billsville
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 5:46 pm

Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 6:48 pm

All,

Having been lurking around here for ages and viewing photos for ages I decided to start uploading some of my own. That was a bad mistake.

Having spent some hours preparing and uploading the photos (12 in all), all were rejected. The reasons given were very indeterminate. To me it seems that all photos from new people are out of hand rejected.

The photos were taken with a new D70 with new lenses. How a new camera could take photos that are tagged 'badquality' is beyond me. My background is in Television and graphics. This involves knowing what a correct white balance looks like, knowing what is sharp, knowing what is a good composition. I'm no newbie to photos, scanning, image manipulation and knowing what a good result is.

Having read the FAQ and getting no real determination on what will be accepted or rejected, I uploaded. Silly mistake.

I think the screening process is inherently flawed because...

1. No information provided before uploading on what makes a bad or good photo. If you browse the photo database the quality varies widely even on the latest additions. The FAQ seems fuzzy at best. Even the photos tips page has photos that are comparable to photos in the database.

2. A single screen process. How can a subjective process only be applied once? (the appeal process doesn't count, as you are only allowed two photos in the appeal). Photos should be screened twice by different people if there is any conjecture.

3. The reasons given for rejection are extremely vague. You open the email and it says your photo was rejected because of A or B or C or D or E. At least you could tell us what the exact reason or which area of the photo drew the ire of the screeners.

4. A photograph is a piece of art the photographer has created. If they wanted it this way, they wanted it this way. If they wanted the ground at a slight angle, they wanted it that way. If they cropped something off, they wanted it that way. If its shot through a hazy sunny day, that's the way it was meant. Photography is about art, not just getting a plane and its rego. They upload it because they think its good.

Like it or not, people are going to compare their photos to ones that already exist in the database. People want a reference level. Having read this forum and seeing a lot of disillusioned posters, I can see that no such level exists and your photo getting accepted really is a big lucky dip. People like myself want to be on here because this is the place to have your photos and it has obviously turned into a professional site. But do I feel that having some sort of auto-generated email with a fluffy reason for rejection and then having to pay to join up find out the true reason for the rejection is a bit amateurish for a professionally run site. I don't think I'm alone in feeling this way.

I offer the above post not as a critique, but as constructive criticism.
 
diezel
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 6:50 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 6:52 pm

Hi Billsville,

Welcome to the forum!

Can you show us some rejections?

Roel.
Never be afraid of what you like. (Miles Davis)
 
Kukkudrill
Posts: 1039
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 10:11 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 6:57 pm

Yes the rejection e-mails are inevitably a bit too generic. But if you want better feedback, that's what the forum is for. Post links to the photos here and other photographers can tell you what they think. Speaking for myself I've learned a hell of a lot from here.

Charles
Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:16 pm

Quoting Billsville (reply 0):
2. A single screen process. How can a subjective process only be applied once? (the appeal process doesn't count, as you are only allowed two photos in the appeal). Photos should be screened twice by different people if there is any conjecture.


Photos are usually screened three times before they get in. If there are obvious reasons that the photos dont make it they get rejected by the first screener. But they even might be rejected by the 2nd 3rd, 4th or whatever screener. When appealing you can only appeal 2 thats correct, but once they are processed you can appeal the next 2. Appeal Q is moving very fast these days so there should be no problem doing so.

Quoting Billsville (reply 0):
3. The reasons given for rejection are extremely vague. You open the email and it says your photo was rejected because of A or B or C or D or E. At least you could tell us what the exact reason or which area of the photo drew the ire of the screeners.


Its NOT A or B or C or D. If there is more than one reason the it is A and B and C and D

Quoting Billsville (reply 0):
4. A photograph is a piece of art the photographer has created. If they wanted it this way, they wanted it this way. If they wanted the ground at a slight angle, they wanted it that way. If they cropped something off, they wanted it that way. If its shot through a hazy sunny day, that's the way it was meant. Photography is about art, not just getting a plane and its rego. They upload it because they think its good.


See it from the other side. Its Johans website, screeners apply his rules on the uploaded photos. If Johan decides one day he only wants photos of blue planes in the database then only photos of blue planes will be accpeted.

Quoting Billsville (reply 0):
But do I feel that having some sort of auto-generated email with a fluffy reason for rejection and then having to pay to join up find out the true reason for the rejection is a bit amateurish for a professionally run site. I don't think I'm alone in feeling this way.


See it positive. at least you get some feedback. If you send photos to a magazine or an Image ageny you might not even get any feedback if they accepted it or not. Soo its not that bad eh?  Wink/being sarcastic
-
 
LHRSIMON
Posts: 1314
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 5:59 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:23 pm

Welcome to the hard end of downloading to A.Net. We have all had your feelings , but at the end of the day its a system that we all have to follow. I agree its very frustrating when you have spent hours editing 20 pictures only to have them all returned due to a vage auto answer such as "bad quality".

The thing is after a while you do improve your skills. As others have said the help of this forum should be your guide.... You will then start to notice what is or isn't up to scratch.. Yep you will be baffled with a reason sometime's but if you do a re-edit on the photo and you really do feel its up to A.Net quality , try a reload. Always remember though to put a note to the screener to let him know that you HAVE done some work to the picture,rather than just re-uploading it.... If you do that you can get the old slap on the wrists !!!

I think you have to remember the volumes A.Net now operates. If the screener had to judge and write an idividual reason for rejection for each photo the que would be 50,000 pictures !!!! Yeah it would be great to have a note for every rejected pic saying "the wings to dark" or "there to much grain in the sky" etc etc.... But its never going to happen when screeners have to sift though 1500+ pictures A DAY !!

Good luck, i know its hard and i have (and still sometimes are) go though it.... Just today for example i had a contrail picture rejected for "Bad distance" when there are thousands of pictures that are the same.... Oh well

Simon C
Canon 1D Mk III,Canon 20D+17-40 L f4.0,70-200 L IS USM f2.8,400 L USM f5.6,135 mm L f2.0, 50 mm f1.8,1.4 x II extender
 
TZ
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 9:21 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:26 pm

Quoting Billsville (reply 0):
To me it seems that all photos from new people are out of hand rejected.


At first it feels like that, feels like you are the victim of a conspiracy against new photographers. I had that feeling too when I started. But it's simply not true.

But it's all part of the process of learning what is and what is not airliners.net material. We (screeners) don't pretend to be photographic Gods who know all about photography. We simply apply the airliners.net standards, whatever they may be. It takes a little while to learn the compositional style, sharpness levels, etc, etc that the site prefers. When I now look back at what I had rejected when I started here, I wholeheartedly agree with those decisions and I'm glad my portfolio is better for not including those inferior images.

Lastly, when screening we could not care who the photographer is. There are SOOOO many photographers we could never remember all their names anyhow.

Please, please, please post your rejects and we can work constructively to help you learn the ways of airliners.net.

And, I endorse Peter's corrections to some of your incorrect assumptions about the screening process.

Tamsin (a.net screening crew)
TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
 
embraer145
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 9:01 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:37 pm

Billsville...One advise.
Kukkudrill...One remark.

Don't try to understand the reasons for rejections. I've done it. Post threads with my rejected pics and asked how to improve them. Resulted in a couple of reactions from tributers to this forum who always agree with the screeners and always pissing of the one who have posted the thread. You can read this in other threads too.
I have the same at the moment. One picture accepted to the DB and another one rejected due to "badcamera angle". It was easy for me to compare both originals and the visible poles etc are exactly the same. Dunno how it's possible, but it happens.

I've stopped postings about my rejections due to the reasons mentioned above. Consistency is far away sometimes, but it doesn't bother me anymore. The advises you get most of the times are correct when you have pictures which must be rotated just a little bit. Further most of the advises are strictly personal and most of the times they are not valuable to improve the picture due to the ersonal taste of the one who has posted. I am not saying that I am an expert, but with almost 600 pics in the DB I am not a complete outsider too.
I upload my pictures once and when they are rejected it's not worth for me to try to get them in again.
There are a couple of good other databases, which I will not mention, because that's also a very sensitive subject here.
You can always write me via my profile, although I think that my post will be deleted very soon by the moderators of the site. (happens most of the times with posts like this one).

Maybe it stays in, and I know for sure that a lot of people will stumbling over me. As said earlier it doesn't bother me anymore.

Best regards

Aart
DAI - Dutch Aviation Images.
 
billsville
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 5:46 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:59 pm

Here are two of the 12..

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...in?filename=FedEX_N608FE_SYD_1.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...filename=Emirates_A6-ERB_SYD_1.jpg
(I wanted the haze in this shot it makes for an interesting view)

One of the ones I wanted to show now doesn't show in the rejected pile anymore.

It doesn't take long to type a few words.. "Spots around Tail"...."wings Underexposed"....

A question if I may. If the screeners are dealing with such a large amount of photos and they can't type a simple message surely they can't also be giving the photo the due considerations it deserves???

[Edited 2005-02-25 12:03:32]
 
embraer145
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 9:01 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:06 pm

Quoting Billsville (reply 7):
A question if I may. If the screeners are dealing with such a large amount of photos and they can't type a simple message surely they can't also be giving the photo the due considerations it deserves???


That's exactly what I am thinking about.
DAI - Dutch Aviation Images.
 
Kukkudrill
Posts: 1039
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 10:11 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:18 pm

My two cents worth:

-- There's a little bit of grain in both. Standards are so high that this would be enough to earn you a rejection. It can easily be fixed using software like Neat Image.

-- First photo: nice sharp shot, well framed, clearly you should do very well here with a bit of persistence. Unfortunately most of the plane is in shadow -- another common rejection reason. Try to shoot from below only when the sun is low and behind you.

-- Second photo: you might have wanted this effect but for a.net it is hopelessly heat-distorted. We all have photos we like but won't/can't upload. This one also needs rotation to level the horizon.

If I may add another piece of advice, size your pics to 1024 px wide. Easier for most people to see on their monitors, and can improve the chances of a marginal shot.

Keep at it. You'll be adding pics to the database in no time.

Charles
Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
 
TZ
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 9:21 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:23 pm

Quoting Billsville (reply 7):
A question if I may. If the screeners are dealing with such a large amount of photos and they can't type a simple message surely they can't also be giving the photo the due considerations it deserves???


(Ignoring Embraer145's completely unhelpful posting)

There's two sides to every coin... How about considering that because we are spending so much time analysing your image, we then don't have so much time for eveything else? Your statement is like saying that just because the train driver doesn't have time to tell his passengers about the view out the window, he therefore isn't driving his train properly... it doesn't follow.

In a lot of cases, especially in borderline cases, screeners do add those personal comments you refer to. I like to do that to help a photographer.

However, the long (standard) explanations with each rejection category were carefully written to explain those rejection reasons. In both rejects linked above I can see quite an obvious CMOS dust spot in the upper left quadrant. It ought to be apparent, after reading the rejection email and looking again at the image, without further instruction from the screener(s). The second image is also not level - the majority of the vertical poles and buildings are leaning over. It's necessary for all such verticals to be truely upright to avoid a "badangle" rejection.

As for the heat haze... that's a little more subjective. I would say that the majority of the aircraft is obscured by the haze, rendering it less effective than a composition where the haze is behind the aircraft, or obscuring only a smaller percentage. With such subjective decisions, you are free to use the Appeal-to-Johan facility if you feel we've made a bad call. I'd urge you to address the CMOS dust and angle problems first though, or Johan will reject the appeal for that.

Embraer145:
If you ask for opinions, you will get many, some are right, some are wrong. That's life. Anybody can say anything (within reason here). The screeners decisions and explanations should help, and that appeal facility is your ultimate tool to check that the process is being run as Johan intended. If you disagree with Johan's line of thinking, then ultimately you disagree with airliners.net. Now, let's all try and pull together on the same team?

Tamsin (a.net screening crew)
TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
 
TZ
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 9:21 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:25 pm

Oh, and one more thing. The database is run, and all the volunteers use a lot of their time because they want to help people share their photos and make airliners.net a great place to visit. We want you to have your pictures in the database, not the other way around.

Tamsin
TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 8:52 pm

Quoting Tamsin (reply 10):
Now, let's all try and pull together on the same team?

Agree with you here Tamsin but in order to do so A.net should accept critics as well. Love needs to come from both sides.
The rejection emails as the currently exists are no help to anybody.
The more frequent uploaders don't pay attention to them and the new comers are overwhelmed with something like 5 possible reasons of what possibly might be wrong somewhere in the picture mainly about a scanner they probably don't even have.  Confused
Therefore i can understand Billsville as well as Embraer145 posts.
In my view it is about time to update the screening rules and rejection emails to the current "digital" standards.

@Billsville:
I like the compositions and the first one might be saved with some work, the second one will end up in the bin anyway i am afraid.
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
 
StMawganE14
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun May 25, 2003 5:57 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:02 pm

A question - Why should Embraer 145's posting be ignored?

It puts some valid points and gives all of us an insight into views which are not necessarily holy writ. By discussing these issues we are furthering the argument and, being intelligent human beings, are able to make up our own minds.

Volunteers have done exactly that - they have volunteered and they want to screen. They will all have their own reasons for doing so and I thank them for it. I do not however feel sorry for them nor do I feel that I should not criticise or listen to views which they may find "completely unhelpful". If Tamsin is bemoaning the lot of the screener then perhaps she should get out more!

All I would suggest to Tamsin is that she be willing to listen to other views before dismissing them as being unorthodox or unhelpful.

I rarely post to this forum but enjoy the debate and the tips I pick up. Sometimes however I have to put finger to keyboard.

Brian
Live for today and have another one tomorrow!
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:02 pm

Quoting Aviopic (reply 12):
In my view it is about time to update the screening rules and rejection emails to the current "digital" standards.


There are no "digital" standards.
-
 
Psych
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:06 pm

Welcome to the Forum Billsville.

Though it may not be much consolation, I think it is true to say most of us have been where you are now and have experienced those feelings of frustration. I recognise that sense of outrage that all your hard work feels like it has been thrown back at you. But I also recognise the points that Tamsin makes - I too look back at my rejected images now and, with the hindsight I now have, and with all that I have learned since last September (when I started uploading), recognise they simply did not meet Airliners.net standards.

One of the reasons I do not upload any of my photos to other sites is that I believe A.net has the harshest criteria - that appeals to me as a bit of a perfectionist. But I also feel that if I have a photo that makes it on here then it must be of a certain standard - and a high one at that.

I would be lying if I said I have not raged about rejections that I have felt were harsh or showed inconsistency, but I accept that screeners are human and will therefore make mistakes. Plus it is always going to be impossible for all screeners to have exactly the same opinion about everything. But my experience to date tells me that very often they appear to be right. Though I am not one myself, if I put a screeners hat on and look at the 2 photos you linked, I too would reject them:

- in the first there is a clear dust spot above and to the right of the nose - and that is always a reason for a bad quality rejection, no matter how good the photo is. But, easy to sort out by cloning it out. The image is also grainy - but again you may be able to sort this out with appropriate use of Neat Image - free to download a version from the Internet.

- straight away looking at your second image I noted another dust spot just above the left winglet. Plus there is the problem again of the grain and the issue of the heat haze. I would have rejected that too.

The key message that I hope you get from this post is that there is a learning curve to this (which I am still very much on myself) and if you are prepared to persevere, your standards will doubtless improve. You are right in your point that, with the equipment you have, plus your obvious ability to take a good airliner photo, you will be able to get images accepted on this site.

Keep at it and good luck with your future uploads.

All the best.

Paul
 
billsville
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 5:46 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:06 pm

The point I was trying to make with the Emirates photo, is that yes, there are a lot Emirates A340's in the database, but this was a different angle with the haze, it provided a different view.

Because there are so many photos taken side on etc, maybe its time to look outside the square.....

Just a different point of view.
 
TZ
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 9:21 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:08 pm

Quoting Embraer145 (reply 8):
That's exactly what I am thinking about.

That's what I ignored, because it didn't contribute to moving the discussion forward. I did not suggest anybody else ignore it.

I'm not bemoaning the lot of the screener. Please re-read:
Quoting Tamsin (reply 11):
Oh, and one more thing. The database is run, and all the volunteers use a lot of their time because they want to help people share their photos and make airliners.net a great place to visit. We want you to have your pictures in the database, not the other way around.


Like I said, and I re-iterate... We're all doing this because we want to do it, and all want the same thing. We all have parts to play in the big team.

Thanks for your suggestion Brian... maybe I should get out more and screen less?  Wink/being sarcastic (that's a joke, BTW, in case anybody tells me off!)

Tamsin (a.net screening crew)
TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:11 pm

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (reply 14):
There are no "digital" standards.

So we keep talking about possible scanner problems even though 95% of the uploaded images are shot digital ?
Sounds very strange to me but have it your way, it's not my playground.

However your post exactly indicate where the problem lies and why i posted my thoughts.

Regards,
Willem
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:20 pm

Quoting Aviopic (reply 18):
Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (reply 14):
There are no "digital" standards.

So we keep talking about possible scanner problems even though 95% of the uploaded images are shot digital ?


yes we do because the other 5 % should also get pointers on how to improve the rejected photos.

Quoting Psych (reply 15):
in the first there is a clear dust spot above and to the right of the nose - and that is always a reason for a bad quality rejection


Wrong. dust spot --> baddirty

[Edited 2005-02-25 13:49:03]
-
 
gkirk
Posts: 23345
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2000 3:29 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:26 pm

Well, I dont take pics but read this foum quite a bit, so maybe this advice will help  Big grin
If you get some rejections, have a look at them again, and if you don't know whats wrong or how to improve them, start a thread in this forum asking for some help/advice about the pictures.

Personally, I think that the database has got some top quality pics in it, which makes this site the best for aviation photography
When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
 
billsville
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 5:46 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:28 pm

The point I'm trying to make has been perfectly proved in this thread so far.

-The photos were rejected, I accept that.
-The email was very vague as to the exact problem.
-So to work out why they were rejected I have to pay money and join to find out the exact reason.
-People in this forum post have provided the exact details (Thank You).

A long way around a process that could be much smoother and easier.

It would be so much easier, and I bet you would have less antagonism to the rejection process, if the specific details of the rejection were stated and not glossed over as it seems by getting a preset email. If you want better photos, tell people whats wrong so they can fix it.

As I said before I'm just trying to provoke some constructive discussion on the subject.

[Edited 2005-02-25 13:34:52]
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:36 pm

Quoting Billsville (reply 21):
It would be so much easier, and I bet you would have less antagonism to the rejection process, if the specific details of the rejection were stated and not glossed over as it seems by getting a preset email. If you want better photos, tell people whats wrong so they can fix it.

Exactly my thoughts Billsville.
A pity Big Pete only wants to address to the 5% slide shooters.  Laugh out loud
Who still get 5 different possible failures for one problem btw.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:37 pm

The way I understand it the screeners have a number of tickboxes describing what is wrong with the rejected pic.
The problem seems to be that the rejectee can't understand what exactly is the problem since the reasons stated are a bit vague.
How about a set of new tickboxes like:
- jaggies
- sensor dustspot
- unlevel verticals
etz etz

/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
embraer145
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 9:01 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:45 pm

Quoting Tamsin (reply 10):
(Ignoring Embraer145's completely unhelpful posting)



This is exactly what I mean when somebody have some criticism at the actual system of telling what's wrong with your pics.

A example:
Don't even know which rejection it is anymore. When you have a serie uploaded from AMS. Everybody knows you were along the runway outside. In that rejection male it's stated that the picture was taken behind glas out of a window.

This is one of the examples I can only laugh about. What is the constructive appointment to improve these kind of shots.

With Kind Regards

Aart

BTW nothin personal against you Tamsin
DAI - Dutch Aviation Images.
 
IL76
Posts: 2237
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:43 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:46 pm

If you want better photos, tell people whats wrong so they can fix it.

Every day, about 1000 photos get rejected. Who's going to write these 1000 emails? Screeners don't have time for this, as the queue would grow to a rediculous size. Hence the standard generated email. If the rejection reason is still unclear to you: ask for help. The rejection message gives you a hint of where the problem lies, but you have to chew your own food after that, to use just a figure of speech. If you need help, ask for opinions here in the forum, or if you don't want to pay, ask a fellow photographer. There are thousands of photographers on this site who can help you. Slowing down the screening process for each individual case is just not feasible.
Eduard

[Edited 2005-02-25 13:48:21]
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:50 pm

Quoting IL76 (reply 25):
Who's going to write these 1000 emails?


Added tickboxes might do the trick...

/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:51 pm

Please read Eduard.
That is not what Jan or me meant.
Just the same checkboxes as are used currently just with the specific info instead of a wide range of possibilities.
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
 
IL76
Posts: 2237
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 5:43 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:55 pm

Willem, please read. I was commenting on Billsville's comment, not yours or Jan's.
Jan's post was added while I was typing...
More tickboxes would be fine, but giving explanations would be too time consuming...
Ed
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 9:56 pm

Quoting Aviopic (reply 22):
A pity Big Pete only wants to address to the 5% slide shooters


I edited my post with the 5 % so that funny big Willem can understand what i meant (maybe)

Quoting Embraer145 (reply 24):
on't even know which rejection it is anymore. When you have a serie uploaded from AMS. Everybody knows you were along the runway outside. In that rejection male it's stated that the picture was taken behind glas out of a window.


Wrong. When you have never been ther you cant know if its shot from the terminal or not.
-
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:03 pm

Quoting Billsville (reply 0):

The photos were taken with a new D70 with new lenses. How a new camera could take photos that are tagged 'badquality' is beyond me. My background is in Television and graphics. This involves knowing what a correct white balance looks like, knowing what is sharp, knowing what is a good composition. I'm no newbie to photos, scanning, image manipulation and knowing what a good result is.



Sorry, but appearantly you do not. Both samples you have posted are clearly not acceptable on Airliners.net. Look at the halo around the nose gear on the FedEx shot, that would be faulty sharpening.


Quoting Embraer145 (reply 6):
Don't try to understand the reasons for rejections. I've done it. Post threads with my rejected pics and asked how to improve them. Resulted in a couple of reactions from tributers to this forum who always agree with the screeners and always pissing of the one who have posted the thread. You can read this in other threads too.
I have the same at the moment. One picture accepted to the DB and another one rejected due to "badcamera angle". It was easy for me to compare both originals and the visible poles etc are exactly the same. Dunno how it's possible, but it happens.


Aart, there are 2 different things; asking a question, and listening to the answers. You are constantly not listening to the answers given by regular (and succesful) uploaders. You start a thread, asking "why the pics didn't get in", you get responses, but then you just ignore the answers that pick the screeners' side, because you already made up your own answer and nobody is going to change that for you.



Quoting Kukkudrill (reply 9):
Unfortunately most of the plane is in shadow -- another common rejection reason


In this case, there are cool reflections all over the airplane hull, so the photo in itself is good, its the sharpening that messed things up.

Quoting Billsville (reply 7):
A question if I may. If the screeners are dealing with such a large amount of photos and they can't type a simple message surely they can't also be giving the photo the due considerations it deserves???


They can't do both, can they? It's either guessing what the pic looks like and typing a complete resume on how to fix that, or looking at the pic, studying it, and tick the correct boxes and expect some effort from the photographers side to interpret these messages. Can't have it both ways.



Quoting Billsville (reply 0):
Like it or not, people are going to compare their photos to ones that already exist in the database. People want a reference level. Having read this forum and seeing a lot of disillusioned posters, I can see that no such level exists and your photo getting accepted really is a big lucky dip.


haha, so after one batch of uploaded photos, you know all about what it takes to get photos accepted?



Quoting Billsville (reply 0):
4. A photograph is a piece of art the photographer has created. If they wanted it this way, they wanted it this way. If they wanted the ground at a slight angle, they wanted it that way. If they cropped something off, they wanted it that way. If its shot through a hazy sunny day, that's the way it was meant. Photography is about art, not just getting a plane and its rego. They upload it because they think its good.


This is an airplane database, not an art center. Try to create art without breaking the requirements of the site.
Quoting Billsville (reply 0):
But do I feel that having some sort of auto-generated email with a fluffy reason for rejection and then having to pay to join up find out the true reason for the rejection is a bit amateurish for a professionally run site. I don't think I'm alone in feeling this way.


Just re-read the rejection message, and get a good comparison between your pics and the pics in the database. There IS a standard you can compare your pictures to. Nobody forces you to sign up.

Wietse
Wietse de Graaf
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:13 pm

Quoting IL76 (reply 28):
Willem, please read. I was commenting on Billsville's comment, not yours or Jan's.

Sorry Eduard, the posts are going fast hehe

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (reply 29):
I edited my post with the 5 % so that funny big Willem can understand what i meant (maybe)

Thanks Peter, it makes more sense like this.
Still i think the emails can be improved for both slide and digital shooters.
By pointing out the problem more specific the email can shrink quite a lot which will reduce the A.net server load, get ride of most threads like this one(although this one is turning out rather nice), people will be helped in a more constructive way(for sure the newcomers), less "bad" uploads so less emails have to be send anyway reducing the server load even more.

The pointers you are talking about can(or maybe they even are) be published on the website so there will be no need to mail them over and over again.
The email with the appropriate rejection reason can also include a link to the pointers on the website for one who is wandering.
All in all we only need a very small email by which screeners workload might be reduced too.
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1639
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:14 pm

The standard rejection messages are dreadful in my opinion and there has to be a balance between the time the rejection takes the screener and the information that the photographer is given (and often needs)
Jan makes the point that this could simply be a ticked box.
There could be one standard rejection message for all with a ticked box for the problems which would narrow down the rejection area and be more helpful to the photographer, surely a good aim.
The full length (annoying, sometimes inappropriate) standard rejections would not need sending out then, scanner etc as people could be directed to a rejection advice area.
When I started I found the rejections daunting. I still get them but have learned a hell of a lot in a year.
Without the rejections we would not be moving forward, as a site and as individual photographers. Just try looking at the other sites and see where the quality photos are.
Mick Bajcar
 
billsville
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 5:46 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:18 pm

Wietse

Quoting Wietse (reply 30):
Sorry, but appearantly you do not. Both samples you have posted are clearly not acceptable on Airliners.net. Look at the halo around the nose gear on the FedEx shot, that would be faulty sharpening.



yes I do, but I'm not argueing that point.


Quoting Wietse (reply 30):
They can't do both, can they? It's either guessing what the pic looks like and typing a complete resume on how to fix that, or looking at the pic, studying it, and tick the correct boxes and expect some effort from the photographers side to interpret these messages. Can't have it both ways.


It doesnt take long to type "too much Noise", "Spots above left wing". We're not asking for a novel just a few words that are direct to the point for the rejection.




Quoting Wietse (reply 30):
haha, so after one batch of uploaded photos, you know all about what it takes to get photos accepted?


I have been looking at this webiste for many years, and I have many friends who contibute here. I'm well informed as to the process.

Quoting Wietse (reply 30):
Just re-read the rejection message, and get a good comparison between your pics and the pics in the database. There IS a standard you can compare your pictures to. Nobody forces you to sign up.


You've missed the point. The emails are vague. The standards of the pics in the current database vary widely. There is no way to do a comparision. Why do you think so many people feel frustrated?

Please don't make it personal Wietse, I'm trying to discuss the process, NOT the people.
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:25 pm

I am not attacking you, I am sure you are a nice guy, an internet forum is no way to judge someone.

But I am discussing the way you come rushing in here acting like you know it all, but clearly, you do not. I do not mean this as an attack on you, but if 12 out of 12 pictures are deleted, that should say something, right?

Perhaps I am wrong, and there really is a lot of biase and luck, and prejudice, and rampant disadvantaging of new members going on. I just find it strange that out of all those thousands of photographers that upload daily, only a handful ever comes in here complaing about these things. At least I have never been disadvantaged by the screeners before, so that is why I am the "constant screeners asskisser" (as noted by people that did not know I read that)

Wietse
Wietse de Graaf
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:29 pm

On the email side i agree with you Billsville as you probably noticed.
I have to agree with the screeners though when it comes to typing which should be kept to an absolute minimum, your example does indeed not take to much time but if you have 250 images to go and they all require a personal note it will be very time consuming.
Therefore i think the checkbox idea is a possible solution to think about at the A.net side.
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
 
KLGAviation
Posts: 234
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:00 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 10:35 pm

Guys,

Before reading through this whole topic, I will tell you what I have gathered from the screening process. It's subjective.

Those who get shots into the database NEVER have anything bad to say about it. Yet, those who don't get shots in the database certainly think it's flawed.

One more thing. An above comment was that "There are SOOOO many photographers we could never remember all their names anyhow." Therefore, only the good ones are remembered, I assume. I feel that certain photographers get away with "questionable" motives and questionable quality, but the reason it's not concrete is that our own personal opinions of our photos is blurring reality. Hypothetically, if someone uploads a photo, it could photographically suck yet they still think it is incredible (because they took it, of course). This strong sense of selfism (<--not ment in as "selfish") can make us view other photos differently then we view our own.

Bill, you did a lot better than I did on my first 30 uploads or so. Keep trying, and always upload at 1024*. Big grin

Chris



Chris
There is a fine line between a picture and a photo. The latter seems to be disappearing.
 
embraer145
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 9:01 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:06 pm

Quoting Wietse (reply 30):
Aart, there are 2 different things; asking a question, and listening to the answers. You are constantly not listening to the answers given by regular (and succesful) uploaders. You start a thread, asking "why the pics didn't get in", you get responses, but then you just ignore the answers that pick the screeners' side, because you already made up your own answer and nobody is going to change that for you.


Hi Wietse (here we go again)

FYI I haven't start a thread for ages, because I edit my pics the way I like to do that. I know you don't like them (you made that clear around six months ago). As I can remember my pictures where a waist of time for the screeners and not worth to upload. (That was your positive feedback about improving pictures six months ago). At this moment I have around 600 pics in the db so what is succesful. And I also know my pics will not attract the number of hits like your pics. I prefer sideshots and not the way you are shooting. But as written earlier that's personal. And in my opinion the number of hits has nothing to do with being a succesful photographer.
I am finished again with another unuseful discussion with you, whatever your status may be here with a lot of other A.netters.


Being constructive again:
I've read a couple of posts from others about the rejectionmails. What Jan Mogren has written about the ticketboxes is very good and not too difficult to import for the screeners. Short messages are easier to understand than the long rejectionmails. As Willem has written: what does he (and with him a lot of other DSLR-photographers) have to do with all the appointments of improving a scan. Short appointments like: overexposed, unlevel, too dark, too light, jagged etc. Say a lot more and are easier to interpret
DAI - Dutch Aviation Images.
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:10 pm

Billsville,
about your uploading 12 pix:
it says in the upload FAQ "We do recommend however that you start with sending in one or two. If they pass the quality check, you can go ahead and send in more. If not, you haven't wasted an afternoon sending in a bunch of photos that were all rejected"

/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
diezel
Posts: 622
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 6:50 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:22 pm

When the forum members were yelling for more screeners we got more screeners, when we were yelling for a quote system in the forums we got one (and it's working perfectly!).

Now lately there have been a lot of photogs complaining about the screening process, so I guess this is also noted by the crew. They do a good job in maintaining the side, so I think something will be done about this in the future (but hey, I can be wrong).

I do agree with Chris that we often look at our own photos with a different set of eyes which does not always make it easy to understand the infamous BADQUALITY rejection. It would be a great improvement to the side if something can be done about that, without hassling the screeners too much.

Still enjoying it here though.

Roel.
Never be afraid of what you like. (Miles Davis)
 
TZ
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 9:21 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Fri Feb 25, 2005 11:51 pm

Please read to the end before hanging me for something!

Quoting Embraer145 (reply 37):
Short appointments like: overexposed, unlevel, too dark, too light, jagged etc. Say a lot more and are easier to interpret

badexposure = Image is badly exposed, either too dark or too bright. Should not be hard to work out which.
badangle = image is not level.
badjagged = image is jagged.

So, I don't think we need to type those things into the personal-comments section (while screening) when they are already covered.

What I do completely agree with is the many people who have said that the rejection emails could be improved. We've been talking about that for a while behing the scenes, and we'd like to revise the way that works. One of our ideas is to state just the rejection categories in that email, with an HTML link to a webpage which describes the rejection category in more detail.. This "could" include photographs which illustrate the rejections. Such an overhaul would not be quick and may bring as many problems as it causes. It's clear that generic messages are unpopular, but if we get too specific then that could lead to critism that the explanations don't cover a broad enough range of issues. That does not stop us from developing these ideas, and any positive suggestions here will, of course, be considered in that process.

Thanks to all those who've contributed so positively.

Tamsin (a.net screening crew)
TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Sat Feb 26, 2005 12:55 am

Ok lots written hear and I'm not going to read everything but will comment on a general level.

Yes the rejection emails are outdated and can be improved, and this will no doubt be done in the future. I think however with the recent improvements to the site you can't ask for everything to be improved at once. This is just one thing on a long "to do list". Nothing wrong with bringing it up again, but be patient also. Rejection reasons will continue to be generic though, and most likely only after having some experience with acceptions and rejections will you be able to quickly see what the screeners were looking for in an image. Personal rejections is simply IMPOSSIBLE, the queue would be out of control within days.

Aside from that there is nothing wrong with the screening process, or "flawed" as this topic calls it. Some people just want to make it seem that way, and constantly complain about their rejections in the forum (no this is not aimed at all posts in the forum, I know some people are honestly asking for help). It's a case of a small group being very vocal making it seem like there's a problem.

Tim (shooting real sideshots)
Alderman Exit
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9042
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Sat Feb 26, 2005 1:35 am

The ironic part of this thread, in my opinion, is that I started a thread with the exact same title 2.5 years ago.

Boy a lot has changed in that time, the most important being that I actually learned what this website was all about, and how to succesfully upload a picture.

http://www.airliners.net/discussions...iation_photography/read.main/64121

I remember how I thought I was convinced that the screeners had a vendetta against certain people, and that I was being treated unfairly. I remember thinking that it must be jealously, after all I take the best pictures, am better looking, and have the good fortune of living in Seattle  Big thumbs up Okay I made that last part up, but now having been on "the other side" I can assure you there are no evil plots. Myself and my fellow team members are much too busy with screening, our hobby, and our lives to worry about such silly things.

Screening isn't easy, and some of the rejection reasons are a bit myopic, but we make do with what we have. I, along with many of our fellow crew members, are always available to answer questions or help with the process.

I am a photographer and contributor to this website first and foremost.

Royal
 
embraer145
Posts: 305
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 9:01 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Sat Feb 26, 2005 1:37 am

Quoting Tamsin (reply 40):
So, I don't think we need to type those things into the personal-comments section (while screening) when they are already covered.


It's not necessary to type all these things personally. If you now have a couple of "buttons" which you can choose for a rejection. It must be easy for a software specialist to make them simpler without the long text. That's what I am writing about. The things you have mentioned will be fine and very clear for everybody. Simple, One sentence and easy to understand for everybody. And a lot less confusing then the actual system.
DAI - Dutch Aviation Images.
 
Psych
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Sat Feb 26, 2005 1:58 am

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (reply 19):
Quoting Psych (reply 15):
in the first there is a clear dust spot above and to the right of the nose - and that is always a reason for a bad quality rejection


Wrong. dust spot --> baddirty


Sorry about that one - I do know that one really.

Quoting KLGAviation (reply 36):
Those who get shots into the database NEVER have anything bad to say about it.


Chris - I have to say that I cannot agree with you on that one. I, for one, know that I have felt critical of the process - see this recent thread. For me it is the manner in which criticisms and observations are made that matters. I don't see any point in slagging a screener off, even if - as in that thread - I felt a wrong decision had been made. I believe they had their reasons and think it unlikely that they were acting in anything other than good faith.

But, ultimately, screeners are attempting to apply the site acceptance/rejection rules to what they see - and we can't escape the fact that that will be subjective - and therefore people will disagree. Of course, I want people to agree with my opinion, but my experience over the last 5 or so months has showed me that my opinions have changed. Some of my early uploads (and do bear in mind I would never upload a photo I myself thought to be under par) I would now reject myself.

It seems that most of us are in agreement that the rejection emails could be better. I share the view that they are too general and there needs to be something more specific. I prefer the suggestion of tick boxes with very punchy subjects - such as 'soft'; 'sensor dust spot'; 'jaggies' etc etc. I would also like a separate lot of similar tick boxes where the screener could indicate whether they think doing 'x' or 'y' would make the photo good enough to upload again, or a 'give this one up mate' option. But as soon as I type that I can imagine the problems inherent in that - e.g. one screener says sort the dust spot out and it'll be okay - photographer does that, only for it to be rejected by another screener for some other factor. Having never screened I don't know how much extra time it would take to give more details - but my guess is the standard rejections could be revamped so that they could be much more specific.

I am heartened to hear that this issue is being discussed in the background and maybe there may be a few alternate proposals put out to consultation. That would be healthy, though we can know we won't all agree.

For me one of the best uses of this Forum is for people unsure of the reason for their rejection to post that and get constructive feedback - I've learned a lot from doing that myself and reading other people's threads.

Paul
 
futterman
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 11:04 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Sat Feb 26, 2005 4:01 am

It's all Sam's fault.  Nuts

Quoting Billsville (reply 0):
I offer the above post not as a critique, but as constructive criticism.


What may surprise you is that, as has been said over and over and over again, it works both ways. While you do have a justifiable and reasonable view on the existence of actual help from the screeners, the reasons for rejection they select are mere pieces of 'constructive criticism.' Nothing more, nothing less. No critiquing, as that would only be the case if there were real remarks.

So, either you're a massive hypocrite (don't mean it personally), or when somebody said "everybody's a critic", they weren't kidding.


Quoting Billsville (reply 7):
A question if I may. If the screeners are dealing with such a large amount of photos and they can't type a simple message surely they can't also be giving the photo the due considerations it deserves???


This has some serious implications on 'public relations'. Sounds like a great idea--I support it, and I'm sure the vast majority of the regular posters around here would too. Personally, I tend to breathe easier when I see a personal message from the screeners telling me that I missed a dust spot big enough to scare a blind man.

But the fact remains that there is no feasible way to filter the people who don't care from the over confident and presumptuous from the honest, zealous uploaders. What happens next? Johan gets a mouthful from an irate photographer who took offense from a screener's generic comment. You'd see a LOT more bitching and moaning than there already is over "bad---". At most, just rephrase the current reasons and revise the explanations to suit the changing times and demographic.

I understand the simplicity of your suggestion, but there's more to it than meets the eye.

_________________________________________________________________


While you may be a veteran from a visitor standpoint, you are just as much a newbie to uploading as the next guy is. The best remedy for this Anti-Airliners.net frame of mind (that everything is flawed) is to just breathe, stand back, and reassess your thoughts in a few weeks. In the big picture, this site is here only to exhibit the interests of its creator. However right and logical you may be, there is ALWAYS something more corrupt and pathetic.

And that, my friend, is why Airliners.net is so great.  Big grin


Brian
What the FUTT?
 
BREmer
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 7:50 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Sat Feb 26, 2005 4:05 am

I've never spent too much stuying the a.net standards, but I have to say the rejection e-mails really don't help me too much. 'Bad quality' can be almost anything.

The pre-made categories were - that's what I think - created when uploads to a.net were usually still made with analog cameras. However in the last months and years we have seen a dramatic increase of people owning a DSLR and equipment, so the upload quality and amount of uploaded pictures has risen dramatically. I think through this, some of the rejection reasons have simply become too vague. Not wrong, but to a state where many people are just puzzled why their pictures have been rejected.

It would be great if Johan, the screeners and maybe even the forum users could sit together some day and work over the screening categories. All that has to be done is to specify the categories a bit more. It wouldn't take too much time from the screeners to select from additional categories (sensor dust, oversharpened, etc. etc.) and it would be easier for us photographers to see what exactly is wrong with the image. I do a lot of post-processing to my pictures, but sometimes I really don't see the screener's point until I have really really concentrated on the picture. There have been times where I freaked over a rejected picture and then realizd how many more possibilities for improvements there were that I just didn't see before.

I'd also like to suggest another step: Instead of writing down reasons how to improve this or that, make an example and link it to the rejection e-mail. For example: If a picture is rated 'badsoft', that link would include a 'before-after' version of a typical 'badsoft' picture and naming some helpful tools (unsharp mask, color level etc.) I think a lot of photographers don't even know what you can get out of your shots if you post-process them properly. Maybe after seeing a 'before-after' picture, they realize that 2-minute editing doesn't make the perfect picture.

Just my $0.02, of course this is and stays Johan's site so I'll continue to have to accept his rules whether I like 'em or not.  Big grin

Lukas
 
NIKV69
Posts: 10889
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 4:27 am

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Sat Feb 26, 2005 4:35 am

Futterman,

You can remove your lips from anet's ass now!  Love

He was just merely voicing his opinion. He is a newbie to the way anet handles it's screening of uploaded photos which is not flawed. He was wondering why a more detailed email can be sent but all of us know that could not be possible with the amount of photos that are screened and the fact this forum is here where he can post rejections and get help from the photographers here. Which only helps the quality on ones photos.

Billsville,

Your taking this a little too personally. Every picture uploaded gets a fair shake. Being a new person uploading means nothing. I looked at your FedEx pic and the lighting seemed a little off, the reflection or glare bouncing off the fuselage hurt the shot. Anet is the highest standard as aviation pics go so you have to consider this. There are many good photographers here that will be more than happy to look at your rejections and help you if you post a thread asking for help, just don't post already accepted pictures from other photographers for comparison or think there is a conspiracy for rejections. Both will not win friends here!

Your pics are very good, just need some improvements to meet the criteria here, take the advice, snap some more pics and move on.
Hey that guy with the private jet can bail us out! Why? HE CAN AFFORD IT!
 
jumbojim747
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 8:05 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Sat Feb 26, 2005 7:59 am

Hey clickhappy
That previous thread you started looked funny because you where not a screener then but a screener being a critic of the screening process looked out of place. Smile
On a wing and a prayer
 
billsville
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 5:46 pm

RE: Is The Photo Screening Process Flawed?

Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:24 am

All,

Thanks to all who have contributed.

This topic was not a personal vendetta but merely an inquiry as to why the process works the way it does. From my point of view it seems flawed in that if your photo gets rejected there is no specific reason given as to why.

Its all about perception and if the site is trying to encourage good photography, the rejection process doesn't seem to encourage a new photographer very much.

One thing about forums like this is that you can never determine the authors full intent. I'm trying to spark discussion, not emote anything negative. Please don't misconstrue.

There have been a couple of posts that said that because its my first uploads and series of rejections, I have no right to question the process. So should I only be able to question it after I have uploaded what, 10, 20 , 100. This way of thinking only reinforces the view held by some (but not myself) that there is favoritism. You should be able to question the process whether you have 1 or 10,000 uploads.

Let me again say I don't think there is any bias of any type.

Once again thanks to all who have given constructive comments, I have fixed the rejected photos and will try to upload again. This still does not change my mind about the process being flawed and the possibility's of better methods being used.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], MinorLogan and 9 guests