EZYAirbus
Topic Author
Posts: 2318
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 4:57 am

Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 4:52 am

I recently had this picture rejected for badcommon, what does it mean??

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/GMIDXELDRIDGE.jpg

Glenn
http://www.glenneldridgeaviation.com
 
A346Dude
Posts: 1161
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:23 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 4:54 am

Glenn,

I believe it means there are already many photos of that particular aircraft in the database, so any additional photos of the plane must be of excellent quality to get in.
You know the gear is up and locked when it takes full throttle to taxi to the terminal.
 
EZYAirbus
Topic Author
Posts: 2318
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 4:57 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 4:57 am

Obviously millions of the same aircraft taken at the same time on the same day at the same airport then eh??

What a load of complete and utter BOLLOCKS!!!

Glenn
http://www.glenneldridgeaviation.com
 
sulman
Posts: 1963
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:09 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:01 am

Glenn,

There's 94 images of G-MIDX in the DB; that'e enough to warrant it as a common aircraft. In essence, it means that any further additions will have to be particularly high quality.

Badcommon can be frustrating but if you think about it, it is fair.


Cheers


James
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
 
f4wso
Posts: 942
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 5:07 am

A bright spot is it was rejected for Badcommon, not for quality. Good luck in future uploads.
Gary
Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
 
Kukkudrill
Posts: 1039
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 10:11 pm

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 6:11 am

With the database growing by leaps and bounds, this is the future so I guess we all better get used to it ...
Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
 
A346Dude
Posts: 1161
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:23 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 6:26 am

I have a question though, eventually nearly every aircraft will be common and then the database will grow excrutiatingly slowly. Wouldn't it be better to have many photos of every aircraft than say "OK, that's enough"?
You know the gear is up and locked when it takes full throttle to taxi to the terminal.
 
EZYAirbus
Topic Author
Posts: 2318
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2003 4:57 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 6:45 am

I agree with A346Dude, if they reject that for badcommon what about the endless number of BA A319s/A320s??

Just be nice to get pics like that on there, not often I get mine accepted when I get a half decent pic they come back with that crap!

Glenn

http://www.glenneldridgeaviation.com
 
User avatar
aerorobnz
Posts: 7411
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2001 3:43 pm

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 6:47 am

The problem is there are very good photos and there are older scans and poorer quality photos from when the acceptance criteria wasn't as high that have deemed the aircraft too 'common.' Perhaps if some of the older ones could be reassessed on today's standards you would stand more of a chance of acceptance if your photo is up to the correct standard.
Flown to 120 Airports in 44 Countries on 73 Operators. Visited 55 Countries and counting. Wanderlust is like Syphilis, once you have the itch it's too late for treatment.
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:01 am

what does it mean??

Because of this you post a thread in here? Look into your rejection email!
Everything explained there.

Oh btw. You've got a nice big dustspot above the SQ logo and also smaller one's overall the image. Should have been badquality!
Jet Visuals
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:04 am

No reason to freak out over this.

Two factors play a role in this situation.

1. Commonality
2. High Quality

1. is applicable, and therefore 2. should be present as well. You fail to meet that requirement. It is dull, 3/4 rear angle, there are dustspots etc etc. The shot is not good enough for a common plane.

if they reject that for badcommon what about the endless number of BA A319s/A320s??

Those are different registrations, and therefore a lot of different planes. I cannot even remotely begin to understand why that would be a good ground for badcommon. Eh?

Wietse
Wietse de Graaf
 
Cpn360
Posts: 140
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 7:48 pm

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:43 pm

EZYAirbus,

I rejected it and the FIRST reason was "badquality" and not ONLY "badcommon" as you mentioned. The reasons why and how are explained by Wietse.

So you have now 2 options:
-Or you appeal and waste someone else time.
-Or you try to improve the photo and ask help in a CONSTRUCTIVE way in this forum.

With these kind of childish reactions you won't gain much.

Hoping this helps and made this all clear to you...

Serge

There is more in life then Airliners.net... Belgae Gallorum Fortissimi
 
OD720
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 6:46 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:05 pm

Hi Serge,

I have a question regarding badcommon.

If there are too many photos of the same plane but if it was captured at a new location or airport, will it still be badcommon?
In other words, if the plane has lots of photos, let's say at LHR and if turns out at CDG for the first time, will it still be badcommon?

If new locations were allowed in the database for the same plane, I think it would be nice. It will show some history to where it has flown to. Researchers might benefit from it or something.

What do you think? Are there any clear guidlines?

Many thanks.
 
INNflight
Posts: 3526
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:16 pm

It will not get a badcommen rejection if there are already 200 photos in the DB but your image is still perfect. So high quality, nice motive,etc!

But the posted one above was not, as we know.
Jet Visuals
 
OD720
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 6:46 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:37 pm

I know what you are saying Florian and I believe that every photo should have a minimum quality requirement below which it will be rejected.

I agree that the posted one of this topic might get rejected even if it weren't common.

My question, will it be harder to get the plane in the DB if it were in LHR than CDG, as stated in my early question. I mean, is it common at a certain location or very common in general?

Thanks.
 
vir380
Posts: 484
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2002 12:45 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:38 pm

Im afraid your not on your own in having a "badcommon" rejection ... i had one recently and i have no problem with it ...

just deal with it and move on .... without bad language  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

regards Tony

Moved away from this lost website to better things !
 
Cpn360
Posts: 140
Joined: Tue Mar 16, 2004 7:48 pm

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:46 pm

Hi Vatche,

Well, we have a lot of things to check on each photo.
But most important factor is the quality of the photo...
For me, the mentioned photo is/was badquality and the supplementary reason is/was badcommon.
So if you have an excellent quality shot, disregarding the location and quantity in the DB, it will get in for sure.

But location will not get priority on quality for common things unless the location is VERY very rare....

But as said, each photo is judged on a lot of factors and the combination of those will gives a result of acceptation or not.

Hoping this answers your question,

Rgds

Serge
There is more in life then Airliners.net... Belgae Gallorum Fortissimi
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 9:10 pm

We do not have time to go through every existing photo of a subject to see whether the one just uploaded is at a new location. Besides, its the subject and image quality that matter. Once we have a representative selection of pictures of a specific subject (I'm talking registration, NOT generic type) then further uploads need to be of better than normal quality to be accepted except in exceptional circumstances (e.g. if it was shown crashed, or something like that), or if the picture is something different to what we already have (e.g. a flight deck pic of a common subject may get in if all the other pics are externals). A picture of a common subject may be rejected badcommon even if it is of an "acceptable" standard - the same quality as a subject we have less pictures of.

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
OD720
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 6:46 am

RE: Why Was This Rejected For Badcommon?

Sat Jan 22, 2005 9:46 pm

Many thanks Serge and Andy. I agree that it will be very time consuming to check every location for a common subject. Also, it will definitely create more pointless arguments in here as well  Smile

All the best to you.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: sparky35805, Yahoo [Bot] and 13 guests