statement.....Regarding the eq
88 Post contains images Joe pries : I actually used to upload to one of the other sites, not much but here and there- typically ainet rejects or new stuff not on ainet- but then they sta
89 Post contains images ADG : NonRevKing (making sure to address it to the right person). I still dont see the relevance to the discussion, but heck .. i'm proud enough of actually
90 BO__einG : 5-7 minutes of reading time: Firstly: HOT DAMM! Thats a heck of reading material to sift through. I gotta blink for a few seconds or else my eyes will
91 Post contains links United_Fan : So,can someone tell me why this pic is of such 'low quality' ? I don't mean to nitpic,but come on...I even resubmitted it after it was resharpened.Th
92 Loki394 : Hey Rob, what the hell does this "Blanco" crap mean? Do you have a problem with my last name or something? There's no need for your sarcasm, you are v
93 JBLUA320 : Sad to see you go. As a younger person (I deem 15 young), you were one of the few photographers on this webpage I looked up to. Please do keep me info
94 Post contains images Bruce : United_Fan: was that really a reject???? I looked at it and it looks fine to me! what was the reason given? JeffM: I agree about the "dividends". My p
95 Post contains images Res : You gotta forgive Loki....he's had a little too much...i dont know what. Perhaps its the altitude sickness he's been exposed to now that he can solo.
96 Clickhappy : Bo - your post has zero credit with me, based on this statement: you may as well pay 3500 dollars to join first class membership and get a generous 97
97 Post contains images Xenon : Hi, Just to say that I love this site. Its a great source for aviation stuff! I personally take pictures with a 2.1 megapixel camera, and it is indeed
98 Loki394 : Glenn, Rob, I'm sorry, but there have been many rumors circulating about fixed acceptance and quality of acceptance and denial of photos. I truly apol
99 Joe pries : Hi Loki, im confused- what are you referring to as currupt? can you expand on that- im trying to follow what you're saying as ive been reading this th
100 Loki394 : Joe, the possible corruption of photo acceptance.
101 ADG : Loki, You shouldn't ever believe rumours. The problem with this one in particular is that it comes out of people who simply cannot accept that they're
102 DSMav8r : Sorry to see you go, Mark. I agree with a lot of the things you said...especially in the quality-drop of the forums. I don't venture into the non-avia
103 Tu154m : WOW!!!! This topic reminds me off an incidence in our line room at work. There was a magazine featuring pics of beautiful women(no it wasn't pornograp
104 An-225 : I think that we all got carried away with flamewars, and Mark was right about that. Just look at this very topic - I cannot see a single reply asking
105 DSMav8r : Honestly, I think a lot of the crap in the non-aviation forum trickles down into the other forums. Not so much in here, but you can definetely see it
106 Sudden : It's so interesting to see that when 1 person put together the words A.net+leave, all hell breaks loose!!! Why not just copy one of all the other thre
107 Cabbott : HI Mark I hope you are still reading this forum/thread. Sorry to hear you have came to your wits end. I can agree with you on most points. IMHO there
108 Post contains images EGGD : . All I see is constant flame-wars, hate, hate, and more hate...from both sides. Couldn't agree more.. Just one thing guys, we discussed quality quite
109 Post contains images Paulc : ATCO, it was my Mandarin 747SP that was rejected by your goodself - i cleaned the dust off and reuploaded to JP and here. Odd thing - it has had many
110 Post contains images Skymonster : Odd thing - it has had many more hits here than on JP (over 650 compared to under 200) Well that must say something about the wisdom of quitting airli
111 Post contains images Work4bmi : Reading a "reply" above, rgds supervision of the "screeners"... Maybe it would be a good idea that the email you recieve back from the screener would
112 United_Fan : Bruce,this picture was the first one I submitted to here. It was rejected as being slightly 'soft'. I sharpened it and it looked much better,re-submi
113 Ckw : These screeners don't care or appreciate what it takes to get some of these shots. For example,for this one I had to troop thru 3" of mud,balance myse
114 Post contains links and images Tappan : I have received a couple of emails from a.net guys asking if I too have left. No I am still here, just very busy with other stuff. BUT, when the weath
115 Post contains images Skymonster : United_fan said: These screeners don't care or appreciate what it takes to get some of these shots. For example,for this one I had to troop thru 3" of
116 United_Fan : I am stating that there isn't a single bad thing about that picture. Dare I say if it uploaded by a high profile photog it would be accepted.Please a
117 Ckw : try 1 - dust spots all over the sky 2 - nose is blurred - can't even make out the numbers on the gear door 3 - pronounced "halo" along the top of the
118 Tsentsan : Hi everybody, Seems to me that the main idea of some of the newer uploaders is that "I think that unless you are a professional with ramp access with
119 Post contains images Paulc : Skymonster/Andy who said anything about quitting a.net?? my ga shots have got far more hits on an american based site than here yet my top shots here
120 ADG : Reading a "reply" above, rgds supervision of the "screeners"... Maybe it would be a good idea that the email you recieve back from the screener would
121 An-225 : I personally don't understand what the big deal is about hits. If the picture is stunning, chances are, a greater number of people would view it, rath
122 Bruce : About Colin's analysis of United_Fan's photo: now that you point it out I do see it when i view that photo. It still looks like a nice overall photo..
123 United_Fan : Well thanks to everyone who veiwed my terrible picture on jetphotos. I am now on page 3 of most popular pics for the week! Please flame away...
124 Post contains links JayDavis : Well heck, I guess this is a crappy photo also? http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=13461 It probably would be rejected now on this site........
125 Bruce : Looks very grainy to me.
126 JeffM : It is grainy....but everything gets accepted there.
127 An-225 : Jay, this is a nice picture. However, due to current high standards, it would definitely not have been accepted, if you submitted it today. And anothe
128 N754pr : I hope airliners.net has learned that being the best does not mean you can do anything you like. Its the people that use this site and the people that
129 Cx flyboy : To the Moderators, I have been monitoring the 'debate' here and I highly disagree with the tone of the moderators here on this forum. More often than
130 Sunilgupta : accept your photos for what they are not for the quality of some stuck up photographers. Sorry to be so blunt, but this is the stupidest thing I have
131 Aus_Spotter : Might as well throw in my $.02 since I read through most of this. I realize standards have gone up over the years. Looking back at some of my first ph
132 Post contains images Bruce : Can't we all just get along???? Group Hug!!! lol bruce
133 ADG : Jetphotos is a far better site as they accept your photos for what they are not for the quality of some stuck up photographers. What a stupid, childis
134 Cabbott : Guys STOP! for a minute and look at this thread. It's getting real silly now guys! There are worse things happening in the world! Do we really need to
135 Post contains images Joge : Back to the topic: Bye, Mark. -Joge
136 Skymonster : Cx_flyboy said: You do not have the right to be rude, no matter how rude others are Cx, I'll assume you are talking about screeners here, rather than
137 Administrator : Alright, I think it's time to end this thread. All that can be said has been said. Those of you do not like the way Airliners.net is ran and are confi
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...
Heat Distortion On My Best Photo Ever! (A380) posted Fri Jul 28 2006 17:24:42 by Azza40
My First Accepted Photo On A.net! posted Fri Feb 17 2006 01:17:31 by TUNisia
My Photo On Aviation Week posted Wed Jun 29 2005 13:08:10 by Whoop
My First Photo On The Database! posted Fri Dec 17 2004 01:38:09 by SkyWestFan
My First Photo On A.net! posted Sun Oct 10 2004 04:36:44 by FoxBravo
Need Help Getting My First Photo On Airliners.net posted Tue Mar 23 2004 21:23:11 by Hannigan
My First Photo On Airliners.net! posted Sun Oct 6 2002 03:18:00 by Continental
My Turn: My First Photo On Airliners.net! posted Mon Sep 23 2002 20:49:54 by Usa4624
My First Photo On A.Net! posted Fri Sep 6 2002 03:54:05 by JBLUA320
My First Photo On A.net! posted Mon Mar 18 2002 11:24:37 by Alaskaairlines