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

Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 7:43 am

Hey!

I've noticed over the past couple of days that alot of lower quality photos have been added. Personally I think this is great, and i'm sure photographers would love it if it were made easier to get photos onto this website.

Or is it just me?

And, just a little nag... Photo sizing, since the new 1600x1200 size has been allowed, people seem to be uploading very odd sized photos. I use 1024x768 desktop, and I find that most people use this resolution (ok some use bigger). But i've seen some VERY odd sizing for photos, I can understand if it was 1280x1024 or whatever, but some I just don't understand... Also I feel that some of the larger photos are very poor quality, soft and grainy. Are there different rules for different sizes?

Don't understand... then again there is alot I don't understand  Laugh out loud

Regards

Dan
 
Tcas
Posts: 254
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:01 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 8:09 am

It is the new screeners I think. I have seen photos off by 4 degrees or more!
 
Glenn
Posts: 1454
Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2005 8:33 pm

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 8:19 am

I don't think that is correct. The way I understand it is that the old screeners still have the final say over the new screeners. ie: the newscreeners don't upload anything, they just prescreen.

but if you have facts maybe you can provide them ?
would make an interesting change
 
EGGD
Topic Author
Posts: 11880
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:01 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 8:23 am

TCAS, me too! What annoys me is when I see that, and then I have had some in the past rejected for not being level (even though they were, well..)

Dan  Smile
 
jwenting
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:12 pm

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 1:26 pm

If the criteria were becoming more realistic that would be good, but I think there may be just more errors being made at the moment.
I wish I were flying
 
KingWide
Posts: 698
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 7:30 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 3:36 pm

Glenn's right, the new screeners cannot actually add photos directly to the database [with the one exception of note/newsworthy shots]. The new screeners are not screening the HQ queue at the moment. They can only nominate a photo as HQ. The decision is still left to at least 2 of the old screeners as to whether it should be added to the db.

Effectively things have polarised so that the new screeners are doing the main queue and the old screeners are doing the HQ queue [mostly].

As far as the perceptual lowering of standards goes - I'm not sure I agree. I think the site's standards are the same as ever. What you're seeing is down to 2 factors -
1) the number of screeners has just doubled. Now the old group screened according to a set of standards they agreed over time. The group happened to be 'perceived' by the users to be very tight on camera angle. The new group of screeners is perhaps collectively less strict on angles but more strict on scan quality say. The net effect is that, if you were excited about camera angles then you think the standards have lowered, whereas if you were excited about low image quality then you think the standards are getting higher. The net result is that the standards are about the same but the 'balance' has shifted slightly. This is all just hypothetical but hopefully you see my point.

2) The appeal process has allowed a number of shots that don't meet the standards to get into the db because they're rare. Remember that rare doesn't necessarily mean that plane is physically rare, just that there are very few photos in the db [perhaps even none]. I've seen a number of accepted shots like that in the last few weeks and rightly so. If a guy shoots a shot which enriches the database then the standards should be justly lowered for that shot.


J
Jason Taperell - AirTeamImages
 
PH-OTO
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 1:52 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 7:35 pm

Jason,

Thanks for your explanation. It solves a lot of questions marks I had in the past couple of days.
Are you sure this kind of posts should be made under your own username? Wink/being sarcastic

Martin Boschhuizen
Look very closely between the lines of this message, and you will see the captain beating up the jumpseater
 
KingWide
Posts: 698
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 7:30 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 7:53 pm

I was never one to hide from the public gaze anyway! Big grin


J
Jason Taperell - AirTeamImages
 
KingWide
Posts: 698
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 7:30 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 8:07 pm

I might add that the statements above are not definitive statements of fact [someone would need to do some analysis on the last few month's rejections for that] but are merely meant to illustrate the point that in such a subjective area like screening, adding 100% more screeners will inevitably lead to some differences in the standards whilst the equilibrium returns and things settle down again.

J
Jason Taperell - AirTeamImages
 
Guest

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 8:33 pm

Uh, oh. We'd better get more strict then...  Acting devilish

S2
 
Blackened
Posts: 535
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2001 4:19 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 9:10 pm

Be careful with huge (1600x1200) images. Some are not good enough for their size. Ask people to make them smaller for a better sharpness.
Bring it back, bring it back, bring it back
 
EGGD
Topic Author
Posts: 11880
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:01 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Tue Apr 30, 2002 11:59 pm

I think it wasn't the best Idea to introduce the new screeners (partially) whilst also introducing the new size limits. Makes it more difficult..
 
KingWide
Posts: 698
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 7:30 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Wed May 01, 2002 1:28 am

Dan,

Why more difficult?


J
Jason Taperell - AirTeamImages
 
EGGD
Topic Author
Posts: 11880
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:01 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Wed May 01, 2002 1:38 am

Well, it seems there are different Criteria for larger photos (so it SEEMS..), larger photos that get added seem to be blurrier and grainier than their smaller counterparts...

Of course, I might be wrong again  Smile.

I think it would've been easier if the new screeners were introduced first, set a good standard and then introduced it.

Just my 2c!
 
KingWide
Posts: 698
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2001 7:30 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Wed May 01, 2002 2:00 am

Ahh. I see. What screen resolution are you viewing at? If you view the 1600 shots at 1024 than they look much worse than if you view them with a resolution of 1600 x. A bit like viewing a 1024 shot a VGA resolution - they look awful.


J
Jason Taperell - AirTeamImages
 
EGGD
Topic Author
Posts: 11880
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:01 am

RE: Acceptence Level Lowered A Little?

Wed May 01, 2002 2:04 am

Well, I guess so, but .... nvm  Smile.

I see what you meen though, I've had my screen at other resolutions and the photos look poor (esp 16bit colour Big grin).

Regards

Dan

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests