LGW
Topic Author
Posts: 4281
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 6:07 pm

Time For Change

Sun Jan 13, 2002 7:17 pm

Im used to rejection by now and it doesnt bother me...but

I had over 50 photos accepted by the screeners as HQ over the xmas period. Out of the ones submitted some went onto Johan. As I have had photo in the queue for quiate a while I had built up over 50 photos to be looked at by Johan.

All 56 rejected. Now, having over 50 accepted as HQ by screeners and from the same batches having over 60 rejected?

Something is wrong here. How can half be so good as to be accepted as HQ and the other half not even be good enough by screeners OR johan?

Also, how can the screeners pass over more than 50 photos to Johan and all be rejected? Thats a huge gap

Is it time for change? screeners can accept and reject all photos?

Your views?

LGW
 
User avatar
Fly-K
Posts: 2991
Joined: Thu May 04, 2000 4:26 pm

RE: Time For Change

Sun Jan 13, 2002 8:04 pm

Same for me, over the last weeks the screeners accepted about 25 photos via HQ (and a few rejected by them), but of the rest, about 40 out of 42 were rejected by Johan. So all I can do right now is shoot for HQ acceptance. And Johan only sees the "crap" from us, so his impression of our quality goes down even further...

Konstantin
Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been...
 
Guest

RE: Time For Change

Sun Jan 13, 2002 10:05 pm

I know what you mean Ben, but I don't see it as a problem. Can you honestly say your rejected shots are as good as your HQ ones? Self appraisal.

Gerry/EDI
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Time For Change

Sun Jan 13, 2002 10:11 pm

Hi!
Glad that someone started this thread. I had 45 out of 50 rejected by Johan when he came across my pictures.
I also think that the site could need some improvement for example:
1.) More screeners.

2.) The existing screeners being more restrictive with not HQ shots. Reads: Either its HQ or you reject it.

3.) A page for the photographers where they can put in some options. For example: "If you pictures are not accepted via HQ do you wish them to be seen by Johand or do you wish them to be rejected immediately!" O Johan O Reject
That wouldnt even have an impact on the existing screening pages. Because if the screeners decides its not HQ then the scripts would check the photogs. options and do the rest automatically.

Just my €-cent
Peter




-
 
EGGD
Posts: 11880
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:01 am

RE: Time For Change

Sun Jan 13, 2002 10:12 pm

hmmm, this is funny because...

I am sure some of the photos uploaded over the christmas period were not up to the standard of A.net, yet I hear about so many people who were previously regular uploaders to A.net having rejections, and sometimes alot.

Not to say that I have had the same problem of course  Big grin. Well, in the way that I think that the screeners and Johan have been extremely lenient on my photos Big grin.

Regards

Dan
 
User avatar
derekf
Posts: 887
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 4:05 am

RE: Time For Change

Sun Jan 13, 2002 10:18 pm

I do see it as a problem. If the screeners pass them on to Johan and he rejects most of them why don't the screeners reject them in the first place and save us all the waiting around. Does it mean that the screeners have a very different view on what is acceptable. If so it begs the question on the validity of the "HQ" acceptances.
My ratio is slightly better. I had 19 waiting and 5 were accepted, albeit only 2 without warnings. It would be interesting to find out what the ratio of accepted/rejected photos is across the piece.

Regards
DerekF
Whatever.......
 
User avatar
Fly-K
Posts: 2991
Joined: Thu May 04, 2000 4:26 pm

RE: Time For Change

Sun Jan 13, 2002 10:23 pm

I would mostly agree that the HQ shots were better than those rejected, but not in all cases.

Konstantin
Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been...
 
jwenting
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:12 pm

RE: Time For Change

Sun Jan 13, 2002 10:26 pm

Of the last batch waiting for Johan, 18 out of 19 were rejected. The 19th was accepted with warnings (dirty scan, it was in fact a clean scan of an extremely dirty aircraft...).
After that, 6 or so accepted as HQ with another 6 waiting for Johan still (well, it's been only about 2 weeks).
Acceptance by the screeners has gone up, and acceptance by Johan has gone down a lot. Either Johan has become a lot more critical of things like composition and colour ballance (rejecting things he does not like on non-technical grounds as poor quality is a well known phenomenon) or the screeners have taken to accepting everything Johan would accept leaving the rejections to him so they will look nice to us  Smile/happy/getting dizzy  Wink/being sarcastic
I wish I were flying
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: Time For Change

Sun Jan 13, 2002 11:53 pm

On my last batch of 27 photos I had 12 added as HQ, and 6 added by Johan, the screeners rejected 2 and Johan rejected 7.
Now that all the good stuff is getting added by the screeners we are going to see a higher percentage of rejects from Johan, but when almost all the borderline shots are rejected is seems like a waste of time that the screeners pass them on instead of rejecting them.

My 2 cents,

Staffan
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 12:09 am

Last week I had 36 out of 36 rejected by Johan, some to my agreement, some not.

Wietse/AMS
Wietse de Graaf
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 12:15 am

Wietse,
i read what you write below and i say to myself: why does this guy upload shots that he would agree are rejections? doesnt make sense to me.

------------------------------------------------------
Last week I had 36 out of 36 rejected by Johan, some to my agreement, some not.

Wietse/AMS

 
Craigy
Posts: 1076
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2001 6:24 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 12:23 am

Judging by the ratio of borderline cases rejected by Johan, it seems that the screeners are now working to a level consistant with what Johan deems acceptable. Are we are almost at the stage where the screeners do all the accepting and rejecting and Johan monitors the sitation on a quality control basis only?

This is a clear indication that screening process is progressing the way Johan wanted.

Craig.
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 12:42 am

I shouldn't have said agree....

I meant:
Some I can live with (them being rejected) I won't kill myself over them, they aren't my best shots. But some, I am very pleased about, I love the quality and they still get rejected! Those are the ones I don't agree with.

I hope I made myself a bit clearer...

Wietse/AMS

PS. I don't upload if they aren't good enough even in my standards!
Wietse de Graaf
 
LGW
Topic Author
Posts: 4281
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 6:07 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 12:49 am

Craig, I agree with you. I feel that slowly but surley the screeners are taking over from Johan.

If not accepted by the screeners then very little chance now with Johan.

LGW
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 12:52 am

i hear you Wietse. This goes for everyone, not necessarily you but i think that if more people would be more selective with their uploads- meaning only upload their very best rather than just everyrhing and hoping that whatever makes it makes it- there would be alot less stress over rejections.

Joe
 
AviationIvi
Posts: 760
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2001 2:49 am

Joe

Mon Jan 14, 2002 2:16 am

"...if more people would be more selective with their uploads..."

good point, Joe, and it would also shorten the queue Big grin
But seriously: I don´t like it when people upload everything...  Sleepy

Regards,
Ivica

 
BO__einG
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2000 5:20 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 2:30 am

This morning 15 out of 16 were rejected by Johan.
One accepted had warnings.
A majority amount of the 15 were all scanned and processed the same way I always done..
It works with the screeners no problem and I do sometimes get to the HQ list.
IN the future I will post one of those
"what do you guys think about these shots" Posts..
I was quite dissapointed because two of the 15 I put in like an essay about a special event at my airport some time ago. JMC.

I may as well upload other shots which I could not upload last night.

Bo
Follow @kimbo_snaps on Instagram or bokimon- on Flickr to see more pics of me and my travels.
 
LGW
Topic Author
Posts: 4281
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 6:07 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 2:50 am

"...if more people would be more selective with their uploads..."

Well seeing that I uploaded 60 out of about 500+ on my computer I would say I was being kind-a selective

LGW
 
Fredrik Hjort
Posts: 109
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2001 10:50 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 5:26 am

Ehrm.. how do you manage to upload over 50 shots? I was like this when I used to upload just a couple of images. How many hours do you spend really, filling in all the information of each shot?

/Fredrik
 
LGW
Topic Author
Posts: 4281
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 6:07 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 5:49 am

Well I have had photos in the queue for over 1 month so I have had plenty of time to upload others!

But I must admit, without Stella and Amstel I would not be where I am today!  Nuts

LGW
 
Guest

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 6:20 am

....had photos in the queue for over 1 month...

When it reaches that stage, you know they're going to get dumped!

Crickey..I've just noticed! I uploaded some 36 hours ago and they've still not been added HQ yet! I must be degenerating...

Gerry/EDI
 
G-CIVP
Posts: 1406
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 6:38 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 6:23 am

Interestingly some shots from yesterday at LHR have already been uploaded onto the database! LGW might have a point!
 
Guest

Time To Speak Up

Mon Jan 14, 2002 7:02 am

My how the pendulum has swung in the other direction!

When this screening business started last year, initially it was WHO ARE THE SCREENERS, HANG THE SCREENERS, THE SCREENERS ARE INCOMPETANT, THE SCREENERS REJECT TOO MANY PICS, DUMP THE SCREENERS, etc. Now that we now know what is expected of us, those photogs with lower rejection rates and high HQ acceptance say "...the screeners are doing a good job."

When the queue started to climb, the screener rejection rates were high because it was assumed that we were here to weed-out the crap, and send the remainder to Johan for review. Well, the queue continued to climb and the HQ function was added. HQ was/is a good idea. It allows quick additions to the DB for those pics that would undoubtedly be added at some point in time. It was recently speculated that the screeners were scared to death to upload a HQ pic that Johan may not approve of. That's not the case at all. Screeners DO occasionally reject pics deemed HQ by other screeners. The situation is actually the opposite. There are some that I wouldn't dare to reject, because I know I would hear about it later. Then it's back to HANG THE SCREENERS again. We dont need that, nor do we need more screeners. We are handling the queue just fine, especially lately.

"...or the screeners have taken to accepting everything Johan would accept leaving the rejections to him so they will look nice to us" There might be some truth to this. Early on, we (the screeners) were getting hammered for rejections, and I think photogs wanted to see rejections from Johan himself, instead of us. Well guys, you got your wish.

"...but when almost all the borderline shots are rejected is seems like a waste of time that the screeners pass them on instead of rejecting them." There's a switch too! Now you want your rejections right away, instead of waiting? Does that mean that it would enable you to voice a complaint NOW instead of later? I remember a few months ago that one of my rejections was questioned here EIGHT-MINUTES after the rejection. How much fun is that for us? IT ISN'T! Nobody will be 100% satisfied with whatever technique is used, so we are searching for a happy medium and I think we are close.

The one thing that really amuses me are the posts that solicit opinions AFTER they have been uploaded. That just doesn't make sense to me. Why not question a picture BEFORE it is uploaded, instead of AFTER? Im not suggesting that this forum be cluttered with a gruntload of such posts, but dont be a bonehead by asking for comments after the fact, BEFORE it is even reviewed.

The Motiv issue is purely subjective. Face it, there ARE some pictures that are just unacceptable. However, I personally prefer a good scan of a bad picture, than a horrible scan of a good picture. You guys get plenty of top notch advice here from credible photogs, heed their advice and apply it.

Finally, is it really necessary for everybody to know everything that occurs during the screening process? I mean every minute detail? It seems like some sit at their PC biting their nails waiting for some sort of e-mail, whether it be an addition and/or rejection. There really IS life outside of AN, and sitting with a calculator cyphering your photo stats (or the stats of others) is counterproductive. Instead of 'worrying', go shoot more pictures! Yes AN is an addiction, but dont let it control your life.

My opinions expressed here may not be shared by all screeners, or even Johan for that matter. But, I felt that it was time for 'somebody' to say 'something'.

OK skeptics, FIRE AWAY!!!
 
Guest

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 7:11 am

...hmm...maybe taking it a tad too seriously?
It's been quite lighthearted up 'till now...
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 7:14 am

S5 wrote:
Now you want your rejections right away, instead of waiting? Does that mean that it would enable you to voice a complaint NOW instead of later?

Speaking for myself of course: No i dont wanna complain NOW instead of later. I would like to know whats wrong and learn from it.

Peter
-
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 8:31 am

S5, I agree to what Peter wrote, I don't want to complain about a reject, but if one of my photos isn't good enough to be added without doubts, I'd reather see it rejected for a good reason immediately so I could learn from it and try to make it better.

Just my 0.02 cents..

Staffan
 
Guest

Staffan

Mon Jan 14, 2002 8:57 am

Staffan, I agree with you and Peter as well. However, early in the game the screeners were not 'trusted' by the rejectees, and still aren't under some circumstances. Perhaps that is why so many pics are STILL given to Johan for final review.

No offense to Peter (are you listening?), but many of your fog-shots are very difficult to decide upon. You have a respected track record here and for every reason I could think of for a rejection, you could probably suggest a reason why it should be accepted. I dont have a problem with that, but I dont want to argue over rejections either.

Rejections have been especially difficult lately due to the fact that many people either received or bought dig cams and/or scanners for Christmas and we have been receiving plenty of poor shots/uploads. (Common tact prohibits me from posting them here).

Remember, screeners ARE your friends. If you upload nice pics, they will be added rather quickly. If your pics are bad, expect rejections. If they are marginal, be prepared to wait awhile...
 
Lindy
Posts: 4722
Joined: Wed May 19, 1999 10:42 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 9:00 am

We should call them Rejectors not Screeners.
BWIADCA - Nikon D100
 
Staffan
Posts: 3879
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 9:10 am

"If they are marginal, be prepared to wait awhile..."

S5, that is exactly my point, in that situation I'd prefer a reject. Given a reason I could try to improve or reconsider if this photo really is worth uploading.

I know many others won't agree to this, but that's my opinion about it.

Regards,

Staffan
 
F27
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2001 11:59 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 9:50 am

I bet there are more rejections than acceptances. I went to place a new rego on the database and it was rejected i would very much like to see the
Rejectors give a little bit more leeway and i am not using a flatbed scanner and i am scanning from slides.Again i think the predjudces of what the screeners like and dislike in shots is again coming to the forefront it is a fact many screeners will not tollerate a little bit of grain. If Airliners .net is not careful it will be killed off by it own adminastration. People only tollerate things so much and the goal postrs have moved so much now that unless you shoot digital shots you have no future on this web site
 
connector4you
Posts: 768
Joined: Wed May 16, 2001 10:27 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 10:11 am

I hear you people and I fully sympathize with your frustration. This is what I say… this site badly needs a spring cleanup of all the old crap photos lacking TRUE QUALITY. Let's dump them in some sort of archive and make room for the newest (current year photos only) Maybe in this way we can speed up significantly the whole processing which currently takes weeks and months…Remember the old say "Time is money"
There are similar sites that currently deliver OVERNITE EXPRESS !!! This situation needs a swift fix or else all these talented photographers are going to migrate toward better places. It's simply called COMPETITION
Have a good year.
 
AUS_Spotter
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2000 1:35 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 12:32 pm

Over a period of nearly 2 months I had time to upload 38 shots. Results: 6 rejected by screeners, 6 added HQ and 26 passed on to Johan. Of the 26 passed to Johan, yesterday 23 were rejected, 1 accepted with no warnings, 2 accepted with warnings. On the uploads I made before this batch 28 out of 34 were accepted by Johan.

I have changed nothing. I still have the same scanner, same camera, same film, same processing lab, same software and edit the photos in the same manner as I always have. The photos are taken from the same locations at the same airports in the same type of weather.

Something has obvioiusly happened in the last 2 months. Seems like digital photos are the only photos good enough for this site any more.

Jason
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 12:46 pm

Jason,
please dont say that digital photos are the only photos good enough anymore- because myself and many others here use plain ole slide film with a scanner and we get uploaded with low rejection rates- yes i shoot on the ramps etc but i also have plenty of through the window shots, plenty of outside the ramp action shots- and they get accepted- why? i take the time to make damn sure they do- if i see a bad scan i dont bother uploading it and if i see a marginal shot i dont bother with it. Like i said in another post- if you take the time to really look at the pic- you yourself can usually say yeah- this'll make it or- eh, this isnt so great- there are some borderline cases but for the most part, its up to the individual photographer to be cognizant of what he's uploading

Joe
 
BO__einG
Posts: 2646
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2000 5:20 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 12:59 pm

I wonder how many of us are Print shooters.

MEE! Oo Me!
I work my way up in the uploads by scanning my negatives and working from there. I do realize that most times they dont even come close to slide quality scans but I seem to enjoy uploading prints as some like 10% of all my photo shares have negatives that are quite high in quality provided I buy the right choice of film.

I wonder if there are any frequent uploaders who shoots Negatives/Prints.. I can only think of one person admist all these Slide/K64/Digital guys..

Bo
Follow @kimbo_snaps on Instagram or bokimon- on Flickr to see more pics of me and my travels.
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 1:17 pm

Bo,
the most famous print photographer in the US is Richard Silagi- you probably have seen his work. He can tell you about the abuse he gets from me and the rest of the k64 guys all the time  Smile

Joe
 
AUS_Spotter
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2000 1:35 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 1:27 pm

The only reason I made the digital comment is becuase 6 of the last 7 photos I had accepted were digital. I spend what I think to be a good amount of time looking at my photos and in most cases I scan and edit them and then go back a day later and look at them before uploading them. I know there's been a few I've uploaded that I shouldn't have after I go back and look at them again, but for the most part I can no longer see what is wrong with a majority of the photos I get rejected. I've made no changes in the way I edit photos yet have gone from about a 85-90% acceptance rate with no warnings to a 95% rejection rate in 2 months.

I'd take more digital photos but I need to be close to the planes to get decent shots as my digital camera only has a 80mm zoom and wasn't originally purchased for the purpose of taking airplane photos.

Jason
 
AUS_Spotter
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2000 1:35 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 1:39 pm

Here are a couple photos that I can't understand why they were rejected for "low quality"

http://www.coasterphotos.com/temp/Anet-rejected/UA-A320-Nxxxxx-122601-MSP-1sm.jpg
I thought this one was pretty damn good for a 1.5 second exposure with no tripod and through a window.

http://www.coasterphotos.com/temp/Anet-rejected/SW-737-N325SW-122301-AUS-1sm.jpg


I shoot a mixture of slides and print. I always scan the negatives when I shoot print film (Fuji Reala 100).

Jason
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 1:44 pm

Jason,
im no screener but my own opinion- the night shot- a good chunk of the 320 is blocked- its not a clean shot. The other one- i dont know whats wrong with it other than its just a southwest 737 at the gate- maybe theres so many southwest shots that johan and co. are looking for shots that are more interesting?

Joe
 
AUS_Spotter
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2000 1:35 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 2:10 pm

Both of those photos (along with 16 others) were rejected by Johan for "low quality" under which it says:

"If you think you have been able to improve the quality of the photos, please re-upload them. Note that we are still very interested in having these photos in our database, we only ask that you try to improve the quality of the digital version of your photos."

Jason
 
Aussie
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 1999 7:51 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 3:48 pm

Then again looking at the uploads of today/last nite - I do wonder how a few of them got pass the screeners / johan .... there are some serious shockers in there !

And then we get rejections for "Low Quality" and whatever they can find to pick on .... I'm still not gonna put any pics into this post ... but its frustrating to see this ....

Cheers,

Frank


 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 4:32 pm

Did I hear my name: Big grin
---
No offense to Peter (are you listening?), but many of your fog-shots are very difficult to decide upon. You have a respected track record here and for every reason I could think of for a rejection, you could probably suggest a reason why it should be accepted. I dont have a problem with that, but I dont want to argue over rejections either.
---
Neither do I, I have retired from asking "why". I am on the screeners side with their rejections. They usually bring it to the point. I am still learning about what to upload and what not. The rejections I am getting from the screeners make me sometimes think OMG why did i upload this. May be it was because of what Frank said "if they get added why not them" but most of the time i have to admit for myself not being restrictive enough on the selection. Lately I thought I was on the right way but now that I have been waiting for a week without any message (except a rejection) seeing pictures being added taken later than mine where uploaded I am not sure about it anymore may be the standards have moved up or I did something wrong I dont know.

What really makes me thinking is waiting for weeks or even months for Johan to go to the queue which seems to happen occassionally and then getting pics back with lets call it "standard messages". I think he hasnt got the time anymore to walk through all the borderline cases axactly. No offense intended here. He also has another life to live and I think its a hard task already to keep the site running financially and technically.

Thats why i wrote "Make it HQ or reject it". It would reduce the queue. In fact it would be no more existing. Also a better system of messaging would be fine I think. For example if a batch of pictures is viewed by a screener for the first time, a message cold be sent out afterwards "aaa pictures have been screened the first time. bbb of them are marked as HQ by the first screener. ccc pictures have not been through any screening" that would give the submitter a feeling about the process (When the correct numbers are in the message of course) . In the moment you only get a message from the first screening when at least one picture is rejected.

S5 said: "... nor do we need more screeners. "
Sorry disagree. Just press the "of the last 24/48 hours". It comes up with 188 pictures. That cant be all in 48 hours. 188 pictures added. So little HQ. Sorry but I cant believe this.

About the foggy ones. I really try to upload only the ones which are sharp and without grain and/or show a reare visitor. And sometimes even a foggy one can be more interesting than sunny ones, but thats a matter of taste of course.

Peter
-
 
paulc
Posts: 1440
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2001 10:42 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 4:55 pm

It would be nice to see the 'low quality' rejection more fully explained and examples given.

I recently had 49 picture uploaded over 3 months all waiting for Johan to screen - (2 were loaded as HQ)
but only 20 passed by Johan, yet were scanned in the same way as the HQ ones ie same resolution, and settings, same post scanning 'tweaking' etc - and compared to some of the recent uploads were imho much better.

The images look fine before I send then - even at the small file sizes JPEG's produce (full screen) - maybe the compression used by ANet takes them over the quality edge.


English First, British Second, european Never!
 
Aussie
Posts: 136
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 1999 7:51 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 7:40 pm

Peter,

no ... wasn't talking about u !!!

Gruesse,

Frank
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 7:50 pm

I was just using your words. I didnt assume they where pointed at me.
Peter
-
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Time For Change

Mon Jan 14, 2002 11:03 pm

Frank,
im with you my friend- i still see some shots uploaded and i say to myself- wow, what were the screeners/johan thinking? this should definetely NOT be on here- it is cloudy, it is distant, it is small in the frame- why did they pass this one.....

Joe
(who always tells is like it is)
 
Sukhoi
Posts: 1561
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:03 am

RE: Time For Change

Tue Jan 15, 2002 12:10 am

this should definetely NOT be on here- it is cloudy

Bugger no more shots from the UK then  Wink/being sarcastic

Cheers

Paul Big grin
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Time For Change

Tue Jan 15, 2002 12:21 am

Paul,
cloudy shots of common aircraft should be avoided in my opinion- i know there are more cloudy days than sunny in the UK but you know what- shoot more on the sunny days- cloudy shots are not worth the effort unless it is an interesting subject.

(my opinion, others may differ)

Joe
 
KingWide
Posts: 698
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 7:30 am

RE: Time For Change

Tue Jan 15, 2002 12:38 am

Joe,

Not all of us can choose our shooting days. If I only shot on 'blue' weekends I'd only shoot about once a year!  Big grin

J
Jason Taperell - AirTeamImages
 
User avatar
Fly-K
Posts: 2991
Joined: Thu May 04, 2000 4:26 pm

RE: Time For Change

Tue Jan 15, 2002 12:39 am

I've had "customers" (yes, really) that specifically wanted bad weather shots. I agree, just plain grey clouds doesn't make a good shot, but when there's rain/spray/snow, it gets interesting. But tough to get good results, and get them accepted here.

Konstantin
Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been...
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Time For Change

Tue Jan 15, 2002 12:49 am

K, King,
no doubt nice interesting bad wx shots are great and should be seen- but an approach shot of a BA 737 in pure clouds, one that is already uploaded in sun- to me is a waste of time.

(again, thats just me, i know alot of people like cloudy approach shots of common airplanes)

Joe

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests