Psych
Topic Author
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 9:08 pm

I think it is always a good axiom not to post in anger. But I am angry about my experience of A.net over the last week, so shall try to remain rational.

I received another rejection overnight. I appealed, in order to follow procedure in such circumstances, but that was also rejected. Once again, I cannot agree with the decision of the screeners. Here is the photo in question, rejected for 'motive':

Big version: Width: 600 Height: 400 File size: 203kb
Motive Rejection

I put quite a lot of effort into the original framing of this shot in camera, and the subsequent crop in editing. I felt very confident about the motive being acceptable, and wanted to provide some variety to my uploads. My confidence was, in part, based on many previous acceptances for this particular motive - see examples below (and for those who object to personal plugs, the thumbnails show all that is needed).

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Markman
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Markman



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Markman
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Markman


My argument would be that nothing has changed in the way the 'motive' criterion is defined. Yet it seems acceptable for the screeners to change the interpretation of the criterion without identifying this to the photographer community. I am not aware of any clear statement on this between the time that the above were considered acceptable close crops and the present, and I am a regular here.

Too many photographers here are now complaining about such issues and, although I have worked hard to support the site and the crew, I struggle to see any justification for what I perceive to be an 'unlevel playing field' for uploaders.

There needs to be a better communication process between the screening team and uploaders. Legitimate concerns expressed by photographers need to be listened to and - if appropriate - acted upon. There are too many negatives currently with the site that ultimately relate to this issue of communication. I hope someone has seen fit to add this to their to-do list.

Paul
 
viv
Posts: 2953
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 5:17 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 9:47 pm

I fully agree with Paul. His previous acceptances have substantially the same crop as the recently-rejected shot.

Of course, we are constantly told that "standards change". But we are never told when, why, or how they have changed.
Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
 
SNATH
Posts: 3049
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:23 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 10:22 pm

Paul,

Could it maybe be because you can see the faces of the crew quite clearly (notice that on all the others the crew is obscured)?

Tony

PS Great shot BTW!

[Edited 2006-12-16 14:22:59]
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
 
AviatorG
Posts: 255
Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 2:03 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 10:30 pm

 checkmark 

Quoting Viv (Reply 1):
I fully agree with Paul. His previous acceptances have substantially the same crop as the recently-rejected shot.

I am very interested to see what comments 'the' screener would post regarding your rejection. It is very unlikely that this photo was rejected by error, having been rejected twice. I too would be quite angry had this happened to me. banghead  Best of luck finding some resolution with this shot Paul, its another great one for your collection.
 
jajo
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 12:31 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 10:35 pm

Nice to have;

* A "guide" with explanation of all reject reasons and photo examples! For instance, "motiv" would cover exactly what kind of shots that will be accepted in the database. This guide would be updated every time a rule is being changed.
* Some place, maybe a forum section, where screeners (and Johan) can inform on changes.

/ jajo

[Edited 2006-12-16 14:36:19]
 
sulman
Posts: 1963
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:09 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 10:36 pm

Sometimes it happens - you just can't get a shot in despite it being similar to others.

It's a great shot Paul, I wouldn't worry too much about it. Hang it on the wall of your study with the title "dichotomous practice in the field of aviation photography screening (2006 Paul Markman)"


James
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 10:43 pm

Nice shot Paul.
I can understand your frustration but after the recent verbal outburst in Bad Motive, Now Acceptable? (by UnattendedBag Dec 15 2006 in Aviation Photography)
I would be very surprised if any of the screeners would spend some time to post here in the forum in the near future. But hey, that's just normal in this zoo here. The vocal argumentative minority wins against the majority having a common sense left.
-
 
User avatar
ptrjong
Posts: 4107
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:38 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 10:49 pm

Quoting Jajo (Reply 4):
A "guide" with explanation of all reject reasons and photo examples! For instance, "motiv" would cover exactly what kind of shots that will be accepted in the database

There are far too many variables.

Peter
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
 
Psych
Topic Author
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:04 pm

Quoting SNATH (Reply 2):
Could it maybe be because you can see the faces of the crew quite clearly

No - that's not a problem at all for motive. The pilots being visible in their working environment is fine for motive. In fact, I would argue that their visibility here enhances the motive.

The problem in the screeners' eyes must be the space above and below the fuselage. My argument would be that this is a very minor issue, given the other positive aspects of the image. Also, it is as it is because I am constrained by other site demands - I am not allowed to crop in any ratio 'narrower' than 3:2 (even by a little bit) and I would feel that cropping closer on the left and right would not allow the image to 'breathe' (and could get me a motive rejection for that).

For me this is a good image, worthy of a place here, and it is being rejected following a subjective - and stringent - reading of this rule. I want to feel screeners look for reasons to accept a shot, and only reject if the problems are clear.

Paul
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:11 pm

Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
I think it is always a good axiom not to post in anger.



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
shall try to remain rational.



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
I put quite a lot of effort into the original framing of this shot



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
I felt very confident



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
My argument



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
change the interpretation of the criterion without identifying this to the photographer community



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
and I am a regular here.



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
Too many photographers here are now complaining about such issues



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
I struggle to see any justification for what I perceive to be an 'unlevel playing field'



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
needs to be a better communication process between the screening team and uploaders.



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
need to be listened to and - if appropriate - acted upon



Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
I hope someone has seen fit to add this to their to-do list.

Reading your posts becomes more and more like watching a soap opera. Even the small snippets above are longer then what most people post.

You make a lot of demands for someone with zero authority here. We have no "photographer's rights". You get what is given to you here whether you've been around for 8 years or 8 days.

So you get a rejection you don't like, you write a book about it, (sniff, sniff), and i'm sure you won't drop it until you get your way. The posts here are becoming more and more like I remember at Brand -X.
 
tappan
Posts: 1478
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 1999 9:30 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:17 pm

I have to say..These posts are getting tired and do no good. I am quite sure that the screeners have a gazillion pics to judge. We all have to live with these rejections. I have been rejected on probably my last 20 tries and at one point (many years ago) I had some of the most hits/views etc...We all have to accept and move on.
Mark Garfinkel
p.s I do, however, like the photo that started this thread.
 
Fly747
Posts: 1361
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:03 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:50 pm

I think Paul has a valid point. You could call these his "trademark shots" he's uploaded before with no problems. It seems odd that they get rejected twice. Usually when there's a change to the motive rule we get some sort of a notice.
I guess we missed it this time.
Nice picture Paul.

Ivan
 
Psych
Topic Author
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:51 pm

Jeff - to be honest, given your apparent contempt for much of what I have to say, I am surprised you bother to open any of my threads.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 9):
You make a lot of demands for someone with zero authority here

If I sound like I am making demands then I apologise to readers. My recent posts have been motivated by a genuine desire to see improvements for us all. Of course I don't like rejections, but my post here is motivated by a desire to see better communication between elements within the site. I think this is a fundamental problem for photographers with the site these days, and I know I am not on my own. Screeners feel driven away from the Forum, and people like me who feel we have genuine issues to grapple with have an increasingly ineffective forum for discussion.

But I reckon their are too many deaf ears and so I will learn my lesson and stop. I am sure you will be cheering  wink .

Paul
 
User avatar
acontador
Posts: 1381
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:54 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:51 pm

Quoting JeffM (Reply 9):
So you get a rejection you don't like, you write a book about it, (sniff, sniff), and i'm sure you won't drop it until you get your way.

Sorry Jeff, but instead of going into all the work you did for posting your reply, why wouldn't you use all this time and effort to help Paul understand why this picture was rejected? OK, the screeners might be off (again) for a while, but at least WE can help ourselves, can we???
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
 
9V
Posts: 1368
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:35 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sat Dec 16, 2006 11:57 pm

You gotta remember Paul, PIA 777's are common as hell now at MAN. There are hunderds similar shots already on here and you already have almost identical shots.

However, it does look slightly different. The crop looks slightly odd to me. The pic looks slightly too oblong and looks awkwardly cropped where the left hand side landing gear is.

Just my 2c.

 Smile
 
User avatar
ThierryD
Crew
Posts: 2029
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:58 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:05 am

Quoting Tappan (Reply 10):
We all have to accept and move on.

Yeah, I guess moving on is always the easiest way to treat an issue...  no 

I agree with your opinions expressed in this thread Paul, however I'm also sure it won't lead us anywhere as it falls under the usual screening inconsistency issue and we've had tons of similar threads.
The source of this issue originates at a higher level and it won't be solved by single photographers posting rejected shots especially since, as Peter noticed, these threads mostly lead to verbal outbursts and thus keep ever more screeners away from the forum.


Quoting JeffM (Reply 9):
We have no "photographer's rights". You get what is given to you here whether you've been around for 8 years or 8 days.

This is right and wrong. I thougt we'd already come to the conclusion some months ago that the site is a symbiosis between Johan and the photographers; neither one can live without the other. And if you depend on someone you should listen to his needs and take care that he feels alright otherwise you'll end up feeling quite bad yourself.


I think it would be a good thing if we all took the opportunity of this contemplative phase of the year to think some things over and re-start with full energy next year. (I know this might sound a little pathetic ...  Wink)

A good point to start with would be to work on our culture of discussion.

Thierry
"Go ahead...make my day"
 
Kukkudrill
Posts: 1039
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2004 10:11 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:13 am

Quoting Acontador (Reply 13):
Sorry Jeff, but instead of going into all the work you did for posting your reply, why wouldn't you use all this time and effort to help Paul understand why this picture was rejected? OK, the screeners might be off (again) for a while, but at least WE can help ourselves, can we???

 checkmark   checkmark   checkmark 
Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:27 am

Quoting Acontador (Reply 13):
Sorry Jeff, but instead of going into all the work you did for posting your reply, why wouldn't you use all this time and effort to help Paul understand why this picture was rejected?

Not my job. He's a big boy, to me the rejection is valid.

Quoting Tappan (Reply 10):
I have to say..These posts are getting tired and do no good.

 checkmark 

Quoting Tappan (Reply 10):
We all have to live with these rejections....We all have to accept and move on.

 checkmark  BINGO

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 15):
I think it would be a good thing if we all took the opportunity of this contemplative phase of the year to think some things over and re-start with full energy next year. (I know this might sound a little pathetic ...

Yes, it does.
 
User avatar
acontador
Posts: 1381
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:54 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:32 am

Jeff,

But why is the rejection correct in your opinion? Is it too hard to be constructive rather than destructive?

[Edited to change tone]

[Edited 2006-12-16 16:35:49]
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 12:39 am

I think its a great shot and highlights (in a great way) the inconsistencies this site has developed.
 
tappan
Posts: 1478
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 1999 9:30 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 1:18 am

The rules here are tough. They are based on technical qualities of a photo over creative qualities. It was not always like this. Today, this "Air India Moon Shot"
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mark Garfinkel

would be rejected, yet look at all the views it has got. But, with all the great new equipment, it would be my fault if I turned in something like that shot today.To be honest, it has made me a better photographer TECHNICALLY...grain, sharpness etc...But, the age old question... are there sometimes when a photo that might be low in tecnical goodies, but different or better than average in creative goodies be given a pass due to it's creativity?? Like this one that I had rejected this week??

MyAviation.net:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photographer © Mark Garfinkel


Yes, I know it is soft..but is it unique...More importantly, can I live with this rejection and not put the screeners down? Yes! The screeners have a tough job.
I will be ok because I can still post it on myaviation.net

Mark Garfinkel
and not
 
User avatar
ThierryD
Crew
Posts: 2029
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 6:58 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 1:39 am

Quoting Tappan (Reply 20):
Yes, I know it is soft..but is it unique...More importantly, can I live with this rejection and not put the screeners down?

Yes but Mark this is a matter of playing by the rules; A.net has a set of rules which have to be adhered to if you want to have your shot accepted. I.e.: had you reduced your image in size and sharpened it a little it might have been accepted as especially the softness issue can be easily avoided.

However some people get the impression nowadays that the rules are not being adhered to by the crew and that's where a big part of miscontend lies and you can't blame people for trying to solve that.

Thierry
"Go ahead...make my day"
 
cosec59
Posts: 2618
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:59 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 1:40 am

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 19):
think its a great shot and highlights (in a great way) the inconsistencies this site has developed.

Spot on Chad. Most of the posts regarding rejections recently have been the lack of consistency from the team.
Put the consistency in place and this type of thread will disappear.
I hope the screening team can see the validity of consistency and find the time to comment on the consistency issue and this issue only.
Rules are for the obedience of fools but for the guidance of wise men
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 1:57 am

Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 22):
find the time to comment

Why should they even bother? To get feedback with four letter words?
-
 
cosec59
Posts: 2618
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 2:59 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:07 am

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 23):
Why should they even bother? To get feedback with four letter words?

Fair comment Peter, but the only way forward to stop this IS for some positive input from the team so everyone knows they are singing off the same hymn sheet.
Let's not forget that the input from some of the team has been fairly curt too in certain cases.
I was hopng that perhaps, this being the season of goodwill, the hatchet could be buried and we could move on productively.
Rules are for the obedience of fools but for the guidance of wise men
 
tappan
Posts: 1478
Joined: Sat Oct 23, 1999 9:30 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:08 am

I re-uploaded my MOON photo after a very nice screener suggested that I reduce the size of the photo, sharpen it more and correct the caption. I was wrong in stating that the jet was an A-330. It is a 777...
Mark Garfinkel
 
j.mo
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:29 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:11 am

Quoting Psych (Reply 12):
Jeff - to be honest, given your apparent contempt for much of what I have to say, I am surprised you bother to open any of my threads.

It makes him feel good about himself. He is a notoriously arrogant member.

I quit trying to upload on A.Net long ago. Not worth the time, effort or headache.
My magic 8 ball is the 1.0 Beta version and it cannot guess which rules are in effect on any given day or who is applying said rules. And my name is not well known enough to get special screening.

JM
 
Gary2880
Posts: 1856
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 8:52 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:27 am

Quoting J.mo (Reply 26):
Not worth the time, effort or headache.

 checkmark 
Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel :- Samuel Johnson
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:27 am

Quoting J.mo (Reply 26):
I quit trying to upload on A.Net long ago. Not worth the time, effort or headache.

Im starting to feel this way. Havent uploaded since my American 777 was rejected and the screeners couldnt decide if it was "good" or not. One said to appeal, the other said to rework it. I did rework it, it was rejected for two totally different reasons. Then another screener pops in and says to fix another totally different item. lol. FUN.
 
agd
Posts: 199
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 11:52 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:55 am

Quoting 9V (Reply 14):
However, it does look slightly different. The crop looks slightly odd to me. The pic looks slightly too oblong and looks awkwardly cropped where the left hand side landing gear is.

Paul,

I had the same impression. Althought a very nice picture quality wise (as usual!), I feel it somewhat doesn't fiill the frame properly.To me, your other PIA picture (the one shown as an exemple) looks much better. But I would say it's a matter of perspectives. However, I agree that it looks really similar to some of your shots already in the database, and I clearly see the points of your intervention.

And please Paul, don't give importance to those who don't deserve it ...  wink 

Taking your words, take good care!

Alex  wave 
NO URLS in signature
 
EWS
Posts: 3369
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2006 6:41 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 2:56 am

Paul,

I understand your fustration and to be honest im suprised you havnt given up here yet. It would be a sad shame to loose your superb contributions to the database but with the ever increasing barrier we simply cannot keep up with those.

Top quality photo you have there Paul, hope to see it in the database.

Lew
 
linco22
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:16 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 3:11 am

Evening all,

Sorry, i'm late again to the thread!

Anyway, Jeff good to see you haven't lost your sensitive side. I'd love to have a beer with you some day. I think you're a big softy really.....

Paul,

I understand your frustration. For me the photo does look a touch awkward, but not enough to get hit with a motive. The same thing with Chad's shot, the AA 772, it was a very small issue really and the two totally different rejection reason on appeal. Soft and then blurry if memory serves me right. There are inconsistances present. But we shouldn't beat up the screening team over it, and I know you aren't Paul. We should work out where we, the photographers are going wrong. Is the bar too high? No, I think the standard is very good and achievable. But the site will lose out in the long run. This site needs shots that stand out, look at Mark Garfinkels stuff. There has been some fantastic additions to the site over the last while. Lets grow it.

Regards
Colin
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 3:16 am

Quoting Linco22 (Reply 31):
it was a very small issue really and the two totally different rejection reason on appeal.

Colin, I never appealed it. I figured Id take one of the screeners advice and rework it instead of appeal. But yea, in chronological order it went like this:

Photo rejected for Soft.
Asked for help and was told to appeal it by a screener.
Another screener suggested a rework and reupload.
Rejected for Blurry/Quality.
Posted that it was rejected for these new reasons.
Another screener chimes in and says its not centered correctly.

Cheers.
 
linco22
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:16 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 3:19 am

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 32):
Colin, I never appealed it

Sorry Chad, memory ran off on me there. But your photo highlights the problem of the inconsistances.

Regards
Colin
 
Psych
Topic Author
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 4:29 am

Like with plugging, if you don't want to read what follows no-one is forcing you:

* I believe the screeners work hard for the site and should be commended for their efforts.

* I hate rejections and am somewhat obsessional (not clinically - yet) - I would love it to be an exact science but know it cannot be one.

* My comments come from a genuine desire to see this site move forward.

I agree with Thierry's comments above - we need to look at the culture of discussion on this Forum.

A screener involved in this rejection was good enough to contact me and explain his position. Clearly I do not agree that it was enough to warrant a rejection, but I understand his argument (others agree with him, as we can see here) and respect his opinion. He did not join in the discussion here because of the hostile atmosphere. This is symptomatic of the problem.

Though I know it will appear that way to some, my intention in posting was not simply to stick the boot in to the screeners and spit my dummy out. I didn't agree with a motive rejection. As the rejection process had given me no information as to why it was perceived to fall foul of the criterion, and because I felt I had similar acceptances (I could link more examples), my only way to seek clarification is by posting. I also hoped that a by-product of a healthy debate - whether or not we all agree - is that some further clarity is brought to the contentious and subjective debate about 'motive'.

We cannot achieve this if people will not respect others' opinions and be prepared to engage in proper constructive debate. I still do not agree with the rejection and am p**sed off that what I consider a good photo is not in my portfolio. In the big scheme of things it does not matter a jot. It is not my decision, so I have to accept that. But I want to make sure I am not in the same position again.

Without debates on these issues, and the resulting two-way communication, I believe an important part of this site is in trouble. There is nowhere else to get the examples that people refer to as 'inconsistency', and debate them so that we can better understand the tricky aspects of the screening process.

Far too many words for Jeff (and others), I am sure, but I don't really care. I guess that is why I chose to work in the helping professions and Jeff in the armed forces.

Paul
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 5:12 am

Quoting Psych (Reply 34):
I still do not agree with the rejection and am p**sed off that what I consider a good photo is not in my portfolio.

So anet is your only portfolio? wierd.

Quoting Psych (Reply 34):
I guess that is why I chose to work in the helping professions and Jeff in the armed forces.

Kind of an unfair statement there buddy. I like to help good people when I can. Dont understand that remark really.
 
lasham
Crew
Posts: 214
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 5:43 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:02 am

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 6):
I would be very surprised if any of the screeners would spend some time to post here in the forum in the near future

Ok

The PIA shot has the nose leg cut in no mans land, and the RHS gear is cut in half = Motive. Its the first time I have seen the shot.

And I apologise for the other day when I said that your shots look the same.

Tony.
No sun no fun
 
Psych
Topic Author
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:43 am

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 35):
Kind of an unfair statement there buddy.

My apologies to you Chad (and Jeff too if you felt the same). I did not mean my comment to sound like an insult. I had meant that the nature of what I do requires me to spend a lot of time communicating about issues that require a lot of words. I will always tend to use 20 words when some others will use 10. I would assume that is in contrast to your line of work  wink . Certainly no offence was intended.

Quoting Lasham (Reply 36):
And I apologise for the other day when I said that your shots look the same

Thank you Tony.

Paul
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 6:58 am

Quoting Psych (Reply 37):
I would assume that is in contrast to your line of work

 checkmark 

 rotfl 

 stirthepot 

 duck 











Just kidding


d
 
lennymuir
Posts: 403
Joined: Mon Oct 14, 2002 7:58 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 7:34 am

Paul

I keep contact with an excellent photographer in here who
is also an a.net screener.

He got more than a handful of rejections the just the other week in one go.
Yup, he was very suprised too!  hissyfit 

So, although we all get pissed off occasionally getting what appears
to be silly rejections, it happens to them too.  grumpy 


Quote:
Yet it seems acceptable for the screeners to change the interpretation of the criterion without identifying this to the photographer community.


No, I don't think they are denying any secret revelations to us plebs.
If something can be 'technically fixed' it may be worth discussing.
If there is a personal dislike (eg. & especially 'motiv') of the photo, just drop it,
even though you can produce a precedent.

Gerry
 
Psych
Topic Author
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 8:07 am

Quoting Lennymuir (Reply 39):
just drop it

Good advice Gerry - I have probably built things up too much in my mind recently, so am going to do just that.

Paul
 
eadster
Posts: 2125
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:31 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 8:29 am

Quoting Viv (Reply 1):
Of course, we are constantly told that "standards change". But we are never told when, why, or how they have changed.

In my time here, I have only ever seen 2 subjects on the forum in regards to changes. These were waving pilots and close up of logos. That's it. There may have been more but I did not see those. Now its great that they were made public, as it helped, but thats only two matters in a whole range of criteria that I am aware of.

Quoting Lasham (Reply 36):

See now that's the response we need. Straight to the point. No diverting around the subject, telling it like it is. Thats all most of us ask for. Thanks Tony!

So we have all on this current discussion, all except one, seem very willing to openly discuss this and other matters with crew members and come to a solution. Will this fall on deaf ears yet again?

There have been suggestions like photo examples of what and what not to do (I know I could donate many to the what not to do section!), creative sections and many other ideas thrown out there. I personally see this as a better time than ever for all to get in and see what we can achieve.
 
QANTAS077
Posts: 5175
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:08 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 8:33 am

for shit sake Paul, does it always have to be a psychology thesis when you post? ...it's becoming like Days of your rejected photos Lives...longwinded and usually resolved, why does it matter so much? it's an airplane photo and nothing more.

end of my psychology lesson for today.
 
linco22
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:16 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 7:09 pm

Quoting QANTAS077 (Reply 42):
does it always have to be a psychology thesis when you post?

Why have you got an issue with the way someone expresses their views? Surely your not that narrow minded?
 
QANTAS077
Posts: 5175
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:08 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Sun Dec 17, 2006 8:49 pm

Quoting Linco22 (Reply 43):
Why have you got an issue with the way someone expresses their views? Surely your not that narrow minded?

it's a hobby...ever heard of KISS?
 
frippe
Posts: 185
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:24 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Mon Dec 18, 2006 1:16 am

Hello again and please let me add my thoughts here.

I think Paul asked for something very reasonable in his first post. He wanted the database to be as consistent as possible, at least that is my interpretation. Then much of the discussion went in less constructive directions, sorry to say.

I think he also agrees with me in the following that if I know what is right and wrong I can pre-screen myself and thus reduce the hard work for the screening team and also reduce the number of rejections.

Myself, I would very much like more instructions from Johan himself or from the top screeners, telling me what is accepted and not.

1.
We had such a post in January 2006 regarding Colourful Paint and until this autumn it was easy to choose which box to tick. Then came the problems with changed rules, but we are promised this will be solved and announced when matters are settled. Thanks a lot for that!

2.
Some posts have told us about the ratio of 3:2 being the one generally preferred and that some uploaders have had rejections for 4:3 -- here as well an official clarification would be much appreciated. (Sorry of course if I have missed one already given lately.)

3.
The problem with close ups like Paul's is surely more difficult to solve. But an official post telling us what is no longer accepted, with photo examples (front gears cut off etc.) would help me at least and I am sure also many others.

Thanks in advance for listening,
Frippe
 
LIPH
Posts: 841
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:24 am

Paul, I strongly agree with you, but I see in these screening incongruences the only reason why this site is still alive and people wants to upload here. Controversies are in this sense part of the game.
Screeners, who perfectly distinguish between a boring side shot and a nice action shot are at the end the only ones (with Joan) who will let you in, and are the ones who decide even which will be the "top of the 24 hours" (and not people).

Regards
Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
 
9V
Posts: 1368
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 10:35 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Mon Dec 18, 2006 2:52 am

Quoting LIPH (Reply 46):
Joan

Has he had a sex change then?
 Wow!
 
Gary2880
Posts: 1856
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 8:52 pm

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Mon Dec 18, 2006 3:42 am

Quoting 9V (Reply 47):
Has he had a sex change then?

and your first class membership helped pay for it!  Wink
Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel :- Samuel Johnson
 
linco22
Posts: 1278
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 6:16 am

RE: A Plea For A Level Playing Field

Mon Dec 18, 2006 4:33 am

Quoting QANTAS077 (Reply 44):
ever heard of KISS

Thanks for reminding me. I just think that sly little remarks like that, not just from you and i'm not gonna make a big deal about it, are shredding the forum up. Why can't we just communicate normally without getting down each others throats? Paul is just showing his concerns and voicing his opinions which he has every right to do and his own way. As does anyone else.

Quoting Gary2880 (Reply 48):
and your first class membership helped pay for it!

And twice as I remember it......  Wink

Regards
Colin  Smile

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 13 guests