Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
cpd
Posts: 6371
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon Apr 27, 2020 9:54 am

I noticed an unusual crop that I'm sure would have been a no-go 5 years ago. Front on view with only one side of the plane? Seemed a bit different to what we expect.
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon Apr 27, 2020 12:10 pm

Would be great if you could show the image, or post the link to it so we can see see what you are referring to.

Thanks

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
User avatar
Kaphias
Posts: 707
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:29 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon Apr 27, 2020 2:15 pm

jelpee wrote:
Would be great if you could show the image, or post the link to it so we can see see what you are referring to.

Thanks

Jehan


Certainly unusual for a.n but I don't mind it... evidently others like it too as it's PC.
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon Apr 27, 2020 4:07 pm

OK thanks. Yes, it is an unusual view. We see the one side perspective plenty for gate shots. I think what is unusual about this is that including the entire wing does make it look like it is Right-in-Frame. Personally, I would have considered cropping it closer to the engine to show more of a close up. However, this crop captures a lot of the activity at the gate as well as in the background which captures the buzz of activity at JFK. Also, as Mathew has noted above, it seems to be popular image.

Cheers,

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
cpd
Posts: 6371
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon Apr 27, 2020 8:07 pm

jelpee wrote:
Would be great if you could show the image, or post the link to it so we can see see what you are referring to.

Thanks

Jehan


The other person did post the image, I didn’t because as you know, that was always frowned upon. The “ramp clutter” as it would have been described also wouldn’t have been a valid reason for that crop.

I’m not a screener and haven’t photographed a plane in heaven knows how many years, but if I’m noticing this stuff on the very random times I look here, then others must be too.
 
Newark727
Posts: 1872
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 6:42 pm

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon Apr 27, 2020 9:35 pm

I like the image. At the very least, cropping off the wingtip wouldn't improve it.
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon Apr 27, 2020 10:46 pm

cpd wrote:
jelpee wrote:
Would be great if you could show the image, or post the link to it so we can see see what you are referring to.

Thanks

Jehan


The other person did post the image, I didn’t because as you know, that was always frowned upon. The “ramp clutter” as it would have been described also wouldn’t have been a valid reason for that crop.

I’m not a screener and haven’t photographed a plane in heaven knows how many years, but if I’m noticing this stuff on the very random times I look here, then others must be too.



Good point about not posting the image...typically not good form to do in public. In the future, feel free to PM me so we can discuss it in private.

I can see your viewpoint on the foreground clutter; not a show stopper for me. I did not accept the image...I suppose screener discretion played a role in acceptance.

Cheers,

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
User avatar
johnr
Posts: 134
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2005 9:46 pm

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon Apr 27, 2020 11:38 pm

The next person to upload a similar image should have it accepted, forget about this “screener discretion” nonsense...it either meets the site criteria or it doesn’t.
 
JakTrax
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue Apr 28, 2020 3:57 pm

I've always been of the opinion that, if you choose to display your images on a website as public as A.net, you should not have an issue with your images being singled out and/or discussed. Let's face it, the only reason it's considered 'bad form' is due to potentially damaged egos.

With that said, I see no reason why that particular image shouldn't have been accepted. Johnr makes a good point above, though — there are times when clear and concise decisions need to be made without that ambiguous 'screener discretion' excuse. I think these crops are fine but ONLY while an aircraft is on an airbridge; take the airbridge away and you're left with a very unbalanced, awkward-looking photo.

Karl
 
cpd
Posts: 6371
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:32 pm

JakTrax wrote:
I've always been of the opinion that, if you choose to display your images on a website as public as A.net, you should not have an issue with your images being singled out and/or discussed. Let's face it, the only reason it's considered 'bad form' is due to potentially damaged egos.

With that said, I see no reason why that particular image shouldn't have been accepted. Johnr makes a good point above, though — there are times when clear and concise decisions need to be made without that ambiguous 'screener discretion' excuse. I think these crops are fine but ONLY while an aircraft is on an airbridge; take the airbridge away and you're left with a very unbalanced, awkward-looking photo.

Karl


That’s a fair point made by both John and Karl.

I’m not really against the image, just pointing out that in the years past it would likely have been not accepted and it would probably be possible to find examples to back that up.

The more methodical the process becomes then that makes it easier for contributors.
 
JakTrax
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:47 pm

Just to add...

I think the background adds much to the motive of that VS shot — take away the background and replace it with an empty runway and a treeline and, again, you have an unmotivated/unbalanced/awkward crop. I'm aware that 'screener discretion' plays a role but lately we've seen a lot of very discriminatory 'screener discretion'.
 
yousaf465
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:38 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Sun May 03, 2020 4:55 pm

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Thai-Ai ... 16/5988367
Are these types of images, allowed? I mean clearly the person is posing, which was a no-go few years back.
yousaf465
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Sun May 03, 2020 8:37 pm

Hello Yousaf465,

This was discussed in a different post "Photos that made you go Wow" here: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1348569&start=250#p22145921

Check Post # 286 and onward.

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
cpd
Posts: 6371
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Sun May 03, 2020 11:47 pm

jelpee wrote:
Hello Yousaf465,

This was discussed in a different post "Photos that made you go Wow" here: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1348569&start=250#p22145921

Check Post # 286 and onward.

Jehan


Regardless, I still disagree with it and it is cheapening the site and the reputation. What is it going to be, top 5 photos all the time being nothing more than scantily clad people posing with the plane just being a minor distraction in the background? This is not what airliners.net was about and shouldn't be. Who can this be escalated to? Really disappointing.

What will you guys do if everyone starts taking these kinds of photos, where will the limit be?

There are other sites on the net for those kinds of photos, why does this place need to be turned into that? :shakehead: Saying this because I actually do care.
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon May 04, 2020 4:22 am

cpd wrote:
Regardless, I still disagree with it and it is cheapening the site and the reputation. What is it going to be, top 5 photos all the time being nothing more than scantily clad people posing with the plane just being a minor distraction in the background? This is not what airliners.net was about and shouldn't be. Who can this be escalated to? Really disappointing.

What will you guys do if everyone starts taking these kinds of photos, where will the limit be?

There are other sites on the net for those kinds of photos, why does this place need to be turned into that? :shakehead: Saying this because I actually do care.

I agree, cpd. Given some of the incredibly minor things that will get a photo rejected, I find it troubling that photos where the aircraft seems to be an afterthought are not only accepted, but seem to be encouraged. I enjoy more creative photos - I've never been a "side on, perfect light only" traditionalist, but for an aviation photography site, aircraft need to be the focus of the photos. They clearly are not in these cases.

As for who this can be escalated to? I don't think anyone - the screening team appears to have made the decision that they like these photos, at least from certain members, and VerticleScope doesn't care about the site as long as it brings in eyeballs for the ads they sell. The absolute lack of development on the forums is evidence of that.
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
User avatar
Kaphias
Posts: 707
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:29 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon May 04, 2020 2:44 pm

I'm fine with it if the change is being applied equally, but it's simply not. I had this photo rejected for distance, underexposed, and motive; and upheld on appeal with the comment "Underexposed due to aircraft being backlit. Insufficient motive for wide crop. Sorry, but a person in the frame does not add much to the composition to justify inclusion." Evidently inclusion is only justified if the person is wearing a bikini and is more prominent in frame than the aircraft. And backlit? Yeah, so was yesterday's #1.
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon May 04, 2020 3:14 pm

Kaphias wrote:
I'm fine with it if the change is being applied equally, but it's simply not. I had this photo rejected for distance, underexposed, and motive; and upheld on appeal with the comment "Underexposed due to aircraft being backlit. Insufficient motive for wide crop. Sorry, but a person in the frame does not add much to the composition to justify inclusion." Evidently inclusion is only justified if the person is wearing a bikini and is more prominent in frame than the aircraft. And backlit? Yeah, so was yesterday's #1.



Hey Kaphias.

The image was reviewed by several screeners and upon appeal it was up to me. I handled that appeal..sorry the outcome wasn't what you wanted. In the case of your image, the context of a person in motion by the aircraft and the position doesn't quite tell a story; ergo the lack of motive. On the other hand, for the beach scenes at Phuket, people posing under arriving airplanes is very much part of what seems to define Phuket in terms of photography. Therefore it is viewed as having sufficient motive. In your image, even if it was a bikini clad female (or a male wearing Speedos) in the same pose and position, it would still have been rejected for motive/distance due to lack of context. I have yet to see any images from Phuket featuring folks who don't look like fashion models though...LOL! But to be fair, within the context, I'd have to say they should be accepted without discrimination.

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
JakTrax
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon May 04, 2020 3:35 pm

Photos don't always have to tell a story; they can set a mood too. That 'screener discretion' we hear about a lot lately certainly seems to benefit some more than others...

Isn't this all quite irrelevant anyway when most of the HKT beach shots have visible banding in the sky? And wasn't it only the other day we were told deliberate posing was unacceptable?

It's plainly obvious to anyone but a passive idiot that the site's screening and promoting is now overtly and systematically biased.
 
yousaf465
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:38 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon May 04, 2020 4:20 pm

Moose135 wrote:
cpd wrote:
Regardless, I still disagree with it and it is cheapening the site and the reputation. What is it going to be, top 5 photos all the time being nothing more than scantily clad people posing with the plane just being a minor distraction in the background? This is not what airliners.net was about and shouldn't be. Who can this be escalated to? Really disappointing.

What will you guys do if everyone starts taking these kinds of photos, where will the limit be?

There are other sites on the net for those kinds of photos, why does this place need to be turned into that? :shakehead: Saying this because I actually do care.

I agree, cpd. Given some of the incredibly minor things that will get a photo rejected, I find it troubling that photos where the aircraft seems to be an afterthought are not only accepted, but seem to be encouraged. I enjoy more creative photos - I've never been a "side on, perfect light only" traditionalist, but for an aviation photography site, aircraft need to be the focus of the photos. They clearly are not in these cases.

As for who this can be escalated to? I don't think anyone - the screening team appears to have made the decision that they like these photos, at least from certain members, and VerticleScope doesn't care about the site as long as it brings in eyeballs for the ads they sell. The absolute lack of development on the forums is evidence of that.

Yes, I agree, some photographers have photo rejected on slightest of issues, e.g slightly blurry, not enough contrast. On the other hand, some people get away with photos where aircraft is a second afterthought. These kinds of photos might look better on Instagram or Flickr but A.net is supposed to be aircraft photography site.
yousaf465
 
User avatar
Kaphias
Posts: 707
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:29 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon May 04, 2020 4:26 pm

jelpee wrote:
Kaphias wrote:
I'm fine with it if the change is being applied equally, but it's simply not. I had this photo rejected for distance, underexposed, and motive; and upheld on appeal with the comment "Underexposed due to aircraft being backlit. Insufficient motive for wide crop. Sorry, but a person in the frame does not add much to the composition to justify inclusion." Evidently inclusion is only justified if the person is wearing a bikini and is more prominent in frame than the aircraft. And backlit? Yeah, so was yesterday's #1.



Hey Kaphias.

The image was reviewed by several screeners and upon appeal it was up to me. I handled that appeal..sorry the outcome wasn't what you wanted. In the case of your image, the context of a person in motion by the aircraft and the position doesn't quite tell a story; ergo the lack of motive. On the other hand, for the beach scenes at Phuket, people posing under arriving airplanes is very much part of what seems to define Phuket in terms of photography. Therefore it is viewed as having sufficient motive. In your image, even if it was a bikini clad female (or a male wearing Speedos) in the same pose and position, it would still have been rejected for motive/distance due to lack of context. I have yet to see any images from Phuket featuring folks who don't look like fashion models though...LOL! But to be fair, within the context, I'd have to say they should be accepted without discrimination.

Jehan

Appreciate your input Jehan. Where I'm from, the image of a bundled up pilot wearing tall rubber boots and a life vest after returning from a flight in below-freezing weather is perfectly natural, and just as much a part of the local aviation story as the images we've seen from Phuket. In other words, my photo is an quintessentially Alaskan as Mr. Hunt's photos are quintessentially Phuket. We just tend to wear more clothes up here. And most of our "models" have beards.
 
User avatar
Kaphias
Posts: 707
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 6:29 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon May 04, 2020 4:30 pm

yousaf465 wrote:
Moose135 wrote:
cpd wrote:
Regardless, I still disagree with it and it is cheapening the site and the reputation. What is it going to be, top 5 photos all the time being nothing more than scantily clad people posing with the plane just being a minor distraction in the background? This is not what airliners.net was about and shouldn't be. Who can this be escalated to? Really disappointing.

What will you guys do if everyone starts taking these kinds of photos, where will the limit be?

There are other sites on the net for those kinds of photos, why does this place need to be turned into that? :shakehead: Saying this because I actually do care.

I agree, cpd. Given some of the incredibly minor things that will get a photo rejected, I find it troubling that photos where the aircraft seems to be an afterthought are not only accepted, but seem to be encouraged. I enjoy more creative photos - I've never been a "side on, perfect light only" traditionalist, but for an aviation photography site, aircraft need to be the focus of the photos. They clearly are not in these cases.

As for who this can be escalated to? I don't think anyone - the screening team appears to have made the decision that they like these photos, at least from certain members, and VerticleScope doesn't care about the site as long as it brings in eyeballs for the ads they sell. The absolute lack of development on the forums is evidence of that.

Yes, I agree, some photographers have photo rejected on slightest of issues, e.g slightly blurry, not enough contrast. On the other hand, some people get away with photos where aircraft is a second afterthought. These kinds of photos might look better on Instagram or Flickr but A.net is supposed to be aircraft photography site.

I disagree. This should be a place for photos that tell the story of aviation community as a whole, with the exception of portraits not showing an aircraft. If you wanted to fight the battle that this site should be for photos of aircraft only, that was lost long ago with airport overviews and inside the terminal shots.
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 12576
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Mon May 04, 2020 4:49 pm

Kaphias wrote:
Appreciate your input Jehan. Where I'm from, the image of a bundled up pilot wearing tall rubber boots and a life vest after returning from a flight in below-freezing weather is perfectly natural, and just as much a part of the local aviation story as the images we've seen from Phuket. In other words, my photo is an quintessentially Alaskan as Mr. Hunt's photos are quintessentially Phuket. We just tend to wear more clothes up here. And most of our "models" have beards.


Just wanted to say I agree with what you're saying. I like your photo - I think it evokes mood quite well, and tells more of a story than most beach shots with people posing.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
andrej
Posts: 1255
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2001 8:31 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 05, 2020 1:56 pm

vikkyvik wrote:
Kaphias wrote:
Appreciate your input Jehan. Where I'm from, the image of a bundled up pilot wearing tall rubber boots and a life vest after returning from a flight in below-freezing weather is perfectly natural, and just as much a part of the local aviation story as the images we've seen from Phuket. In other words, my photo is an quintessentially Alaskan as Mr. Hunt's photos are quintessentially Phuket. We just tend to wear more clothes up here. And most of our "models" have beards.


Just wanted to say I agree with what you're saying. I like your photo - I think it evokes mood quite well, and tells more of a story than most beach shots with people posing.


Have to agree as well. Andrew is respected contributor on his own accord and there are many photos that he uploaded over the years that are extremely good (and enjoyable to look at). I honestly believe that A.net should not allow any kind of models/humans in-front, behind, on-top, or underneath airplanes. This will always be controversial. Several years ago, few photos were taken down (I believe flight attendant shots), then people objected when photos were uploaded from St. Maarten (bikini models as well).

Finally, I really like Mathew's quintessentially Alaskan photo as it adds more to aviation motive then bikini models. Will screeners accept photos of spotters in anorak jackets, with planes over or near them? This is a very subjective topic.
 
yousaf465
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:38 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 05, 2020 2:40 pm

Kaphias wrote:
yousaf465 wrote:
Moose135 wrote:
I agree, cpd. Given some of the incredibly minor things that will get a photo rejected, I find it troubling that photos where the aircraft seems to be an afterthought are not only accepted, but seem to be encouraged. I enjoy more creative photos - I've never been a "side on, perfect light only" traditionalist, but for an aviation photography site, aircraft need to be the focus of the photos. They clearly are not in these cases.

As for who this can be escalated to? I don't think anyone - the screening team appears to have made the decision that they like these photos, at least from certain members, and VerticleScope doesn't care about the site as long as it brings in eyeballs for the ads they sell. The absolute lack of development on the forums is evidence of that.

Yes, I agree, some photographers have photo rejected on slightest of issues, e.g slightly blurry, not enough contrast. On the other hand, some people get away with photos where aircraft is a second afterthought. These kinds of photos might look better on Instagram or Flickr but A.net is supposed to be aircraft photography site.

I disagree. This should be a place for photos that tell the story of the aviation community as a whole, with the exception of portraits not showing an aircraft. If you wanted to fight the battle that this site should be for photos of aircraft only, that was lost long ago with airport overviews and inside the terminal shots.

Your photos are much more acceptable compared to another contributor's beach shots. For example, this Alaskan shot might be have been rejected for the plane being too far, but it captures the essence of the environment.


Compared to this, which could have been a motive rejection a few years back, which should be posted to Instagram instead of airliners.net.
yousaf465
 
JakTrax
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 05, 2020 7:59 pm

My issue isn't actually the motives of these beach images — it's that the rules appear to be being bent (or even totally changed) recently to suit the styles of a handful of contributors. This basically means that your shot getting in can depend on your name. If there are rules, they either need sticking to or re-writing, and require application equally and indiscriminately.

For instance, Yousaf, you have a sunset shot in a pre-screen thread which, with some careful cropping, would look nice — it was made clear in that thread, however, that the banding in the sky would not be acceptable but the HKT beach shot above features very visible banding... and was accepted AFTER the comments were made about your image.

I don't see how one can refute that kind of evidence? To the site's credit, however, these constructive criticisms seem not to be being almost instantly deleted like they were a couple of weeks ago.

I will add that Kaphias' shot in my eyes was needlessly underexposed (didn't add to the scene) so is perhaps not the best image to discuss. However if it would have been rejected solely for motive then I think we have a problem...
 
User avatar
PanAm_DC10
Community Manager
Posts: 4085
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 7:37 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Wed May 06, 2020 4:40 am

Karl

About your deletions. You only had 2 do not over state them. You take discussions off topic and that is why you had those deletions. We allowed some to remain even though they are off topic and you can see another member note it in this thread. viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1348569

Your views are welcome if you remain on topic and keep your opinions in a discussion such as this

Thank you
Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
 
JakTrax
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Fri May 08, 2020 8:04 pm

PanAm_DC10, I get your point but, in that case, why wasn't the post that originally veered off topic deleted? I didn't create it; I only added to it. Anyway...

Credit where credit's due — I do actually like this one as there's more to it than just someone posing. I think the site should be accepting these images but I'm sceptical that they're making TOTD entirely on their own merits as the consistency is just too high.

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Thai-Ai ... %2Bw%3D%3D

I am curious at to whether we've had another stealth rule change for this one:

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Aeroflo ... %2Bw%3D%3D

This is not a dig — it's just that, as far as I was aware, any image with an unlevel horizon when there are obvious references would be rejected?

Karl
 
User avatar
PanAm_DC10
Community Manager
Posts: 4085
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 7:37 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Sat May 09, 2020 12:01 am

Hi Karl

Similar to the example I gave in the Photos that Make you go Wow, If you feel the moderators have left an off topic comment you are welcome to flag it and they'll clean it up.

Thank you
Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
 
yousaf465
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:38 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Sat May 09, 2020 3:19 pm

JakTrax wrote:
PanAm_DC10, I get your point but, in that case, why wasn't the post that originally veered off topic deleted? I didn't create it; I only added to it. Anyway...

Credit where credit's due — I do actually like this one as there's more to it than just someone posing. I think the site should be accepting these images but I'm sceptical that they're making TOTD entirely on their own merits as the consistency is just too high.

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Thai-Ai ... %2Bw%3D%3D

I am curious at to whether we've had another stealth rule change for this one:

https://www.airliners.net/photo/Aeroflo ... %2Bw%3D%3D

This is not a dig — it's just that, as far as I was aware, any image with an unlevel horizon when there are obvious references would be rejected?

Karl

The second example clearly need CCW rotation. There is noise in the image. so many issues but still accepted.

This one is an old example but it has clear banding in sky but still in database
yousaf465
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1049
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Sat May 09, 2020 9:39 pm

Karl[/quote]
The second example clearly need CCW rotation. There is noise in the image. so many issues but still accepted.

This one is an old example but it has clear banding in sky but still in database
[/quote]


The image could use slight CCW rotation but nothing show stopping; nor do I see any banding that would h cause me to reject the image.

On a more pertinent note however is that the title of this thread is "Have Quality Standards Changed on here Recently?". This image was added n 2007 and by any measure an image from 13 years ago does not fit a reasonable definition of "recent". Would be helpful to constructive discussion if you did not post content for the sole purpose of inflaming emotions.

Regards,

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
cpd
Posts: 6371
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 3:09 am

The last one added is borderline inappropriate for a family friendly site.

And what will you do if everyone decides to take just those kinds of photos, especially if they push the boundaries further?

Feels like it's pointless raising those concerns - the decision has obviously already been made.
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 3:49 am

cpd wrote:
The last one added is borderline inappropriate for a family friendly site.

And what will you do if everyone decides to take just those kinds of photos, especially if they push the boundaries further?

Feels like it's pointless raising those concerns - the decision has obviously already been made.


A new photographer posted a thread for feedback on a photo and asked for tips on how to get a photo accepted. I wanted to say "Take a photo of a woman in a bikini on a beach with some sort of an airplane in the background" but I was afraid I might get banned for that.
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
ChrisKen747
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:59 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 8:39 am

cpd wrote:
The last one added is borderline inappropriate for a family friendly site.

And what will you do if everyone decides to take just those kinds of photos, especially if they push the boundaries further?

Feels like it's pointless raising those concerns - the decision has obviously already been made.


Thanks for bringing this up - I pointed out the same. Unfortunately (as usual lately, a very democratic sense here) it was quickly deleted.
The shots is showing very young girls in a biking that weren't posing for the photographer - so it is at least doubtful if they wanted to have their bodies published here- with an airplane in the background. As cpd said at least borderline for a site like airliners.

Yes I feel, too that it is pointless to bringing up concerns, it is like that site is turning towards one photographer, and then no matter what. And please hide all concerns immediately. Why is not even a discussion on it possible?
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 9:45 am

People click on the pics, so they can not be wrong. Why would there be a need to discuss it? The photos perfectly capture Phuket beach.
 
ChrisKen747
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:59 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 11:01 am

Sorry, but people click on everything they get shown on facebook and so on. Especially if its an "unusual" shot. A click does not mean "like" and why that should prevent any discussion is a mystery to me. If you like it, fine, but let others express they think otherwise.
 
JakTrax
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 12:04 pm

If people are coming here to see such images then the site is going in the wrong direction, wouldn't you say? Worth noting is that these images are mustering around 6k views on average, whereas a new airline or type for an airline will get 12-15k. Odd how these shots appear not as popular at that 'other' site when it attracts a similar audience, huh?
 
ChrisKen747
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:59 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 1:51 pm

JakTrax wrote:
If people are coming here to see such images then the site is going in the wrong direction, wouldn't you say? Worth noting is that these images are mustering around 6k views on average, whereas a new airline or type for an airline will get 12-15k. Odd how these shots appear not as popular at that 'other' site when it attracts a similar audience, huh?

Agree on both points.
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 2:54 pm

seahawk wrote:
People click on the pics, so they can not be wrong.

People click on cute kitten pictures too. If I have one with an airplane in the background, do you think it will be accepted and popular here?
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
User avatar
Moose135
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 2004 11:27 pm

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 2:57 pm

ChrisKen747 wrote:
Sorry, but people click on everything they get shown on facebook and so on. Especially if its an "unusual" shot. A click does not mean "like" and why that should prevent any discussion is a mystery to me. If you like it, fine, but let others express they think otherwise.

I always thought A.net should have a "WTF" button next to thumbnails you could click to see what was in the photo without giving it credit for a hit. I distinctly remember years ago, one photo of a "lavatory" in some old Russian transport that was nothing more than a bucket on the floor in an enclosed space. It got a lot of views because you couldn't really tell what it was until you clicked on the thumbnail to see it larger.
KC-135 - Passing gas and taking names!
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 3:24 pm

Moose135 wrote:
seahawk wrote:
People click on the pics, so they can not be wrong.

People click on cute kitten pictures too. If I have one with an airplane in the background, do you think it will be accepted and popular here?


If the screening team likes the photo, why not?
 
JakTrax
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 4:27 pm

You could ask 'why not?' about almost anything. Kittens framed with planes should be left to www.fluffykittens.net. The site's focus is still (allegedly) aircraft. The rules until recently were quite clear but an oligarch is obviously now in full control of the site and is manipulating the rules so that its members enjoy maximum views (notice how management hasn't rushed in to deny this?). I'm still participating in the forums but I shan't be uploading any more images as the site clearly only values a core group of photographers and overtly discriminates against others. Ultimately the site's loss as many photographers will not be willing to compete on such an unlevel playing field where the goalposts are shifted with alarming regularity.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 5:20 pm

Sorry, I never knew it was a competition, but my pics are too bad for a.net anyway.
 
User avatar
PanAm_DC10
Community Manager
Posts: 4085
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 7:37 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 7:59 pm

Karl,

We're happy to let your post stand and do our best to address your concerns.

First, there appears to be some of you who have an issue with recent shots from Phuket beach. These concerns were raised off topic in another thread and answered by the crew. To elaborate, the screening team discussed motive for such images and 11 of them made a collective decision using many examples from our site and others to ease the rule for beached worldwide. It was made with the interests of the entire community in mind by the screening team. That should provide fair guidance to the community on the change they made.

That is not how an oligarch operates Karl. Please name what other screening rules have been changed by your so called oligarch as there are none that we are aware of. You stopped uploading in 2018 then uploaded 9 in 2019 and 4 this year. The owners of the site see no reason for you to stop uploading even though you did and since then your uploads have been quite sparse. I asked you not to over state things and you appear to be doing so again.

The last 12 posts in this thread are all in relation to Phuket Beach images. Primarily by members who do not actively upload or in the case of CPD deleted all his images years ago and only posts what is perceived to be popular opinion. More posts than any uploads and it is not to improve his, or others, experience as a contributing photographer like this aviation photography forum should be for. Others like ChrisKen747 have only 1 image uploaded in 2 years and make repeated "me too" posts here. How does that improve his, or others, continuing contributions? That is what this forum is for. It doesn't and to be heard only one post is required.

As noted earlier, the decision to change motive on worldwide beach images was made by 11 screeners. A collective team decision. Yes, it appears 1 photographer is uploading many more than others though that will likely change. Some, including you Karl, noticed banding on some images. Instead of posting in the forums 2 others emailed the crew about it. Edits were made by the photographer and re uploads reviewed independently and accepted or rejected.

How is that benefiting a "core" group of photographers Karl? The rule was changed for the benefit of the community. The sites focus is on airplane images, always has been and always will be.

Thank you
Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
 
JakTrax
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Tue May 12, 2020 10:08 pm

I emailed the crew but each response was increasingly vague and evasive; I'm sure your colleagues could show you the email in which I actually stated a reluctance to make an issue of this in the forums? Ultimately the best I got was a forum acknowledgement to say that the banding issue had been resolved with the photographer. Then two days later the next batch of shots showed up in the database, complete with more banding. In the meantime another user (who's chipped in here) was told in no uncertain terms that his shot, featuring similar but less intrusive banding, would not be accepted. So you'll have to forgive some of us for arriving at what we think is a logical conclusion.

It really is as simple as this: if the current screeners can let slip so many images which display very obvious banding them something isn't right. It's the very first thing you notice about many of them, without the need to even equalise. How are uploaders supposed to put their faith in a team that apparently can't pick out the most obvious image flaws but can, for example, consistently point out a 2k discrepancy in colour temperature? Can you not see how little sense it all makes from the perspective of someone on the outside looking in?
 
User avatar
PanAm_DC10
Community Manager
Posts: 4085
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 7:37 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Wed May 13, 2020 12:37 am

Karl

Again, you are over stating your opinion.

That said, I understand the point you are making. Scroll up this thread for the post which questions banding on an image accepted in 2007 and you have your answer. Screening is not automated as it is human and mistakes happen from time to time. Have done since before 2007 and will continue to do so as long as screening is set up as it always has been. Not just banding but other images that may or may not align to a rule get through. To a degree it can change over time as different screeners focus on different rules.

Screening will never be 100% perfect due to its human nature.and I ask you understand that or at least take it into consideration.

Why do you consider yourself to be on the outside looking in Karl? I'd like to think you aren't as you do still upload periodically and unlike others who chose to give up on uploading over the years your images are still in the database. Instead of posting how you have been if you apply a little bit of your experience and knowledge you'd post in a way that many would learn from.

Many would agree with me that'd be a good thing for the community.
Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
 
ChrisKen747
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu Jul 12, 2018 10:59 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Wed May 13, 2020 1:06 pm

Oh wow, didn't expect that. Instead of having real argument, you respond by attacking and discreting us in style of "you are not the right ones to do so"? Very professional, absolute state of the art for a site manager. If you look through my history you will see more posts, not just "me, too". Well in case you haven't deleted them of course.

But you do bring it across that any criticsm here is pointless.

And you really wonder why no more active members speak up? Well because they fear refrections. Cpd, Karl, Moose & me don't have a lot to lose, as you pointed out righly for everybody to see. Think about the difference.
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 12576
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Wed May 13, 2020 3:31 pm

PanAm_DC10 wrote:
Yes, it appears 1 photographer is uploading many more than others though that will likely change.


To be fair, that's probably because one photographer knew about the rule change (being a screener), and everyone else didn't.

I don't particularly care either way about the rule change, but it's fair to say it wasn't exactly announced anywhere.
I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
 
yousaf465
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:38 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Thu May 14, 2020 3:44 am


This kind of photos should remain acceptable, as it was always the case, but people actually posing for photographer turns this site into a modelling agency.
Following photo is what should be allowed. In both A/C is the main subject unlike that of Thai beaches.
As for people only ranting but not uploading, personally, I and another Pakistani spotter (with whom I had recently discussed Aviation sites in general) were of opinion that criteria for uploading on A.net are really strict, except for certain photographers That is why we choose not to mess with our upload ratio.
yousaf465
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Thu May 14, 2020 5:29 am

It is simple, try up-loading a similar shot of equal high quality and see what happens.
 
yousaf465
Posts: 163
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 12:38 am

Re: Have quality standards changed on here recently?

Thu May 14, 2020 5:48 pm

seahawk wrote:
It is simple, try up-loading a similar shot of equal high quality and see what happens.

Yeah, that is the point. Shots of not that high quality get posted, bcz they were uploaded by someone with high numbers of uploaded photos.
yousaf465

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Crosswindphoto, Google [Bot] and 13 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos