Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
fireguy274
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 11:15 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:09 am

I think an upload limit would be appropriate and I also believe that pictures you enter into queue should be last whether you have pictures in queue already or not...Pictures should enter the queue in the order they are received in my opinion.
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:14 am

Sven -

Ending a condescending, smug comment with a smilie doesn't disarm it, it makes you look arrogant. Big grin

I suggest you and Mr. Unmuth have a little screener meeting and get your points in order before coming into a thread and contradicting one another. He starts this thread to claim there's a problem, then you chime in saying there's no problem and to make matters worse, you discourage users from proposing remedies. Very professional.

I hope my comments prove "interesting" to you and that I don't preclude you from your duties as a screener.

william
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:25 am

William,

I think you are being a little unfair - however it may be perceived by yourself and others, we post here as free agents expressing our own views rather than the official views of the site, at least as far as subjects like this are concerned where we're not expressing official policy. As such, Peter's opinion may indeed differ from that of Sven. Maybe we should all post under psuedonyms (I have another user name which I can use for just such purposes!), which means you'd never get any "inside" opinions, but at least we'd be able to express opinions without our views being regarded as official and without being seen as having differing opinions within the ranks! Big grin

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
User avatar
BO__einG
Posts: 2648
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2000 5:20 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:27 am

Interesting points people. So far enjoying all the ideas fellow photographers are coming up with. Some ideas I really love and would probably support it but others raise my eyebrow a little, overall I am sure that whatever decision the screeners and admin come up with regarding Upload policies, I'll be right behind ya.

But I am not a big fan of the enforced quota of 5-10 photos or whatever per day. Maybe for newbs or high rejection photographers who fit the characteristics that Peter and Gary had described, this may be handy.

Self screening is important and this part must be vigorously brought out to the photographers. With so many high number of pictures in the queue, I gotta say that as years goes by and more planes take into the skies and more photographers knowing this site, the queue will probably jump into 5 digits and the worst thing is that it may eventually be considered "normal" for screening workload.

Anyways, my little 2 pennies.
Follow @kimbo_snaps on Instagram or bokimon- on Flickr to see more pics of me and my travels.
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:33 am

So. To prevent speeding on the highway, we do away with speed limits? Is that how it works?

How does a toll road work? Maybe I'm confused...

Jeff
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:53 am

we post here as free agents expressing our own views rather than the official views of the site

I understand that Andy. But, like it or not, you (and other screeners) represent the site as long as this header () is next to your name.

Feel free to comment under pseudonyms, but those comments won't carry as much weight as a CREW member.

I don't have any issue with Sven disagreeing with my (or others') opinions. I am discouraged, however, at the resistence to input from the very members trying to remedy this issue.

That's all. I suspect this thread will chase its own tail for a while longer and be archived with little or no comment from the Admin. I hope not, but I am losing my optimism...

william
 
User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 4949
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:46 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 8:01 am

I am in favor of a limit of some sort.

What really bugs me is putting a few photos in the queue, waiting days for them to be screened, and then getting a rejection for a minor, fixable thing and then putting the fixed one back in the now-larger queue where it will sit for even more days.

bruce
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
 
fireguy274
Posts: 291
Joined: Fri Dec 05, 2003 11:15 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 8:16 am

Bruce I am not being a wise guy but I think what they are trying to say is upload them without that minor, fixable thing and this will help the queue. Stay safe...Artie
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 9:21 am

While I fully endorse the various screeners views on pre-screening, tougher "badcommon" etc., I do think the site works against these common sense measures:

1 - the numbers game: as long as the sheer number of pics accepted gets your name in lights on the search page (and presumably thereby some additional hits), some people wil always try and upload as many pics as possible.

2 - batching photographers uploads - especially when the queue is large, there is a big incentive to "keep your place" - even by uploading rubbish. Could someone explain why FIFO can't be applied? The traditional arguements against this (duplicate uploads etc) are by and large non-issues with screening tools which have been available for a good while. FIFO has been applied as an "emergency measure" in the past, and as far as I could see, worked well.

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
futterman
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 11:04 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 9:25 am

Colin:

FIFO?





F
FI
FIF
FIFO
FIF
FI
F
What the FUTT?
 
vafi88
Posts: 2981
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 10:32 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 9:44 am

What I'm personally tired of, is people with DSLRs shooting everything, spending about 30 seconds on each shot, and uploading 50 or more shots with the same angle and sometimes with the same a/c and airline with a different reg.

Just because I, and many others don't have a DSLR, doesn't mean that everyone else should compensate by just random clicking of a shutter button with little, or no thought behind the picture.

I say limit the uploader's right to have up to only 5 pics in the Q at any given time.
I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 9:47 am

FIFO - First in, First Out ... in other words, each pic is screened in the order it was submitted regardless of who took it.

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
futterman
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 11:04 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 9:57 am

Colin: Aha...then I agree with you.  Wink/being sarcastic That always struck me as a bit odd.

Vitaly: Hahaha...revenge of the point 'n shoot nerds!  Smokin cool

[Edited 2004-04-14 02:57:34]
What the FUTT?
 
User avatar
Bruce
Posts: 4949
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:46 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 11:06 am

Artie, it is impossible to upload without any minor fixable thing. Take badsoft for example. I do apply sharpening (USM) and to my eye it looks sharp. I upload, and it's not to the screener's taste so I must apply more.

I don't mind fixing these things, although sometimes I do not agree with the screener that it needs more USM or whatever. Its just the long queue wait to find this out.

Solutions that would work:

1. FIFO
2. Uploading limit
3. get rid of "top uploader" category.

i think this is all we need......
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
 
ArmitageShanks
Posts: 3780
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 5:30 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 11:42 am

Here's an idea.... Why don't we all just STFU. Sheesh people, uploading is not a right. Sure, I hate having 4000 photos ahead of mine, but I am not paying to have them put on here either.

My crappy opinion anyway.
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 11:49 am

"..Here's an idea.... Why don't we all just STFU..."

...what fun would that be? I prefer the discussion.
 
vafi88
Posts: 2981
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 10:32 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 11:58 am

I'm with Jeff on this one

My crappy opinion anyway.

I couldn't agree more.

"..Here's an idea.... Why don't we all just STFU..."

Here's an idea, how about YOU do that, and we have a meaningful discussion.
I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 12:27 pm

Here's an idea.... Why don't we all just STFU.

Looks like we found Andy's "other" username!  Big grin

(Just kiddin' around... I know it's not you Andy. You're actually smart and can punctuate properly... )
 
ArmitageShanks
Posts: 3780
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 5:30 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 12:39 pm

Well, Vafi88, just let me know when you reach a consensus on this 'issue.'
 
vafi88
Posts: 2981
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 10:32 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 12:42 pm

Shanks - I seem to agree with myself, thanks.

If we want to have a meaningful, articulate discussion about important issues, don't turn it into a "nonav" sort of topic, yeah, great, thanks.

I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
 
ArmitageShanks
Posts: 3780
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 5:30 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 12:51 pm

No, I was not trying to be funny or trite at all. I was serious about the complaining going on. After all, it is a free site that is set up for us to use. I am the first one to encourage debate, I just thought this was kind of like beating a dead horse. I take back what I said, ok.

No need to become defensive. I mean no harm.
 
United4everDEN
Posts: 737
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:36 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 1:58 pm

I am uploading 1 shot at a time and choosing only my most unique shots, and it seems to work acceptance wise. I am 2 for 2 so far by doing that. My most recent shot I uploaded 4 days ago and I am still 5000 some odd photos behind. I used to be 4800 behind. I think the problem is that photos should not be grouped by photographer but by order they are received, I have a feeling it might be weeks bfore mine gets done. By doing order received it will cut the time down before a photo is screened, I would hate to be last right now since everyone in front of me is adding more pictures.
 
United4everDEN
Posts: 737
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 12:36 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 2:07 pm

Just to add a stat, between this message and my last, 7 photos have been added infront of mine. That is an amazing rate that the Q is increasing.
 
DLKAPA
Posts: 7962
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 10:37 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 2:07 pm

I would hate to be last right now since everyone in front of me is adding more pictures.

Yeah, It does kinda suck being that I am last right now.  Angry  Crying



And all at once the crowd begins to sing: Sometimes the hardest thing and the right thing are the same
 
User avatar
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 2:09 pm

Eric, You finally made it out to the airport?
 
DLKAPA
Posts: 7962
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2003 10:37 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 2:22 pm

Not DIA, actually was out at Park Meadows and decided to do some Perousing of the Centennial facilities. I first tried to get a good ramp shot from Inverness, that didn't happen, then I tried to get a good ramp shot from just south of Runway 10. that didn't happen either. Seems the entire damn airport is on top of or behind a hill, and no ramp shots availed, and I didn't have much time to stick around and shoot jets coming in.

But I did manage to get a good pic of the tower Big grin

but on saturday me and probably Richter will be up at DEN shooting from around 11pm to around 1:30. Not sure if it's a go yet, but I really wanna get up there with my 300D, even if my only lens is the 18-55mm. :-(

but oh well, I still have that film camera with the 500mm zoom, even if it takes shitty motion photos, it's still better than nothing.

DLKAPA
And all at once the crowd begins to sing: Sometimes the hardest thing and the right thing are the same
 
vafi88
Posts: 2981
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2001 10:32 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 2:47 pm

You guys might want to actually start somewhat later, maybe like 1, 1:30, the sun gets SH!TTY around 12 and it's just horrible, towards the 1, 1:30 mark, it begins to go away, and from 2 to 4 all the heavies come in.

Good luck!
I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
 
ebos
Posts: 448
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2001 7:48 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 3:10 pm

If somebody feels offended by my comments, i apologize, but i'm just expressing my own opinion. I guess that's still allowed...

Just checked the queue for the first 30 photographers... 4 had more than 10 pictures in the queue (21, 27, 12 and 40). Some of them will have a high rejection rate, some of them will have a high acceptance rate. It's just the people with a high rejection rate, who don't seem to have a clue how the site works and what standards are required that clog up the queue (so i agree with Peter). The solution: self screening.... even with an upload limit, 1.000 photographers can upload 10 crappy shots... an upload limit is not a "structural" solution imho. Again my personal view, and maybe it's different being a screener as you see everytime you screen tons of crappy shots.

We already have a queue with an upload limit: the appeal queue (limited to two pictures): when the queue is screened by Johan, it's flooded in no time with a lot of crappy shots from people who don't have a clue how the site works and what standards are required (again what Peter said).

Sven
An-225 stalker: 1 x LUX, 1 x EIN, 1 x DXB, 2 x SHJ, 3 x CGN
 
EGBB
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2000 3:21 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 3:55 pm

The big question is how many images does this site want/need uploaded each day?
1000? 2000? 3000 4000?

With the rules as they are and with superior digital cameras becoming ever more affordable to the masses the number of uploads will continue to rise as will the quality but the more uploads the less impact and the more repetitive boring same old images will be seen each day

The bad double rule has to be changed to include ALL photographers images because just how many BA 319s etc adds to this site?

The rules were fine a few years ago but times HAVE changed

Derek

 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 5:37 pm

Well said Derek!

None the less, it must be acknowledged that whilst the site supports the retention of multiple images of the same-old same-old stuff in the same locations, it is within photographers rights to upload such pictures. A good friend on mine has a personal objective of having his own picture of every aircraft he photographs on this site, and good luck to him. On the other hand, I shot well over 1500 pictures the week before last, and have uploaded around 20 - its doubtful I will upload many more as I don't really consider that they add much that the database doesn't already have. Whilst ever the rules don't constrain repeat uploaders and large multiples of pictures of the same aircraft, approaches from both ends of the spectrum will exist despite what is said here. If there turns out to be a genuine need to regulate the queue (and I'm really unsure at this stage whether there is - we may just be going through one of those regular temporary blips) then the only way to realistically do that is to enforce it with tighter rules or programatic contraints.

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
UTA_flyinghigh
Posts: 6304
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:46 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 6:36 pm

- Concerning DSLR's and tons of shots - you'll notice that all My Hatton Cross shots over the LHR meeting were taken with my trusty G5. Why ? It only manages to take one shot of a landing a/c, which is enough for a.net purposes.
As for serial uploaders...just who had that "Top Uploaders" idea ?

Will
Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
 
Stefan
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:07 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 6:51 pm

do i have to feel guilty? currently, i have 6 pictures in the queue, 3 of them were once rejected (baddark, badangle, badsize). i tried to improve them, but now i´m almost sure one them will now be rejected for badcenter. The others will (hopefully) be accepted The other three shots were picked out of ~ 100 shots i did on monday.
I now have two shots on a.net and personally I think, I´m learning a lot with each picture I submit. Also this forum is a good guide for me to improve my skills.

personally, i think some sort of "controlled uploading" needs to be done, because it´s not acceptable under any circumstances for the screeners to waste their time with shots that are not acceptable under any circumstance.

I like the idea of raising the upload limit depending on the "submitted/accepted" ratio.

my 0,02 eur  Big grin

regards stefan
 
PH-OTO
Posts: 373
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2002 1:52 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:15 pm

but now i´m almost sure one them will now be rejected for badcenter

Then why did you upload them? Isn't that exactly the problem?

Martin
Look very closely between the lines of this message, and you will see the captain beating up the jumpseater
 
Stefan
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2004 8:07 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:29 pm

because I found out after looking at it for the 200st time. i checked it for 20 minutes to find weaknesses. when i uploaded it, i thought it was good enough.
now i think, it´s not good enough. would remove it from the queue, if i could.
 
[email protected]
Topic Author
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:44 pm

About Top uploaders:
Just screened 120 shots from one photographer and then i was curios about how many he has in the Q and did a check. result: 184
 Nuts  Nuts  Nuts  Nuts  Nuts  Nuts
He is not one of those whith bad quality but it makes screening really boring to see page after page from the same location.
Well off now for the next 64 from there.
Peter
-
 
Joge
Posts: 1386
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2000 3:26 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 7:49 pm

Peter,

You didn't mention, does that photographer upload the same amount once a week or once a year. Would be nice to know, if he's one of those photographers, who don't have much time for uploading for the whole year and then uploading all the (more or less) good shots in one day...

-Joge
Bula!
 
TZ
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 9:21 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 8:18 pm

All

Just to give you a new perspective on this "queue length" scenario, over the past seven days the screeners have screened a total of over 22,000 pictures, while the queue has grown by (maybe) 3,000 pics.

So, in seven days there have been approximately 25,000 submissions to airliners.net. That's an average of 150 submissions each hour, EVERY hour, 24 hours a day.

Taking a conservative estimate that each photo is reviewed for 30 seconds in total by the screeners (bear in mind that we have to check info, previous rejects, other photos of same reg, and most photos are seen by multiple screeners, that is VERY conservative), then in EVERY hour of EVERY day (at the current rate), 75 minutes of screener's time is devoted to screening photos. Clearly this workload is distributed between the screeners, but this is still quite a statistic.

I'm not asking for sympathy or making excuses. We all volunteered, and if we didn't want to do it, we would stop. I'm simply highlighting some statistics to help explain where the screeners are "coming from" when they air their frustrations with silly things like bad information, repeated reuploads, etc.

Tamsin

TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
 
EGBB
Posts: 527
Joined: Wed Feb 16, 2000 3:21 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:10 pm

I'm not asking for sympathy or making excuses

Tamsin,

You and the rest of the screeners do indeed have my sympathy - but only if you support a need for a change of the rules  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

BTW Imagine what July will bring you this year with both Fairford and Farnbourgh adding to the masses in Myrtle Av while enjoying the warm summer sunshine adding a few more BA 319s to the 1,181 the site has  Sad

Derek
 
sunilgupta
Posts: 771
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 12:15 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:42 pm

This may be a little 'ignorant' of me to say, but photographers with more than 50 or 10 photos on this site obviously have more...stamina, if you will...or are able to come to terms with their rejections and will not go to seek revenge on the screeners by means of uploading $hit shots as a 'newbie' might. Then again, some people might be genuinely trying to fix and reupload their photos.

OR, they just don’t upload all the time for the sake of uploading. Personally I don’t upload unless I feel a photo is a) an extraordinary subject, or b) an extraordinary photo. I’ve shot over 200 rolls of film in the last year and uploaded one or two. Many of them are beautiful photos but nothing that the other photographers around me didn’t also shoot.

A PROCESS OF SELF-SCREENING IS HIGHLY RECCOMENDED. UPLOADING TASTELESS PHOTOS, NON REVELANT PHOTOS, OR PHOTOS WHICH ARE CLEARLY IN CONFLICT WITH THE ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA WILL RESULT IN

But clearly these are highly subjective criteria. The whole crux of the problem is that these people don’t understand what is wrong with their photos in the least bit.

Given that as the root cause, the solution is not to impose upload limits on everyone but try to educate the clueless. I would speculate that most people seem to get the hint when they have a 100% rejection rate, but for those that don’t … ban them or limit their uploads. Peter indicated that it’s a tiny minority (3 out of 900+ in the queue) so it should be quite manageable.

Sunil

 
LGW
Posts: 4281
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 6:07 pm

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:45 pm

"Myrtle Av while enjoying the warm summer sunshine "

Just the thought of it Derek...lovely, am in shorts today so summer sun in Myrtle Av isnt too far off. I may just shoot every BA 319 this summer just for Derek

Ben Pritchard

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

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 10:57 pm

So here is a question...

Does it take a screener longer to screen an excellent picture.... a so, so picture...or one that is obviously not going to make it?

When one does the math using the above information, it seems hard to believe that having limitations imposed, if even as a temporary measure during high volume times, wouldn't make a huge impact on the queue.

It is not like it has to remain in place at all times, the restrictions could be imposed when the queue reaches a certain level, or when a certain inflow volume is reached, etc.

A screener would only have to spend 5 minutes on 10 pictures from one photographer instead of an hour on 120 images from one photographer, and could then move on to another photographer.

Then when the level drops back to a certain level, the restrictions could be released.

 
TZ
Posts: 908
Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 9:21 am

RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

Wed Apr 14, 2004 11:12 pm

So here is the answer...

It takes MUCH less time to screen an excellent picture by a respected photographer than one which is obviously not going to make it. Both take less time than a marginal picture.

Reasons a bad photo takes so long:
1. It isn't fair to the photographer to reject for only one reason (if mulitple reasons are valid), then have them waste their time correcting and re-uploading, then reject for another reason. So, even if the information is complete jibberish, the photo must still be checked for level, grain, dust, exposure, sharpness, etc. etc.
2. We have an extremely harsh penalty regime in mind for persistent reuploaders (those who constantly submit the same picture after rejection without modification). So as well as checking the photo itself, it is also necessary to check the previous rejections by that photographer.
3. If the same photographer has multiple shots accepted, or in the queue, we have to examine them all and try to make a qualitative decision as to which we like best.
4. If it's marginal on one factor (darkness) but outstanding in other regards, we have to try and trade one off against the other factors.
5. If the information is completed incorrectly (or suspisciously) then we have to check the info, and either correct it or reject it.
6. Truely great photos (ones which are technically outstanding) are instant-added. This means they do not occupy the time of several screeners.

Believe me, if I see a great photo which shines in the thumbnail, and I can see all the information entered accurately and completely, then I feel a warm glow before I even click on the full-size version. Of course the full image quality is still examined, and it can be a disappointment when CMOS dust, or sharpness (or whatever) prove to be a let-down.

It is SO demoralising to see pages and pages and pages of badangle, badinfo, baddouble, etc.

So, to answer your question:
  • It probably takes (maybe) twice as long to examine a bad picture as a really good one.
  • Bad pictures taken by truely lazy photographers (those who can't fill the form in properly or don't spend the time to post-process to the extent of their abilities) demoralise the screeners to the point where they become less productive and hence don't screen as many good shots.

    Does that answer?

    Tamsin
  • TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
     
    Skymonster
    Posts: 3428
    Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

    RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

    Wed Apr 14, 2004 11:31 pm

    Yes Tamsin, it does answer. Sadly, with one or two exceptions you are preaching to the converted. The truely lazy photographers (your words) are so lazy they don't read this forum either, and are thus ingorant to the discussions going on here and by definition to the problems that they create!

    Andy
    There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
     
    User avatar
    JeffM
    Posts: 7569
    Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

    RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

    Wed Apr 14, 2004 11:50 pm

    Yes, Thank you Tamsin,

    That was a great explanation of the situation you screeners face.

    After reading your explanation, and Peter's, it only stands to reason then, that limiting the number of uploads would indeed lessen the workload, and shorten the queue. Screeners would still have to deal with the types of photos you mentioned, but on a drastically smaller scale, as the serial uploaders would be limited in the number of images they could "dump" on you on any given day, and you should not be subjected to endless shots from the same location, same angle, etc. Am I correct?

    If not, please tell us where the flaw is in that logic.

    I appreciate your detailed explanation.

    Jeff
     
    User avatar
    Bruce
    Posts: 4949
    Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:46 am

    RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

    Thu Apr 15, 2004 12:39 am

    Thanks also, Tamsin, for the detailed look at Screening.  Smile

    I guess Screening is not as easy as it looks. When we browse the photos its easy to believe that Screeners have an easy job with all those great pics, I think that a lot of photographers would probably be astounded to see the frequency of bad photos that you get.....as someone above described it, page after page of bad angle, dark, bad info, bad level, etc etc.
    Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
     
    cicadajet
    Posts: 816
    Joined: Mon Jul 24, 2000 1:54 am

    RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

    Thu Apr 15, 2004 12:45 am

    Would it be too risky, quality-wise, to move to a 2 screener acceptance policy, rather than 3?

    Tom
     
    TZ
    Posts: 908
    Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 9:21 am

    RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

    Thu Apr 15, 2004 12:51 am

    I guess just to qualify what I said (and to reinforce what Andy said), the majority of people who visit this forum, and consequently are reading this, are not the people who demoralise the screeners.

    But if everybody reading this does try to be extra-vigilent about self-screening and about entering accuate information, then it sure won't do any harm.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

    Thanks for all your support. I should reiterate that we screen because we want to and we enjoy it -- otherwise we'd stop!

    Tamsin
    TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
     
    TZ
    Posts: 908
    Joined: Sat Mar 29, 2003 9:21 am

    RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

    Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:01 am

    Okay, here's another "inside" revelation...

    I just screened several pages of rather similar looking shots, so I looked to see how many shots that photographer had in the queue. They already have over 800 pics on the database, so they are no "newbie". Wait for it... they have 215 shots in the queue.

    Oh, and in case you wondered, almost every shot (I have seen so far) is taken at the same airport, stood at a very similar location, in many cases of aircraft which the photographer already has multiple shots in the db.

    Ho-hum.

    Tamsin

    [Edited 2004-04-14 18:06:17]
    TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
     
    Sukhoi
    Posts: 1561
    Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:03 am

    RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

    Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:34 am

    >>Would it be too risky, quality-wise, to move to a 2 screener acceptance policy, rather than 3?<<

    Tom, we can already direct add a picture wihtout the need for another screener to check the image. So if an image has already been screened then the second screener can add it if they think its good enough.

    I have been working through the unscreened queue today and have had plenty of 100+ image uploads from a single photographer and havent had the chance to direct add anything  Sad

    Cheers

    Paul
     
    ckw
    Posts: 4586
    Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

    RE: Why The Q Is That Long (Inside View Part II)

    Thu Apr 15, 2004 1:50 am

    OK, here's a thought - perhaps a bit harsh and draconian, but would probaly get the message across:

    "badwastingscreenerstime" - if a photographer has more than, say 30 pics in the queue, and 4 or 5 out of the first 5 are rejected, then all remaining pics are removed from the queue and a message sent to the effect;

    "We have screened the first few of your submissions and they are not up to A.net standard. Therefore we do not propose to screen the remainder of your submissions. We request that you only submit a few pictures at a time and wait to see whether or not they meet A.net's standards before submitting more."

    As has been said, most uploaders don't read the forum (or instructions etc.) The message will only get put across by providing penalties. Why upload 10 shots on an approach sequence? Because its easy to do and the uploader has nothing to lose by so doing. Why not shift the suffering back where it belongs - I know exactly what Tamsin means from my screening days - there are some photographers which just make you groan when their images start popping up. You know it ain't gonna be fun, and there's gonna be a lot of it!

    Something like this should result in an immediate reduction in queue size, but more to the point it will FORCE uploaders to self-screen as the only time they will be wasting is their own.

    Cheers,

    Colin
    Colin K. Work, Pixstel

    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 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