Thank you, I was under the impression that Double only applied for shots taken in the same sequence.Jump to post
I don't know the screener's email address as I don't know who screened this photo.
And how can other people learn from emails that only I would get from the screener? In the forum anybody can learn and discuss.
Should this have been rejected for vignetting (or perhaps shooting through the fence)?
Main issue here is the wet ramp which is causing white-outs. Quite different situation than most of your accepted shots (although personally I would reject some of these as well due to the white-outs).Jump to post
I only use the OFF-setting on my cameraJump to post
Hi all, I just got an image rejected for double, even though they were clearly not taken in the same sequence but at different times of the day and at different locations. Can anybody please clarify the "double" rules? Rejected image: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/4/9/71...Jump to post
https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-co ... /screening
You need to be logged in of course.
Thanks, very helpful indeed.
Would it be possible to add "#unread" to the end of all hyperlinks so that it automatically opens the first unread post? Would save a lot of time searching/re-reading, especially when topics get bigger throughout the year.
What exactly is the official index post?Jump to post
Seems to be working fine again, thanks.Jump to post
Goodbye wrote:I'm just wondering if it's a site thing, or if the photographers are uploading their "Large" size photos at such a small size?
Looks like some of the photo thumbnails are loading extremely slow. Is there another server/indexing issue?Jump to post
Not sure if this qualifies for Airport Overview as you just see a small portion of the airport.Jump to post
It seems like some of the previously accepted photos have now disappeared, possibly an indexing issue? When I search for photo ID 7012383, I get no results, but I do see it in my photo corner under accepted photos. There are several more with the same issue. Does anybody else have the same problem w...Jump to post
Just wondering if these were accepted by accident or if the sky is only overexposed on my screen:
Not sure what the problem is with posting such critiques in the forum. Isn't it the photographer who uploaded it himself in the first place? A long time photographer should know to upload just his best shots; not to dump your memory card in the queue. Based on the current queue length he had plenty ...Jump to post
Although I'm not Tim, hope you don't mind if I tell you it usually takes between 10 and 20 days. You can check the progress of the screening queue here (if you are logged in): https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-cornerJump to post
Another one that you might want to take a look at:Jump to post
Usually this website is not a big fan of clipping the wings, but the rules seem different from time to time. Anyway, on the left side, try cropping it closer to the horizontal stabilizer; on the right side try to include the enite strut (including the piece that connects it to the wing).Jump to post
Although I can't see the photo concerned, I can't imagine a reason why an airport overview photo needs priority screening.Jump to post
You can't. Only option is to delete the whole album and start all over againJump to post
Usually between 10 and 20 days.
You can check the progress here (if you are logged in): https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-corner
which photo?Jump to post
What is the point of this calling out of accepted images on the forum here? Can you use the screener email address? The point is to get some clarification on why certain images are accepted and also allowing other photographers to learn from this (which wouldn't be possible via email). It's quite s...Jump to post
Seems very similar to me, same angle, same background/clouds, only the refueling hose is missing in the second one.Jump to post
dutchspotter1 wrote:Just wondering why these two photos of the same a/c were accepted, rather than having one accepted and the other rejected for "double"
Thanks in advance for the clarification.
Sometimes I got a lot of accepted photos in sequence, then suddenly I start to get rejections for oversharpened or soft. I swear that I try a lot to find the best sharpening, I use the same editing process, and even so my acceptance is inconsistent. For example: This one is oversharpened according ...Jump to post
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Romania-Air-Force/Antonov-An-30/6928929/L is this photo within the standards of a.net? Not only that, I'm also wondering how many votes it got in order to become Photographer's Choice. I guess as long as it's an A2A photo of a rare a/c, quality standards are being th...Jump to post
Why on earth would someone even bother participating in non-aviation discussions on an aviation website like this one? I'm sure there are plenty of other sites/platforms for that.Jump to post
Back in the day there were 800-1000 photos in the queue per day, now it's mostly less than 400.Jump to post
Please find the FAQ here:
If you have any questions please feel free to ask at this forum.
Thank you for your reply. So what does batch screening mean exactly? Are photos not screened individually?Jump to post
Just wondering why this website is now accepting photos with dust spots. Has the policy been changed regarding the removal of dust spots?
Here (if you are logged in): https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-cornerJump to post
Just wondering why these two photos of the same a/c were accepted, rather than having one accepted and the other rejected for "double"
Duly noted, thanks for clearing that up.Jump to post
It would be nice to see more community members participate for the best possible result. There used to be a lot of community participation in the Site Related forum to make this website better but since most, if not all ideas/suggestions/bug reports are being dismissed or simply ignored, I guess a ...Jump to post
Well that depends on if those kind of photos are acceptable. Whenever I'm near a heliport I try to have a look but unfortunately there is not always a helicopter present.Jump to post
Just wondering what the rules are when it comes to the acceptance of photos of landing surfaces without any aircraft in it. I get that photos of airport runways are acceptable, but what about photos like this one? 6891217 Does it mean that photos of any empty helipad (on land or on a ship) may be ac...Jump to post
overall screening has slowed down a bit too, so I'm not surprised appeals take longer as well.Jump to post
Any news on this?Jump to post
Thanks, just wondering how it's more OS than e.g. this one:
I'd agree with the screeners on all except the first, which looks OK to me.Jump to post
Just got this one rejected for oversharped: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/1/8/6844813.jpg?v=v4f754f8f300 Can anybody point out what area is oversharped? Obviously the Neos titles and logo have a white line around them by design, not as a result of oversharpness. Thanks in advance ...Jump to post
Doesn't seem to work here (12 April at 1130 UTC).Jump to post
There are also intermediary steps (10, 20, etc at once) but I can't remember the corresponding numbers.Jump to post
It does, to a maximum of 40.
The more photos you have accepted in the database, the more you allowed to upload in the queue. Can't remember the exact numbers but I believe once you have 1000 photos accepted, then you will hit the maximum of 40.
I'd say kudos to the screening team for their hard work!Jump to post
The image appears acceptable and a note for the screeners on upload it was unavoidable would be apopropriate. Please take into account that such a note or background story for the screeners won't be visible for the general public, so it will still raise a lot of questions if photos like this are be...Jump to post
I found two good examples here of what everyone is disgruntled over I think. Why would you even upload or accept such a backlit version of this shot? Can the helicopter not fly up-sun of the subject? 6653259 6654289 I like to think of it this way: A backlit, side on, shot from the ground, photo of ...Jump to post