atco
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 2:30 am

Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jun 29, 2005 9:06 pm

Well here's a first, 7 uploads all rejected

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r.../big/220505_coa737_n27733_sxm2.jpg

Badquality, Badsoft, Badcopyright (Actually Badpersonal, but the text from the screener was "Label")............bad quality, that was a surprise !!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...s/big/220505_crl332_fhcat_sxm2.jpg

Badquality, Badcentered, Badpersonal (copyright)

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ons/big/180605_csa310_okyad_yz.jpg

Badpersonal (copyright)

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ns/big/180605_afr343_fglzm_yz3.jpg

Badquality, Badcameraangle

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...fat72_n407at_sxm2.jpg&appealed=yes

Badpersonal (copyright)

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...ji722_n794aj_sxm2.jpg&appealed=yes

Badpersonal (copyright)

Just a note about the copyright thing. If you look through my last 1000 or so shots on this database they contain exactly the same copyright notice applied in exatly the same way. I thought the rule was that copyright marks are OK as long as they were not visible on the thumnail?

One was a badangle, which on reflection was correct.

Looks like I may be back to 5 upload slots before long !  

[Edited 2005-06-29 14:07:01]

[Edited 2005-06-29 14:07:42]
Canon through and through
 
OD720
Posts: 1856
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2003 6:46 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jun 29, 2005 9:22 pm

You're lucky that you're not doing this for a living  Big grin
 
G-CIVP
Posts: 1419
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 6:38 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jun 29, 2005 9:25 pm

Garry - Had a quick look at these and have to go with the screeners conclusions. CSA A310 is grey and horrid. The AF A340 is ropey, especially with the photographers in the base of the photo. The Corseair A330 (if I recall correctly) at St.M is badly framed (although I see what you are trying to achieve).

Probably doesn't help.
 
fergulmcc
Posts: 1877
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jun 29, 2005 9:31 pm

Quoting Atco (Thread starter):
Just a note about the copyright thing. If you look through my last 1000 or so shots on this database they contain exactly the same copyright notice applied in exatly the same way. I thought the rule was that copyright marks are OK as long as they were not visible on the thumnail?

That was my understanding of the rule too.

Fergul Big grin
Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
 
cabbott
Posts: 496
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2000 5:09 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jun 29, 2005 9:36 pm

Hi Gary

Most of those photographs rock! No bad quality there.

The A340 is not good for me. I like photographers but I dont want to see them in a.net photos.

The CSA is a good style of shot but its a little dark.

Maybe some of your shots are to artistic for here? Get yourself over to LHR 27R, spent a day then upload everything from your CF card and bore us all to death.
 
ChrisH
Posts: 1120
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 4:25 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jun 29, 2005 9:42 pm

The badsoft on the CO 737 really isn't warranted. Very harsh imo.
what seems to be the officer, problem?
 
atco
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 2:30 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jun 29, 2005 9:55 pm

I knew the CSA was borderline at best, I thought it was worth trying because of the unusual low level flight attitude........Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
I suspected it would probably be baddark, but it was only given badpersonal (again copyright label).
Canon through and through
 
Tommy Mogren
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2000 9:30 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jun 29, 2005 10:27 pm

Quoting Atco (Thread starter):
I thought the rule was that copyright marks are OK as long as they were not visible on the thumnail?

Exactly, but sometimes it feels like they will reject it if it's visible at all...
Too bad they don't simply follow the rules in that case...

What harm does a small copyright do ?
Your's is nicely done as well...

For a database of aircraft, I find it strange that they are so picky about that.

Tommy Mogren
Flightdeck Action - Cockpit Videos on Blu-ray and DVD - Flights In The Cockpit- You're Invited!
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jun 29, 2005 10:32 pm

What is the purpose of that additional copyright anyway? It took like 20 seconds to remove it.
 
Tommy Mogren
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2000 9:30 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jun 29, 2005 10:36 pm

Quoting JeffM (Reply 8):
What is the purpose of that additional copyright anyway?

Oh Jeff,

Like I've said enough times in the related thread...

every little step...

Besides, Even if it only takes 20 seconds to remove it...
Why can we still have it ?

It's not like it ruins the picture...

Tommy Mogren
Flightdeck Action - Cockpit Videos on Blu-ray and DVD - Flights In The Cockpit- You're Invited!
 
tfsphoto
Posts: 732
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 6:07 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:13 am

By Label, i think they mean the Heineken logo in the picture...
 
atco
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 2:30 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:16 am

Because Jeff if you find your picture being used somewhere and the copyright has been cloned out it shows that the picture has been purposely stolen and edited..........in other words intent.

Why do you lock your front door and shut your windows, I mean it won't stop a determined burglar will it?
Its just extra steps you take to protect your property, isn't it?

EDIT: Most of the links will not work now as I have appealed 2 (1 accepted, thanks) and now appealed another 2

Thanks all for the comments (Lost 10 upload slots Big grin)

[Edited 2005-06-29 18:39:11]
Canon through and through
 
ua777222
Posts: 2987
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 11:23 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 4:27 am

I had a hard time finding the copywrite so I don't think it was too obvious.

Thanks,

Matt
"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
 
SnowJ
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:24 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 5:11 am

Hey don't feel bad dude, I'm none for nine today, and it seems since the site has had it's regime change, they're finding more and more reasons to reject photos. Granted I agree with some of the comments above, but they're great shots! I'm beginning to lose my patience for the simple fact that I'm tired of my photos being "not good enough", and am thinking of going the way of many other former A.net photographers and going elsewhere. Everyone has their opinion and I frankly don't care who has something to say in rebuttal to this, but I honestly think it sucks and I've about had enough. I've given it a fair chance and I'm losing my patience fast. I understand it's supposed to make you a "better photographer", but I could be making money off of probably 85% of the "rejects" I've had over the last year. Not that I will mind you, I shoot for the love of it, but when you're constantly told that all the work and effort you've put into your photos is for sh*t...well that's crossed the line for me.  irked   mad   banghead   boggled 
Jaysen F. Snow - Midwest Tail Chasers
 
ltena
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:51 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 5:55 am

Hi, cool photos but I dont think its possible to upload photos with your copyrights in watermark as I can see in the top left of them...
Luis Tena Orozco. Why drink and drive when you can smoke and fly
 
willo
Posts: 1331
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:21 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 6:01 am

Yep, same boat today. 5 submissions, 5 rejections all for badquality.

This was originally "badjagged" and "badcategory".

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...jections/big/n109tf040605epsom.jpg

Reworked from scratch and resubmitted. This time "badquality"

http://www.lyntons.plus.com/planes/images/r-n109tf040605epsoma.jpg

Appealed and rejected. Can someone please tell me what is wrong with it because I'm afraid I don't know?  worried 
 
sidewinder
Posts: 182
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 10:15 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:13 am

Quoting Atco (Thread starter):
Well here's a first, 7 uploads all rejected

I am new to a.net and this has been my experience so far...

I have uploaded exactly 7 photos to this website...all have been rejected. This gets very discouraging, I have gone out and purchased new equipment, photo editing software, and spent hours learning the camera and software as well as spent countless hours at the airport.

It does appear that if you have a unique photo that they will lower the standard of quality.

I know that they have thousands of photos to screen.."but throw me a freaken bone people"
"I don't think I will ever get over Macho Grande"
 
Dehowie
Posts: 1068
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:41 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:17 am

Nice helo shots Willo.
Cheers and better luck next time
Darren
2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
 
eadster
Posts: 2125
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:31 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 11:38 am

Quoting SnowJ (Reply 13):
I'm tired of my photos being "not good enough", and am thinking of going the way of many other former A.net photographers and going elsewhere.

You're not the only one!

Some of us here do this as a hobby and love every minute of it.

It does get very upsetting to think that we go out and enjoy taking pics. I actully leave the airport thinking that maybe others would enjoy looking at my work on A.net. Then a few days later to have all that work rejected, sometimes does get to you.

[Edited 2005-06-30 04:40:43]
 
SnowJ
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:24 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:30 pm

Exactly. I'm glad to see that someone agrees with at least part of what I've said for a change.  Wink
Jaysen F. Snow - Midwest Tail Chasers
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:40 pm

Quoting Tommy Mogren (Reply 9):
Quoting JeffM (Reply 8):
What is the purpose of that additional copyright anyway?

Oh Jeff,

Like I've said enough times in the related thread...

every little step...

Please...in my opinion you might just be taking this a little too seriously. Why not just put your initials in the photo someplace? I have a few hundred with them in it. You will only see them when the photo is at 200% and they are rarely in the same place more then once. Be creative.

Quoting Atco (Reply 11):
Why do you lock your front door and shut your windows, I mean it won't stop a determined burglar will it?
Its just extra steps you take to protect your property, isn't it?

No, actually the alarm won't set with the door and window unlocked. We don't have alarms on pictures.........
 
CallMeCapt
Posts: 478
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 3:21 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:43 pm

I think we're all forgetting there is the other site, www.myaviation.net, which has no rejections. Personally, I don't mind if a photo gets rejected here, because I learn from it. There has been 2 photos I have taken which I dispute, but maybe I don't see something where a screener does.
It's all fine and appreciated that people go out to the airport and spend however many hours there taking photos in whatever weather only to have your photos rejected, BUT, if it gets rejected, learn from your rejection. Don't just delete the email and go out and take more photos using the same technique and same post processing hoping THIS time, they will get accepted.
Photos DO get accepted, and I can testify to this. The reason is I can testify to this is because my first upload and rejection was quite disgraceful and am very glad it has been deleted off the rejection database. That was 6 months ago. 2 weeks ago, I had 16 photos from 18 accepted. Today, I had 3 rejections with 2 in second screening. Closely looked at the photos and saw where I went wrong. Not bragging, just pointing out that if you want to get your photos accepted here, expect rejections and hope for acceptances. It's not a personal attack.
Just my $0.02.
Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:51 pm

Quoting CallMeCapt (Reply 21):
just pointing out that if you want to get your photos accepted here, expect rejections and hope for acceptances.

If you want acceptances....Learn what gets them. Hope does nothing, experience and knowledge is the key. The more you have of both the better off you will be.
 
atco
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 2:30 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:53 pm

Well the Continental 737 was rejected as badquality on appeal, if anyone can point out exactly what is badquality about it I would love to know.

And the Corsair was also rejected as badquality and badcentered

Although this pic:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andreas Barowski


Seems to be adequately centered (Not sure about the horizon though)

If that Continental shot is badquality then I'm not really sure how much better I am supposed to make a shot look!
Canon through and through
 
CallMeCapt
Posts: 478
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 3:21 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 12:54 pm

Quoting JeffM (Reply 22):
Hope does nothing

For some people.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 22):
experience and knowledge is the key

Agree with you on this, though.
Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
 
bigphilnyc
Posts: 3874
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2002 10:43 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:02 pm

I wanna say that the original Continental shot is gorgeous.
Phil Derner Jr.
 
SnowJ
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:24 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:05 pm

Quoting JeffM (Reply 20):
No, actually the alarm won't set with the door and window unlocked. We don't have alarms on pictures.........

 rotfl 

Can't argue with that.
Jaysen F. Snow - Midwest Tail Chasers
 
CallMeCapt
Posts: 478
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 3:21 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 1:06 pm

Just had a look at the original continental. Maybe it's my screen, most of the aircraft looks good, but some parts look soft. Engines, tail and elevators to be exact.
Otherwise, Love it!
Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
 
Tommy Mogren
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2000 9:30 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:10 pm

Quoting JeffM (Reply 20):
in my opinion you might just be taking this a little too seriously

Jeff, you are entitled to your opinion, and maybe I am taking it seriously. Too seriously even ? Well, maybe...depends on how you look at it.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 20):
Why not just put your initials in the photo someplace?

I have my name on almost all my shots, so that's no problem.
What I was objecting to was the silly rejections Garry got because of his little copyright text. It was so nicely done and put in the corner.
The rules used to be, it's ok if you can't see it on the thumbnail.
I'm now happy to see that Garry got some nice shots added where it was ok. Like this one:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Garry Lewis - AirTeamImages



Nice one Garry!
 bigthumbsup 

Tommy Mogren
Flightdeck Action - Cockpit Videos on Blu-ray and DVD - Flights In The Cockpit- You're Invited!
 
fergulmcc
Posts: 1877
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Thu Jun 30, 2005 6:36 pm

Including these two...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Garry Lewis - AirTeamImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Garry Lewis - AirTeamImages



Fergul Big grin
Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
 
atco
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 2:30 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Fri Jul 01, 2005 12:27 am

Thanks Tommy, Fergul

Actually maybe my last 500 or so + shots have exactly the same copyright logo, applied in exactly the same way (PS Action), so why suddenly the notice is visible now whereas it did not used to be is a little puzzling to say the least.

All very ironic when the site Administrator is proposing large watermarks on images and an idea even supported by one of the head screeners, who rejected my Amerijet 727 appeal for badcopyright.

Has the copyright rule changed or has my copyright notice suddenly become visible on all the thumbnails?

[Edited 2005-06-30 17:36:37]
Canon through and through
 
SnowJ
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:24 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Fri Jul 01, 2005 6:39 am

Quoting CallMeCapt (Reply 21):
I think we're all forgetting there is the other site, www.myaviation.net, which has no rejections.

Granted, but there's very little effort involved in that, where it's a site where there are no rejections. No offense to anyone that uploads there, but it's a different story than here at A.net. Much more effort is required to get a successful upload here than on MyAviation.net, and therefore it's a different story entirely. Some people--including myself--have been getting frustrated that nearly everything we've submitted in the last couple months has been shot down for whatever reason. Granted it should be difficult, but come on...we're not going to resort to the easy road just to publish. We're proud of our work and we'll keep plugging. I've already vented my frustrations, so I'm just back to plugging away at my photos now, so here's to being HOPEFUL!!  bigthumbsup 
Jaysen F. Snow - Midwest Tail Chasers
 
CallMeCapt
Posts: 478
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 3:21 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Fri Jul 01, 2005 6:48 am

Quoting SnowJ (Reply 31):
Some people--including myself--have been getting frustrated that nearly everything we've submitted in the last couple months has been shot down for whatever reason

If they are rejections that you don't agree with or can't see what the problem is, post the rejection up here and see what kind of feedback you get. Then you can apply that to your next batch.

Quoting SnowJ (Reply 31):
so I'm just back to plugging away at my photos now, so here's to being HOPEFUL!!

Only way to go. Just have a look at my signature on this post.
 Wink
Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
 
SnowJ
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:24 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Sat Jul 02, 2005 1:48 am

Touché, my friend...touché!  

[Edited 2005-07-01 18:49:37]
Jaysen F. Snow - Midwest Tail Chasers
 
J32driver
Posts: 385
Joined: Fri May 05, 2000 2:55 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Sat Jul 02, 2005 2:24 am

Been hanging around this site for about 6 years now. In that time, it seems that the database just keeps getting more and more boring.

It seems like the database use to be about dramatic aviation pictures that were pretty darned good quality. Now, it feels like the database is about absolutely perfect pictures of the sides of airliners. I used to find 1 out of 10 photos really interesting. Now it seems if I'm lucky to find 1 out of 100 that even make me click on the thumbnail.

In short... its moving towards "perfect" and away from "interesting".
 
Tommy Mogren
Posts: 896
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2000 9:30 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Sat Jul 02, 2005 4:11 am

Quoting J32driver (Reply 34):
its moving towards "perfect" and away from "interesting".

True, I wish more artistic shots were allowed.....


Tommy Mogren
Flightdeck Action - Cockpit Videos on Blu-ray and DVD - Flights In The Cockpit- You're Invited!
 
Dehowie
Posts: 1068
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:41 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Sat Jul 02, 2005 12:13 pm

Interesting observation about whats gradually happening.
I was looking through the best shots of all time list and would have to say that the majority today would not get into the DB due to quality issues which would pop up during screening.
Given that they are all great photo's and ALL are in the best of all time list does this raise the issue that by pushing hard for a very high level of quality that the site is cutting itself off from some amazing photo's that dont make it through the screening process.
Does it also mean the site "may" becoming more sterile with thousands of lovely sharp shots of airliners but missing out in other area's?
This is one of the great shots at airliners but today we would never have the oppurtunity to even see it.
Yet it has almost half a million hits and one of the best photos i have ever seen.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Garfinkel


I can see pretty clearly why you want the best possible quality shots on the site but if shots like those in the best of all time list would miss out the question may be has the pendulum swung a little to far?
Cheers
Darren
2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
 
SnowJ
Posts: 204
Joined: Thu Oct 07, 2004 2:24 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Sat Jul 02, 2005 10:35 pm

That's a very good point, Darren. I'm afraid that if anyone tried to upload something like what's in the top list now, they'd be rejected for baduninteresting or badnotperfect.  laughing 

I don't intend this next part to be a screener-bashing session, but I'm sharing what I see with everyone...agree or disagree, it's how I am seeing things today. As I've said before, it's Johan's site, and he'll do what he wants whether we like it or not...fair enough. I DO still think some of the screeners are a bit screwed in the head however, because they're being very "my way or no way" about the photos they process. One small ANYTHING that stands out and the whole picture, no matter how awesome, rare or otherwise outstanding it is, gets shot straight to hell on the midnight express. They don't think about how other people might see the photos and enjoy them...the only thing that matters to them is whether or not it is a photo that THEY want to see. If it doesn't do it for them, then nobody else matters, you know? I am all for high-quality photos, as I don't like crap shots any more than the next person, but come on...it seems like perfection is being demanded from imperfect people, of which I'm certainly one. Just my two hundred cents.  Wink
Jaysen F. Snow - Midwest Tail Chasers
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Sun Jul 03, 2005 11:14 am

Quoting SnowJ (Reply 37):
...it seems like perfection is being demanded from imperfect people,

That's what an underachiever might say. Perfection should be demanded, why settle for less? The bar may have been raised an inch...but it's still easy enough to get over. Hopefully it will continue to rise, if it doesn't, things will get pretty dull around here.

Quoting Dehowie (Reply 36):
This is one of the great shots at airliners but today we would never have the opportunity to even see it.

Nah, unique shots like that will always make it in.
 
javibi
Posts: 1295
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 5:55 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Sun Jul 03, 2005 1:40 pm

Quoting SnowJ (Reply 37):
it seems like perfection is being demanded

IMHO you are missing the point here, it is not perfection A.net is after, they are looking for photos that comply with certain rules which, my opinion again, don't warrant a photo to be perfect at all.

Quoting Tommy Mogren (Reply 35):

True, I wish more artistic shots were allowed....

A lot of us would like that.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 38):
Nah, unique shots like that will always make it in.

I wonder why you are so sure, as Mr. Garfinkel himself probably remember his last wonderful moonshot needed to be appealed to get in.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Garfinkel



Seeing the rejections everybody is posting I really think we are missing lots of beautiful shots for some subtle quality issue which most of people wouldn't ever notice... but so is life!

Back to try not to be an underachiever so I can one day join the ranks of Mr. JeffM and the like


 biggrin 

Cheers

j
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1645
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Sun Jul 03, 2005 5:25 pm

Quoting from a rejection message...I did not have to look too hard to find one....
Don't worry, everyone has their photos rejected from time to time. Our standards are very high. It is and should be difficult to get photos accepted.
With experience and increasingly optimised settings for camera, scanner and photo editor, your acceptance ratio will increase.
Do we not agree with this philosophy, the philosophy of this site ?
I certainly do.

Screening is not an exact science, it is subjective and there are inevitably discrepancies. Atco is one of the best photographers on here and I find it somehow gratifying that he gets rejections too (and I do not mean that in any malicious sort of sense)
To demonstrate how fallible the system is, Fergul used two of Atcos photos as a compliment on his photography, two photographs that have been ACCEPTED onto the database. In my view, and if I had been a screener, I would have rejected one of them as would anyone experienced on this forum if they looked closely enough.
Sorry to point this out Gary, but I use it to demostrate the discrepancies. It is a lovely photo but what is it about the sea at SXM ?
Good for water skiing I guess !
My rejections will, I am sure, keep coming. If their rate does not decrease, then I will worry.
Mick Bajcar
 
javibi
Posts: 1295
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 5:55 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Sun Jul 03, 2005 7:40 pm

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 40):
In my view, and if I had been a screener, I would have rejected one of them as would anyone experienced on this forum

...which is an absolute pity, because it seems WE ALL do not look at pictures with open minds anymore, but instead look for the most minor issues (Look at that one, it is 0,15 degrees unlevel, there are a couple of jaggies under the registration and it is a tad soft on the tail! Oh, and the thing is not perfectly centered!!  Wink ) instead of the OVERALL result.

It is ironic that nowadays, if you want to look for what is, according to our own rules, NOT acceptable for A.net, the best place to look is Editors' Choice, which BTW only got 4 additions so far this year. And yes, I know the non-underachievers would say that is proof that A.net is flexible enough to lower their own standards to get the extraordinary pictures in, but I wonder how many more like those DID NOT make it, because like others have said I am also under the impression that is getting more and more difficult to find out-of-the-ordinary pictures in our DB.

And I do not mean for A.net to lower the bar, there is a reason why I upload here, but on the other hand I think there is room for improvement in the screening process so that we are not systematically killing creativity and at the same time remain the best aviation site.

Cheers

j
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1645
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Sun Jul 03, 2005 8:59 pm

Quoting Javibi (Reply 41):
...which is an absolute pity,

I totally agree, totally. The photograph to which I refer, is magnificent but the instant I even glanced at it as a thumbnail, it glared at me. I love the picture but the horizon is inexcusable, and what is more to the point, unnecessary. That is not something that has come out of a.net, some new concept, it has been an understandable concept since time immemorial....the sea is level. There has to be a damned good reason for a photograph to have that anything other than level.
0.15 degrees out ?
No, it is way more than that!
I have not looked for jaggies, softness or anything else, I rarely do. I seldom check the quality of other peoples photographs, I come here to look at aircraft photographs. Though I love that picture to which I refer, it glares at me. I have been a photographer for a long, long time and decades before I started uploading here, it would have done so.
I apologise again to Gary for drawing attention to it and he might wish to correct it, maybe not. I used it to make the point that where there are subjective considerations, there will always be differences. I am not COMPLAINING that it got through screening, merely commenting. And yes, I have a few on the database with bad angles which I will re-upload once I get a new scanner.
Funnily enough, I met up with Fergul this weekend and he hadn't noticed until I commented so evidently we view them differently. Subjectivity again !
That photograph I still consider to be a great one, but does that mean that it could not be even better?
Subjectivity is a fact of life. If I get rejections I am not looking for a.net to lower the bar, I want to raise my own.
Mick Bajcar
 
atco
Posts: 262
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2001 2:30 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:15 am

It's in the process of being re-worked Mick.

I have just got a new PC and am moving everything from the old one so its taking a little time, but I agree about it being unlevel.

I edited that shot on my laptop while I was in SXM, seems like my eyes were not quite up to standard with that one, but to re-assure you it is all in hand  Smile

Regards

Garry
Canon through and through
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1645
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Mon Jul 04, 2005 1:25 am

Garry
I feel awful saying what I have said and must re-iterate that I really like your photos. That one is a beauty !
Had I have been able to contact you beforehand, I would have done so. I hate these snipe at others threads and I have now partaken of one, but I hope you understand that it was merely to demonstrate the fallability of screening.
Mick
 
gmidy
Posts: 48
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 12:25 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Mon Jul 04, 2005 2:01 am

None for seven.... welcome to my world..... :p
Lawrence
 
javibi
Posts: 1295
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 5:55 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Tue Jul 05, 2005 12:01 am

Mick, when I wrote this:

Quoting Javibi (Reply 41):
Look at that one, it is 0,15 degrees unlevel, there are a couple of jaggies

I was not referring to Garry's shot, it was supposed to be a generic comment, I apologize, English is not my mother language and sometimes I have trouble explaining what I mean.

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 42):
That photograph I still consider to be a great one, but does that mean that it could not be even better?

Yes, but a picture being unlevel is easy to fix. There are other problems you come up with pics when you try to get to the limits that IMHO are simply unavoidable.

Cheers

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

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:17 pm

Quoting Atco (Reply 30):
All very ironic when the site Administrator is proposing large watermarks on images and an idea even supported by one of the head screeners, who rejected my Amerijet 727 appeal for badcopyright.

Nothing ironic here. One thing is the propsed idea of watermarks on the medium and large version of the photos in the database which might be intoduced in the future. The other thing is the still existing rule of copyright logos visible on the thumbnail.
Thanks
Peter
-
 
fergulmcc
Posts: 1877
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 pm

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:29 pm

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 47):
The other thing is the still existing rule of copyright logos visible on the thumbnail.

But Peter, there are photos in the DB where you can see the photographer's copyright in the thumbnails. When did this rule come in?

Fergul Big grin
Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
 
kaddyuk
Posts: 3697
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 1:04 am

RE: Wow, None For Seven

Wed Jul 06, 2005 7:29 pm

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 47):
The other thing is the still existing rule of copyright logos visible on the thumbnail.

But they arent visible, this topic has been here a number of days, this is the 49th reply and still gary hasn't had an official mention of why his photos were rejected for "badpersonal" yet the copyright not being visible in the thumbnail...
Whoever said "laughter is the best medicine" never had Gonorrhea

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests