Hi, all, and especially our photo screeners.

I am going to address a concern that many people have had an issue with over the years. This has nothing to do with queue length or screening time, and does not at all relate to the new owners. It is simply something which has been a factor for a long time.

I uploaded this photo a month or so ago.


It was rejected for "Dirty". That's fine, I missed some specks in the sky. I promptly removed them and re-uploaded the shot with no other changes since it had been the only rejection reason. I didn't change ANYTHING in the upload, either. I selected the NOSE category both times (I verified this, so I'm sure I did) and had all the info correct.

Here is the second upload, void of any specks.


I just got my rejection notice about an hour ago. This time, the shot was rejected for Overexposed, Common, and Category. WHAT?!?!?!

I guess I can see the overexposure, but the light was harsh and I recovered the detail as best I could. I am not questioning the rejection (except maybe the CATEGORY, because I thought NOSE was correct).

I just wish the first screener had selected all of the above. Clearly, CATEGORY and COMMON are not really something that can be of personal opinion based on the screener, and an overexposure should be obvious to multiple screeners.

So, screeners, I ask you this. Many, many people are complaining about the queue time being longer than ever. I don't really care. I have all the time in the world. And I'd be willing to wait an extra day if it meant that screening was as thorough as it could possibly be. I've heard many screeners say that the most annoying thing is when someone wastes a queue spot, and the screeners' time, with a shot that has many, obvious flaws. Well, you can help yourselves help us by screening minutely and avoiding these numerous second uploads that come back with the original rejection corrected, only to get shot down for 26 more reasons that were never indicated to begin with.

I know that was a long post, but I feel it is something my fellow photographers will support me on requesting. As petitions are a bit too formal, I'd simply like to make an unofficial list of those who support me. I'll put my name first.

Also, for everyone who posts in this thread, please allow it to follow the title and remain completely respectful. We are asking for the screeners to devote a bit more time to our shots, and it's not something we can do without being respectful and giving our appreciation at the same time. The work they do is not easy, and they do it purely voluntarily. Please do not flame screeners or post shots and complain about the rejection. I showed mine as an example, but the point of this thread is to communicate with screeners and hopefully come to an acceptable conclusion.

Thanks, all.

I'll start the list here.
ANITIX87

TIS

Tis, sorry to say, but this does not fall under the nose category..
The photo doesn't look too bad, and I think it would be salvagable (which would still leave you with common).

Quoting Airkas1 (Reply 1): which would still leave you with common

Off which youll never get past im afraid  

regards

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter): I just wish the first screener had selected all of the above.

I wish I was 6' 8" tall, but that's not happening either. This has been discussed for years.....

Quoting JeffM (Reply 3): I wish I was 6' 8" tall, but that's not happening either. This has been discussed for years.....

I know, but when it's usually discussed it's people complaining to the screeners and saying the system is messed up, etc.

I'm not trying to do that, I am simply curious as to whether we could come up with an agreement for consistency or something to ensure that the screeners see less unworthy images, and that we spend less time following the advice of the e-mails ("This Problem is easily corrected") only to have the shot come back with more reasons to not have been accepted.

TIS

I agree. If all the rejection reasons are given on a first rejection you'll see many not attempting a second upload because of too many flaws in the first, and/or you'll see the queue go down because this way you'll avoid a third upload, which won't be necessary.

regards  

Hi Antonis,

your thread does raise a valid point and it has indeed already been discussed several times. Fact is that the screeners get hundreds of pictures every day and hence they are under a certain pressure to work quickly but still remain consistent and thorough.
That's why they rely on the uploaders to do a thorough self-screening; and trusting that they do just that they often just tick the most obvious reason when rejecting a photo.
When you then get a rejection you should take another good look at your whole photo and only if you're certain that it matches A.net criteria should you re-upload.
To take your shot as an example you could probably have seen that acceptance chances were quite small with that aicraft already figuring 198 times in the database and the slight overexpousre issue. In addition if you read the category text carefully you could have seen that the nose category doesn't apply to this kind of shots.
I don't want to blame you, I'm just saying that you get much help on the site for self-screening, you just need to use it.
In addition I can offer you the link to this guide: http://planecatcher.com/IGRR.htm
Maybe it can help you further in screening your photos.

Kind regards,

Thierry

Thierry, thanks for your response. The link is quite useful.

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 6): I'm just saying that you get much help on the site for self-screening, you just need to use it.

I am one of the people who post most often in the official pre-screen thread. I do use all my resources available, and I do ask for advice when I am unsure. I think it is a very important thing to be sure of my shots, and having said that....

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 6): if you're certain that it matches A.net criteria should you re-upload.

I only upload in the first place when I am confident my shots will make it.

Please don't take what I said the wrong way, it was not meant to contradict you or be said in retaliation for anything, I am just indicating that everyone is subject to rejections sometimes, and this issue of so-called "incomplete" rejections it quite common.

TIS

Sorry, but just deal with it, most of the uploaders had these sort of rejections. It get on the nerves of many. But it's been like that for years now, never without a clear reason (apparently one screener saw what the other didn't). Just be patient, you have the time, like you mentioned.

KS/codeshare

Quoting Codeshare (Reply 8): Sorry, but just deal with it, most of the uploaders had these sort of rejections

But that doesn't help the slow queue, and what is being proposed will help this huge problem.

Quoting Codeshare (Reply 8): (apparently one screener saw what the other didn't

Fair enough, but if the first reject. gives you only one reason, how can it be that the second reject has three reasons? I'm sure the first screener saw more than one problem (apart from what I guess he saw as the most obvious one). How much time was lost? two more weeks when if the first screener would have been more thorough in his rejection reasons it would have taken him 5 more minutes and the rest of screeners have a picture less to screen (a potential third upload of the same shot). Ok, one case does not make a difference, but if this happens in many cases, it can make a significant difference in overall screening time.

Regards  

Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 9): But that doesn't help the slow queue, and what is being proposed will help this huge problem.

IT's only a problem if you let it be.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 10): IT's only a problem if you let it be.

...and many many other photogs. Even some screeners are saying its a huge problem that must be addressed  

There is really no stigma to rejections and acceptance ratio is not a measure of a person's worth. I think my record is five resubmissions, making corrections each time for various reasons.

Gary
Cottage Grove, MN, USA

I agree with Tis, a thorough first screening will save everybody a lot of time and frustration, both photographers and screeners.

I say upload, upload, upload. Upload a photo, get a rejection, fix one problem, upload again, fix another problem, upload again until it gets accepted. As many times as it takes. Show the screeners NO MERCY!

Why is this not nose category?

Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 16): Why is this not nose category?

Too much of the aircraft in the crop? Nose means Nose and not half the forward fuselage.

Cheers,

Colin   

Quoting F4wso (Reply 12): I think my record is five resubmissions, making corrections each time for various reasons.

I am not far behind you, with one single image rejected 4 times, for four different reasons.......
That particular image was posted in a pre-screen and another thread on the forum as well and I have received some good advice from the head-screeners themselves.
And that image is one of my most viewed images on two different other aviation websites.
But after all it received multiple different rejections!

I am not sure of the capability of some screeners here anymore, but I like it to have my pics on Anet as well, so I will go on with uploading and waiting two weeks to have them........rejected again?  



Freek

[Edited 2008-08-11 09:11:35]

[Edited 2008-08-11 09:17:21]

Quoting Cabillon (Reply 14): I agree with Tis, a thorough first screening will save everybody a lot of time and frustration, both photographers and screeners

And make the queue longer and we will have more people whining. It's not a science. It works. Just because sometimes you will get a level rejection and then fix it and get a soft is not reason to overhaul everything IMO.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 20): And make the queue longer and we will have more people whining.

The queue issue is a separate problem which could be solved by adding more screeners.

Quoting Cabillon (Reply 21): The queue issue is a separate problem which could be solved by adding more screeners.

How is it seperate? By taking longer and checking off every rejection reason it will make screening slower. The length of the crew is affected by numerous factors. Yes # of screeners is one, but there is also time spent per picture, screeners going on holiday, time of season when uploads are more heavy than others. Training the screeners in training. You make it sound like you can snap your fingers and create 10 new screeners who can just start banging out the queue. If only it was that easy.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 22): How is it seperate?

Screening the same picture four or five times as the photographer slowly fixes one problem after another (and then maybe gives up!) also adds work for the screeners and slows down the queue. I never said creating new screeners is easy but it should an ongoing goal to do so.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 22): By taking longer and checking off every rejection reason it will make screening slower.

Yes, per picture. But if we increase screening time per picture by, say, 20% while cutting the queue by 50%, we wind up with faster screening.

I'll echo some of what's been said thusfar on the screeners' POV, particularly workload and relying on photogs to critique their own images.

So, too, being old, it doesn't matter to me if they screen in two weeks or a month  

In general, remember that screeners are people like us who share the same passion. I absolutely rely on them as an extra pair of eyes to catch what - despite my best efforts - I may miss. In a broader sense, they're very similar to my agency clients who can be relentless in their critiques. More often than not, they're absolutely right. In the end, it improves the quality of my work (at least CBS/Viacom thinks so).

Specifically:
• Terrific that you're posting for critique in the forums.
• Dad always told me, "You'll sometimes get more with honey than with vinegar." A friendly, professional and personalable demeanor always helps.
• If you're aware of issues that may/may not be cause for rejection, include it in your comments section to the screener. (Dealing with restored images primarily, I'll often note to them that it's a judgment call of quality vs. archival value).


As to your image, at least make detail interesting (ymmv):
• I'd recrop - assuming you have sufficient resolution - to the nose, fuselage only, just forward of the first window.
• Calm the white a bit with the shadlow/highlight tool, drop the saturation a bit after this step,
• Pull up the captain's detail slight with the dodge tool,
• After cropping, use the distort tool to level the taxiway area.


Regards,
Dave

Quoting Codeshare (Reply 8): Sorry, but just deal with it, most of the uploaders had these sort of rejections. It get on the nerves of many. But it's been like that for years now, never without a clear reason (apparently one screener saw what the other didn't). Just be patient, you have the time, like you mentioned.

But doesn't that simply apply that much screening is a personally subjective thing, and a photo might make it through one screener and not another?

Paul
~~~~