Let me get one thing straight...I was not whining in any way, i just wanted to get a feel what others think and it seems that i am not the only one out there.

I absolutely don't give a rat's a... about the acceptance ratio which has been in the 48% to 52% range ever since it was introduced.

Like Tim said, I could upload a "safe" shot just to boost the ratio, but since I am not uploading more than 5-10 shots per batch. Where is the point? With the current logic in place, (even if i am really doing bad) I could have 15 in the queue.

For my shooting and upload habit more than enough......

As for my ISO 400 / 800 shots or other (for me interesting) shots:
I sit down and take my time to process them (which can take a good amount of time) although I am far from being an expert....upload them to finally get the message i.e. too grainy.

Border line shots have always been critical, but this is my bred and butter. I hate RWY 27L approach or arrival shots......

Vasco

I believe discouragement may also have a lot to do with what you expect from A.net.
The site has its rules with all the good and the bad that results from this; it has been discussed in many previous threads and I won't repeat it here.

However if you can accept these rules and their limitations it can be a lot of fun and very rewarding to upload your pictures here.

Personally I've hit a motivational high and have uploaded more pictures this year already than any previous year since 2003 (with 2 exceptions).

Thierry

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 51): However if you can accept these rules and their limitations it can be a lot of fun and very rewarding to upload your pictures here.

Look at who started this thread...someone who has obviously accepted and has played by the rules for 10 years. But for some reason motivation is slipping. There is a shift in attitude and that's what this is all about IMO.

Being around for a bit more than 9 years as a uploader and a few of them as member of the screening team i think its not so about being discouraged. It's just about the interest and fun that has gone. There are many reasons for this in my opinion.

- Most people thought / and think Johan is / was a bad guy. But since the "regime change" things have gotten much worse than they have been before.
- Too many people caring about accpetence ratios, so a loss of interesting shots.
- The photo forum has become a rejection explanation forum. Which is partially understandable because of the strict "standards" and on the other hand questionable acceptances (like a backlit gate shot of a pretty common plane lately) which leaves people behind confused.
- Questionable deletions of already accepted photos in the database, because of suddenly changed interpretation of rules.
.....

Quoting INNflight (Reply 23): I feel like most people here are just sticking to the status quo because they literally are AFRAID of seeing their acceptance ratio drop. I really don't get that

     

Quoting Apgphoto (Reply 44): The fun has ebbed away but the whole site has changed so much in 10 years....

Indeed

Quoting Apgphoto (Reply 44): Am I mistaken didn't you get a job as a Screener?

Yes Vasco was a screener. When I read the announcement he did get the job i imediately thought "Good choice he was accepted but i am afraid he will be out of the team very soon.".  
What about you Apgphoto haven't you been one as well  

If discouraged, then have a break. Don't go near aircraft, this site or anything related for however long it takes till you work things out. I did it after the big change as the attitudes of the site and people involved changed for the worst. I still choose to stay away from the forums more nowadays, but a change is as good as a holiday as they say. It worked for me.

Quoting Eadster (Reply 54): Don't go near aircra

If you stay away from an aircraft just because you find the going here either tough or just plain tedious here lately then you are in this for the wrong reasons. A.net should not have any bearing on a hobby - you should enjoy it for the love of just being out there beside a runway. If you need a break from aviation then you should make it permanent!

I do it for the 'being there', the people I meet, the pub afterwards (especially when it's been freezing cold!) and the great feeling of achievement when I view my images at home with complete satisfaction (even if they aren't A.net's 'thing').

Karl

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 55): If you stay away from an aircraft just because you find the going here either tough or just plain tedious here lately then you are in this for the wrong reasons.

Different things work for different people. It's got nothing to do with wrong or right reasons
 

Quoting Eadster (Reply 56): Different things work for different people. It's got nothing to do with wrong or right reasons

My opinion is that if people are doing the hobby solely for A.net then it's a sad state of affairs. For me (and many others) my heart has been in it since day one - well before A.net and digital came along - and my heart will always be in it.

Each to their own and I don't care how other people treat their hobby - but real enthusiasm comes from the heart; not the camera.

Still, maybe there are those here with no interest in aviation; who just want to beat the photography standards. Like you say, we're all different. But it does annoy me when people 'claim' they're big enthusiasts when they're actually in it for something else.

I remember a so-called 'enthusiast' at ZRH once. An Il-76 was screaming round the corner but before it got near he said he'd got that frame, wasn't bothered and was off to get a drink! Fine by me dude but surely any real enthusiast would have savoured the moment!

It's similar to reggie-chasers, and while I'm not knocking them it seems to me that many are just in it for the want of collecting something. Whatever floats the boat but when they're done with aircraft they move on to anything - trains, boats, stamps, supermarket trollies.....

The there's the guy who only photographs Boeings because he hates Airbus as competitors; and a guy I know who 'doesn't bother with mundane UK traffic because there's no money in it'.

Again, none of my business but in my opinion fair-weather enthusiasts. Incidently myself and a group of friends are off to EMA tonight to see the An-225 - without cameras (it'll be dark). This bird is just worth watching!

Cheers,

Karl

Quoting [email protected] (Reply 53): Questionable deletions of already accepted photos in the database, because of suddenly changed interpretation of rules

Peter
I don't think that happens.
There was recently a suggestion that it might happen, it was said openly here, but that was a mistake by a screener, a mis-interpretation that was amicably resolved and the images in question were not removed.
There are many images on the database that break today's rules with borders and weird sizes but they are not removed once accepted.
The only images that are removed after acceptance are ones where we later find severe breaches of the rules or, rarely, when there is a very bad mistake by a screener and always with a message to the photographer concerned and usually after they have been given an opportunity to correct the image.

Mick Bajcar

Quoting Eadster (Reply 54): It worked for me.

Hi Martin - like your TSV photos.   Pity I had a 11:00am flight on the Sunday, looks like the open-day was quite good.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 55): If you stay away from an aircraft just because you find the going here either tough or just plain tedious here lately

You know what, Martin is right. Sometimes people do need a break, and that's what I do sometimes. I see most of the same planes all the time, so I'll go out a take photos when something interesting is happening or the weather looks interesting (eg, raining), rather than all the time. Seeing the same stream of Boeings, Airbuses and MD's all the time is enough to sap the interest of even the most devoted.

That's why I'm not yet over 50 images (close to it though) - I don't upload many photos here. I'd prefer to just take photos, rather than meeting airliners.net criteria and worrying about the 0.01% grain or the 0.001* rotation needed to level the photo. Sometimes it's nice to share a photo with some friends without uploading it here - and that's what I usually do.

I also can't stand this urgency to be the first to get a photo of something uploaded here. What's the point? You saw it yesterday with that Qantas 747 and its football team decals.

I dunno. I just love heading off to an airport when I'm bored, irrespective of whether I shoot or casually watch. In fact I go when I need a break from everything else as I find it strangely relaxing - I can be alone if I wish and just go at my own pace. I love aviation and enjoy being around it so for me the going never really gets tough. Yeah, I've been bored at places like EMA mid-winter when it's been freezing but there's always that sense of, "Wonder if something interesting will show?". It usually ends up being an anti-climax but I never end up feeling as though I've lost anything.

Karl

Quoting Cpd (Reply 59): I also can't stand this urgency to be the first to get a photo of something uploaded here. What's the point? You saw it yesterday with that Qantas 747 and its football team decals.

In my case, that I make money out of this beautiful hobby, there's much more behind newsworthy images than having the first shot in A.Net. Being the one with the first and hottest photo of the latest news will expose your name to the world and will probably make you earn some money.

Nicolas

Quoting [email protected] (Reply 53): - Too many people caring about accpetence ratios, so a loss of interesting shots.

I reckon the ones that uploading the interesting shots here could care less about their acceptance ratio really

Tim

Quoting NicolasRubio (Reply 61): In my case, that I make money out of this beautiful hobby, there's much more behind newsworthy images than having the first shot in A.Net. Being the one with the first and hottest photo of the latest news will expose your name to the world and will probably make you earn some money

I see your point and there are arguments for and against. While I'm not the sort to dash off home 5 seconds after getting a newsworthy shot (I'd rather stay and enjoy the rest of the day!) I do try and make a little money out of this hobby. And why not? I'm going to do it anyway! Everything I earn goes straight back into my 'aeroplane pot' - a single photo sale for instance can pay for a photography trip abroad!

Karl

Quoting Cpd (Reply 59): I'd prefer to just take photos, rather than meeting airliners.net criteria and worrying about the 0.01% grain or the 0.001* rotation needed to level the photo.

Bingo!!!!

I simply can't be bothered with the nonsense (IMHO) here when it comes to uploading unless I'm in a particulary crazy mood. Only bothered to upload 2 or 3 in the last year and had them all accepted. But if this website and acceptance is so damn important to you and hits matter that much, and that's all you think about, IMHO you really need to get a life.

I mean not only are acceptance rules and standards so anal, you can't even post a thread asking advice unless it ALSO is to a specific standard and rule. And if THAT doesn't tell you this site has gone far overboard, then abandon ship, all hope is lost.

S.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 63): I see your point and there are arguments for and against. While I'm not the sort to dash off home 5 seconds after getting a newsworthy shot (I'd rather stay and enjoy the rest of the day!) I do try and make a little money out of this hobby. And why not? I'm going to do it anyway! Everything I earn goes straight back into my 'aeroplane pot' - a single photo sale for instance can pay for a photography trip abroad!

Neither am I... I take my laptop and upload images on the spot! 

Quoting Photopilot (Reply 64): But if this website and acceptance is so damn important to you and hits matter that much, and that's all you think about, IMHO you really need to get a life

Eaxctly what I was trying to say, in a round-a-bout kind of way.

Quoting NicolasRubio (Reply 65): Neither am I... I take my laptop and upload images on the spot!

Now that's just cheating!  

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 66): Now that's just cheating!

C'mon, Karl, you don't have a WiFi grip yet?  

Back in the film days, I used to rush, develop and scan quickly when something interesting arrived and then after coming back home process and upload. Those days are gone. I also used to think 'is this suitable for a.net' and take pictures that I thought would make it to the DB. Still some shots I take are like that. That's the past.
I'm on here for 7 years now, still. Nowadays I upload rarely, and stuff that's rather more interesting to me. My approach towards photography of aircraft is continously shifting.

I think Vasco, Photopilot, and others have made a lot of good points. I can't say that I'm discouraged, just maybe not that much interested as some time ago. The site has and will have its limitations. Besides there are alternatives.

KS/codeshare

I can't say that Anet has discouraged me from shooting. Yes, it's damn difficult to get shots on these days and I have to be picky about what I upload, but I don't shoot for Anet....I shoot for me. It's my hobby and i'll take photos whether they are uploadable or not. It's my stress relief and point of release to go stand by the runway for a few hours and forget the crap of daily life.

What has annoyed me over the last year, is that i've not had the opportunites to travel as much as I have over the last few years. I have craved that artistic amazing shot that gives me a sense of joy but i've not had the means or the time to go find it. In addition, the current economic climate has not helped the fact that traffic is down at my local (MAN) which has just made shooting become repetative and boring, so i've stopped going as much. The common rule plays against us there as we're shooting the same planes over and over. I'd go elsewhere but it all costs money to travel, which at the moment is in short supply.

I just yearn to do loads of travelling again to some more exotic locations.

Ohwell.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 36): It took me a year and half. Sure I felt discouraged a bit but how are you going to improve if you use it as an excuse.

I remember giving you tips back in the day when I was a screener haha (WN triple crown?).

But I agree, uploading has lost it's appeal. I still enjoy shooting when I have the time (which is rare), and I have a ton of shots I could edit but I just have no motivation to do it.

I most definitely did not read this whole thread, however I am discouraged. But, it's ok, because a lot of my shots, I know that a lot of people would gladly buy them and have them to look at, and if A.net doesn't that's perfectly fine! If I know for sure its a shot that's on par with what they want here, I'll try and submit it, but otherwise, I'll hold back...

Quoting Cpd (Reply 59): Hi Martin - like your TSV photos. Pity I had a 11:00am flight on the Sunday, looks like the open-day was quite good.

Thanks Chris! The open day was ok, but of course getting decent shots with no people in the way was a challenge. But you didn't really miss anything of great importance.

I agree with Tim. I personally don't care about acceptance ratio. I said many years back that it should be hidden. Many thought it would cause issues and today it seems to still do just that!

Quoting JRowson (Reply 69): I can't say that Anet has discouraged me from shooting. Yes, it's damn difficult to get shots on these days and I have to be picky about what I upload, but I don't shoot for Anet....I shoot for me. It's my hobby and i'll take photos whether they are uploadable or not.

I don't think this topic is about being discouraged from shooting at all period. I think it is very clear that we shoot for ourselves, for the love of the hobby. The discouragement we are discussing deals with the desire (or lack thereof) to upload anymore.

Quoting Eadster (Reply 72): Thanks Chris! The open day was ok, but of course getting decent shots with no people in the way was a challenge. But you didn't really miss anything of great importance.

I could see the crowd from the terminal. You probably saw my plane take off (VH-VXB, Yananyi Dreaming) with the fire in the background.

Back to the topic at hand, today I just took the photos I wanted, and one or two for someone who wanted a photo of a B747 he was operating.

Nothing for a.net, just what I liked. I think I did every photo at 1/100sec or less for planes landing in front of me, and I kept going until my left arm was dead from holding up the lens. That's what it's about - that was fun.  

I think this thread really is about a whole heap of people who can't be bothered to edit or upload photos here anymore. The processing photos for here is a chore, rather than a joy. Sometimes, it's like getting a stone in your shoe. However, I keep coming back - maybe when I'm in that frame of mind.

[Edited 2009-10-24 03:35:11 by cpd]

Quoting [email protected] (Reply 53): Yes Vasco was a screener. When I read the announcement he did get the job i imediately thought "Good choice he was accepted but i am afraid he will be out of the team very soon.". Wink What about you Apgphoto haven't you been one as well Wink

I thought he was... so what happened Vasco???

Peter all us old hands have been screeners haven't we? I remember you were Peter "the machine" screener  

One thing that is discouraging me currently is damn common rejections. I think that "common" should only be in place for those that upload many of the same aircraft under their own name. Why should I get a common rejection to one of my shots when I've only come across the aircraft once??!!

Ok all better now! resume normal life..!

Quoting Eadster (Reply 76): One thing that is discouraging me currently is damn common rejections. I think that "common" should only be in place for those that upload many of the same aircraft under their own name. Why should I get a common rejection to one of my shots when I've only come across the aircraft once??!!

That is a very good point! What's common to someone else perhaps isn't to me. The An-225 I'd say isn't common, especially seeing as there's only one - but it's one of the most photographed 'planes here, because it travels to all parts of the world and is chased down by every local photographer and his dog!

How may people can truly say they come across it frequently (Kiev regulars aside!)? Goes to show that 'common' is a subjective term when applied here.

I also agree that an individual having loads of shots of the same aircraft (and I don't just mean same as in the reg. - I mean same type and colour scheme) from the same place should be more carefully monitored. MAN and AMS seem to be the worst culprits for that!

Cheers,

Karl

Yeah only reasonI mentioned it as I recently went on a trip to Singapore. I had some time set aside to go to the airport, and was amazed at the traffic compared to what I'm used too. But the whole lot that I deceided to upload except one were rejected for Common. The aren't common to me at all!!!

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 77): How may people can truly say they come across it frequently (Kiev regulars aside!)? Goes to show that 'common' is a subjective term when applied here.

I've never seen the AN-225. And I've only seen the AN-124 a couple of times, and, never got it on film or memory card for that matter. They both might be common, but I've never seen them. The AN-124s have a habit of arriving during the week, when I'm working.

Quoting Eadster (Reply 78): But the whole lot that I deceided to upload except one were rejected for Common. The aren't common to me at all!!!

But isn't it correct that the common rejection is never applied on its own, it is usually in association with another type of rejection? I've photographed common planes (old Qantas 767-300ER planes) and had them accepted without problem. It seems that you just have to get the quality to an acceptable level.

Regards,
Chris.

[Edited 2009-10-26 03:31:29 by cpd]

Ive been monitoring this thread aswell & thought Id chip in.

I took most of 2008 off from Aviation photography,I think I went to the airport about 5 times,Didnt really upload anything till December 2008 when I got back into the hobby,I didnt really bother looking at any aviation sites or have anything to do with aviation as I had got bored of it but I eventually got back into it,Thanks to the A380!

Quoting Eadster (Reply 76): One thing that is discouraging me currently is damn common rejections. I think that "common" should only be in place for those that upload many of the same aircraft under their own name. Why should I get a common rejection to one of my shots when I've only come across the aircraft once??!!

A common rejection doesnt mean you cant get the image accepted,All it means is the edit is it isnt quite upto standards & needs to be improved which is possible,Look at most of KLM & Martinair fleet with most rego's being over 100,that doesnt mean because we have so many of those accepted that no more will be accepted,All it means is you want a top quality edit,The rarer the aircraft the more leniency it would get compared to something so common.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 77): I also agree that an individual having loads of shots of the same aircraft (and I don't just mean same as in the reg. - I mean same type and colour scheme) from the same place should be more carefully monitored. MAN and AMS seem to be the worst culprits for that!

Why though,Cant just stop a photographer from uploading half of the KLM 737,777,747 fleet from same day,same angle,same airport because they maybe common,If the quality is there & its not a double & thats why there is the double rules.

I personally have never understood the common rejection. If it's not up to A.net standards then is it not pretty irrelevant? Is it not irrelevant anyway, seeing as we have many thousands of images here of common aircraft? Is 'not good enough' not a sufficient reason for rejection?

I've heard it's used alongside other reasons to discourage a re-upload of what the team considers a non-salvageable image - however I've had the common rejection (not on its own of course) and gone on to upload a re-edit which has subsequently been accepted.Figure that one.....

It seems a pointless reason at the moment and I personally think an outdated one. It's too 'general' and very unspecific. Maybe it should be used more constructively to enforce a ban on people uploading too many similar images, depicting the same aircraft (i.e. type and scheme) over and over. My local MAN is saturated with ET 332s and SQ 772s rotating from the same spot in sun - surely the extra room created in the database by limiting such repetition could be set aside for more interesting shots?

Finally, it irritates me when the common rejection is used simply becuase the AIRCRAFT in the image is common; irrespective of unusual conditions or circumstances. I had one rejected for common (and slightly soft) last week (it's in the database now). My image showed two Thomson 767s lining up exactly one behind the other. The angle gave the picture appeal I think and the chances of identical aircraft sharing the the same taxiway so close together at MAN are slim. 'Plane may be common but circumstances certainly are not - I always ask the question: "What if a BA A320 was nose-diving spurting flames from its engines (God forbid!)?". Would such a unique set of circumstances call for a common rejection??!!

Karl

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 81): Finally, it irritates me when the common rejection is used simply becuase the AIRCRAFT in the image is common; irrespective of unusual conditions or circumstances. I had one rejected for common (and slightly soft) last week (it's in the database now). My image showed two Thomson 767s lining up exactly one behind the other. The angle gave the picture appeal I think and the chances of identical aircraft sharing the the same taxiway so close together at MAN are slim. 'Plane may be common but circumstances certainly are not - I always ask the question: "What if a BA A320 was nose-diving spurting flames from its engines (God forbid!)?". Would such a unique set of circumstances call for a common rejection??!!

Karl,I recall screening your Thompson 767 on its first attempt,The Thompson titles were very soft & still soft on 2nd attempt,The aircraft was common & the rejection reason was fixable with success on 3rd upload,I dont see the big deal with this & why it would irritate you with or without the common rejection included when it suffered from softness.

You wont just get a common rejection without nothing else included,Have a look at the site statistics for most popular regos in Database & most common regos are still being accepted with quality edits...

3 most popular regos in Database-

F-WWOW-Has 533 images in Database about 35 added this year

UR-82060-Has 380 images in Database-19 Added this year

F-WWDD-Has 369 Images in Database-50 Added this year



Common doesnt mean the image wont make it,If the overall quality is good but edit is marginal than it will probably be rejected & can still be accepted on re-upload if improved.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 81): It seems a pointless reason at the moment and I personally think an outdated one. It's too 'general' and very unspecific. Maybe it should be used more constructively to enforce a ban on people uploading too many similar images, depicting the same aircraft (i.e. type and scheme) over and over. My local MAN is saturated with ET 332s and SQ 772s rotating from the same spot in sun - surely the extra room created in the database by limiting such repetition could be set aside for more interesting shots?

I think that sounds abit harsh to be honest to ban photogs because they upload 15 similar Lufthansa A320 shots from same day/angle all different regos,Some photographers go to airport & upload a shot of almost everything they see which may include the same aircraft/airline in similar angles while others only like to upload what they think will be most interesting & attract views,Either way its our decision what we upload & screeners decision what is acceptable to the database based on the standards.

Cheers Mark.

Quoting Aussie18 (Reply 82): ... others only like to upload what they think will be most interesting & attract views,Either way its our decision what we upload & screeners decision what is acceptable to the database based on the standards.

Yes, but even then 'common' is very likely to be issued. What a photographer thinks is interesting, will not always look like it from the screeners' point of view.

KS/codeshare

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 81): Maybe it should be used more constructively to enforce a ban on people uploading too many similar images, depicting the same aircraft (i.e. type and scheme) over and over. My local MAN is saturated with ET 332s and SQ 772s rotating from the same spot in sun - surely the extra room created in the database by limiting such repetition could be set aside for more interesting shots?

Actually that would discourage me Karl!

I very rarely get to photograph any aircraft other than at Manchester. I have various reasons for uploading to this site, but one of them is to create my own portfolio of images that people will look at. Hopefully if I am very lucky someone might find an image and want to use it in some way. You never know - they may even want to purchase it, though chance would be a fine thing! If my photos meet the high quality standards and are not doubles of my own previous images then I believe they should be accepted - to expand my own portfolio. They should not be compared to other people's previously accepted images and considered as potential doubles - that is irrelevant to me and my portfolio. Thus in the aforementioned situation the site acts as a 'host' for my photos first and foremost. The fact that I am contributing to a 'database' could be seen as secondary.

Confusing and/or conflating these different motives for the site is an issue that has been debated a lot in the past, and I am sure will be debated again. The rules for acceptance for a 'pure' database would be different from those for a 'photography site'. For me your suggestion above might have merit for a database only, but not necessarily a photo site hosting photographers' images.

I hope I have explained my point clearly.

Paul

Quoting Aussie18 (Reply 82): Karl,I recall screening your Thompson 767 on its first attempt,The Thompson titles were very soft & still soft on 2nd attempt,The aircraft was common & the rejection reason was fixable with success on 3rd upload,I dont see the big deal with this & why it would irritate you with or without the common rejection included when it suffered from softness

Mark,

No big deal but the common rejection seemed absolutely poinless. Common 'planes in uncommon situations (and I don't mean at airports they don't usually visit) surely result in uncommon (and interesting/unusual) images?

It's a little discouraging fo a photog who has taken the time out to get up early, get into position and get that wonderful sunrise climb-out shot of a BA 747 with some nice silhouetted building in the back, only to have it instantly knocked back because the featured aircraft is common. I would feel as though the screener simply hadn't appreciated what I'd done! One look and, regardless of creative merits, it's one its backside for stupidly technical reasons.

I ask again - why apply the common rejection for a unique shot? Would a BA A320 be common if it was crashing into Big Ben? I find it a little (only a little) insulting to be told the aircraft in your shot is common, irrespective of the conditions/circumstances surrounding the photo.

Quoting Psych (Reply 84): They should not be compared to other people's previously accepted images and considered as potential doubles

Paul,

I'm certainly not suggesting the limiting of uploads due to the number of very similar shots already in the database taken by others. If there are 20,000 shots of an SQ 777 rotating at MAN by 20,000 people then indeed there's no problem - but sometimes I see umpteen very samey shots (on different days but same conditions) by the same photog's. Hard to discourage this I know but I think a lot of it boils down to us asking ourselves what people want to see - "Should I really take up more database space by uploading my 100th shot of a Flybe Dash arriving at BHX from the field off the A45?".

Nothing saying you can't but there's always the law of diminishing returns and as you know this law has been discussed in previous threads. It was even suggested that too samey shots are contributing towards a lack of views. Over-saturation I think it was termed.

I've got no problem really with all the ET and SQ rotations at MAN. I simply avoid them, which is easy enough to do. Also, as I mentioned I think in another thread, people here (including myself on occasions) often wish to get an idea of what happens at such-and-such an airport on an average day. This is where 'card-dumpers' come into play, providing that useful insight.

So there are pros and cons; swings and roundabouts. I try to look at all this from a general point-of-view; as both a photog and viewer. Opinions I express aren't always my own.

Karl

Karl.

I do see the point you are trying to make. If we take the examples of the Singapore 777s we see at MAN, I probably have multiple images in the database of each of the 9V-SV* series. I haven't checked, but I reckon I will have my worm's eye view of most (if not all) and probably a rotation shot on 23L as well. On most occasions I go to the airport I photograph a SIA 777. When uploading I am looking for potential doubles (with my own previous photos) for that particular registration. Thankfully I don't have to compare with all my other SIA 777 images, for fear of a double. If I did I would find that disheartening, because it would limit even further my opportunities to upload. Already it is bad enough (and thus I have - in my opinion - a lot of excellent quality images that cannot be shared here as a result of this rule). I would like to think different lighting is a key factor, but I am just never sure whether different lighting 'trumps' similar/same angle in the screening process (of course, if I didn't care about rejections and I didn't have to think about acceptance ratios I would simply upload and see what the screeners decided    - but I carry out a pretty thorough self-screening process before uploading anything).

The bottom line is that I want to expand my portfolio and probably now am more discerning about what I upload - e.g. in my early days I was eager to upload after every trip out, whereas now, for me, lighting is much more important. For all I know some editor is out there looking for an image of an SIA rotating and I would be aggrieved if I couldn't get my recent photo taken in lovely winter lighting accepted simply because it would have been rejected for a double with a different SIA aircraft I had taken (or worse, someone else's photo - not that you were suggesting that). After all, I assume people are far more likely to look at recent images than those uploaded some time ago.

Cheers.

Paul

Paul,

Likewise I see your point. Like I say, swings and roundabouts. I think different angles and lighting (as long as they're different enough) are fine - even on the same day. But I think the issue is more about five almost identical shots from the same angle in too similar light by the same photog, often taken over the space of only a couple of weeks. Each to their own but if it is found to be a contributing factor to a lack of views and thus the site's gradual downfall I fear it may need addressing. People can't complain if they're having a hand in it.

Recently I heard someone say that they get bored looking through the hoards of samey images when they key MAN into the search engine. A few days later I was complemented here by a member who said he enjoyed looking through my little collection because it was very varied and documneted some unusual types/liveries.

Of course these are the thoughts of just two people but if many think along similar lines think what would happen if that figure was significantly multiplied.

Again I'm not trying to separate right from wrong but simply formulating an opinion based on the potential thoughts of the masses. I for one often rely on card-dumping to get a good idea of what happens at certain airports (I did it only last week to look at BKK!).

Karl

I still shoot, but I don't upload here that much. A.net can be a hassle, and I don't get that much enjoyment out of the process, but I still view a lot of images and visit the site most days.

I'd like to see the photo forum revamped though. I liked the sense of community here. Now, it is a set of rejection or submission help threads; and I don't think they're particularly useful.

James

Hello James - nice to see you here.

Quoting Sulman (Reply 88): I'd like to see the photo forum revamped though. I liked the sense of community here.

Maybe we can start a petition   .

Paul

Quoting Aussie18 (Reply 80): All it means is you want a top quality edit

Still discouraging though isn't it? I mean, say a KLM 747 visits my airport. KLM aircraft in Australia is pretty rare. It gets rejected for "common" ( plus whatever rule might go with it), to me that common rule is very discouraging. We had a visit from a Czech Airlines A320 here just a few days ago. I looked in the database and saw over 100 shots of this aircraft. Now I bet you any money, that shot will be shot down in flames! The light was a little so-so as it was late and right on sunset. But rare for this part of the globe.

Quoting Aussie18 (Reply 82): Karl,I recall screening your Thompson 767 on its first attempt,The Thompson titles were very soft & still soft on 2nd attempt,The aircraft was common & the rejection reason was fixable with success on 3rd upload,I don't see the big deal with this & why it would irritate you with or without the common rejection included when it suffered from softness.

Mark, buddy, I feel you're running of track slightly!!

Two of the three rego's I can see are A380's. That's a given that they have been added is that has been rather big news over the past few years. I'm talking SQ 777's KLM 747's etc.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 87): Again I'm not trying to separate right from wrong but simply formulating an opinion based on the potential thoughts of the masses.

Very well said. For once I would just like a contstructive discussion without either side getting up in arms. I think it maybe time for Anet to have a bit of a listen to what the community are putting out there...

BTW - it is good to see an aussie screener back on the team for once!

I think I started feeling discouraged back in 2004 or so...I've been a member here since 1999, and I just sort of fell out of the hobby for a bit. Things are not the same here anymore - a lot of the people that were active then aren't here anymore, so it does feel different. Back in the day, I spent many hours on this site. Now, not so much. Too many other things going on in my life at the moment.

However, I still make it out the airport and shoot sometimes (only in the winter when the light is the best at LAX and SAN).

It's just about photography season again for me, and I'm getting anxious to get out there again.

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 85): Mark, It's a little discouraging fo a photog who has taken the time out to get up early, get into position and get that wonderful sunrise climb-out shot of a BA 747 with some nice silhouetted building in the back, only to have it instantly knocked back because the featured aircraft is common. I would feel as though the screener simply hadn't appreciated what I'd done! One look and, regardless of creative merits, it's one its backside for stupidly technical reasons. I ask again - why apply the common rejection for a unique shot? Would a BA A320 be common if it was crashing into Big Ben? I find it a little (only a little) insulting to be told the aircraft in your shot is common, irrespective of the conditions/circumstances surrounding the photo.

Karl,

It wont get knocked for common but it will get knocked for other reasons & common will be included to give extra guidance about the standards regarding the shot,Its just another rejected image which can possibly be re-edited again & accepted or suffers from issues which are'nt fixable like blurry,Its not gonna get rejected because its common & no more images are wanted in database.


I think using a BA A320 crashing into a building as an example is abit silly,I wouldnt like to see any images uploaded depicting a aircraft crashing into a building.

Quoting Eadster (Reply 90): Still discouraging though isn't it? I mean, say a KLM 747 visits my airport. KLM aircraft in Australia is pretty rare. It gets rejected for "common" ( plus whatever rule might go with it), to me that common rule is very discouraging. We had a visit from a Czech Airlines A320 here just a few days ago. I looked in the database and saw over 100 shots of this aircraft. Now I bet you any money, that shot will be shot down in flames! The light was a little so-so as it was late and right on sunset. But rare for this part of the globe.

If the quality of the shot meets the criteria it will be accepted,Im hoping to get some images of this Czech A320 while its Australia and if I get some good shots and produce a decent edit Ill upload it,Im not worried about how many images are in database of it,If the quality meets the criteria it would be accepted.

Quoting Eadster (Reply 90): Two of the three rego's I can see are A380's. That's a given that they have been added is that has been rather big news over the past few years. I'm talking SQ 777's KLM 747's etc.

Well Martin Im sure you would be familiar with VH-OEJ,now thats very common rego with 292 images in DB-27 accepted this year from all parts of the world,Every photographer who can get a chance to snap this colorful scheme will & they still seem to get accepted.

Now KLM 744's would be as common as anything & a quick search of database shows 228 images have been added this year of KLM 744's (pax).

Now guys Im not trying to argue or defend the common rule but there is no need to feel discouraged or scared to upload images with common regos,If I get a rejection for Oversharpened & common,I re-edit with less sharpening & try again....I couldnt care less if common is included....Thats my personal opinion anyway.

Cheers Mark.

Quoting Aussie18 (Reply 92): I think using a BA A320 crashing into a building as an example is abit silly,I wouldnt like to see any images uploaded depicting a aircraft crashing into a building

I wouldn't like to witness such an event either but I had to use this example to get my point across as it seems you weren't quite getting it. I see what you're saying now but still, to me, the common rejection seems completely pointless and serves no real purpose aside from being slightly discouraging. Common is irrelevant if an image has other faults, and in my opinion probably prevents yet more great shots from being fixed and re-uploaded here.

Does no-one else feel that the common rejection is pretty useless?

Karl

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 93): I see what you're saying now but still, to me, the common rejection seems completely pointless and serves no real purpose aside from being slightly discouraging

You should never forget that the site was not only created to give photographers a place to dump their cards. We also aim to keep the database interesting for all those who just come to see the pictures.

Stefan

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 93): Does no-one else feel that the common rejection is pretty useless?

I've always understood the common rejection (accompanying another rejection reason) as meaning "your photo isn't that bad but there are already a lot of shots of this plane in the db so we're applying even higher standards than usual". Seems reasonable to me: it's actually a form of reassurance for the photographer.

Now if the shot is unique in some way, I agree common shouldn't apply (that is, it should be screened against the usual standards) but this brings us back to the neverending debate about technical versus artistic quality.

Quoting Kukkudrill (Reply 95): I've always understood the common rejection (accompanying another rejection reason) as meaning "your photo isn't that bad but there are already a lot of shots of this plane in the db so we're applying even higher standards than usual". Seems reasonable to me: it's actually a form of reassurance for the photographer.

Exactly, common should never be given as a reason alone. If that happens please appeal.

It's certainly not useless. It pervents so-so shots from common aircraft flooding the db. In that respect our standards have always been clear: rare = easy to accept common = (more) difficult to get accepted

Common should also be applied by us to "standard"shots. No reason rejecting a great creative shot for common, but it makes a lot of sense to reject another side-on of a BA 747 of so-so quality for common


Again, if you feel common is being used inappropriately please appeal, but take the above into account.

Also, on a positive note, I can announce that we have decided to get rid of the acceptance ratio as a measure for upload limits. Hopefully this should sit well with those who felt it discouraged them.

The new limits should be published as soon as DM has implemented the change.

Tim

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 96): Common should also be applied by us to "standard"shots. No reason rejecting a great creative shot for common, but it makes a lot of sense to reject another side-on of a BA 747 of so-so quality for common

Either the image is HQ or it isn't. If the quality isn't there, then it isn't there, regardless of how many images are in the DB. Then you have to make a judgment call. At least, that's how I see it. The implication is always there that rarer/newer stuff is given more leniency. I know what you're saying on this front, Tim, I guess I just see it as redundant.   People want consistency. That's just my opinion.

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 96): Also, on a positive note, I can announce that we have decided to get rid of the acceptance ratio as a measure for upload limits. Hopefully this should sit well with those who felt it discouraged them.

Certainly good news, although I have a feeling I may be losing some slots soon if it's based on the number of photos in DB.   I haven't complained about the ratio because I've been largely benefitting from it. If me losing a few slots or so makes it more fair for everyone else (and encourages more great work) then so be it.

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 96): Also, on a positive note, I can announce that we have decided to get rid of the acceptance ratio as a measure for upload limits. Hopefully this should sit well with those who felt it discouraged them.

Yeah that is damn good news. Good move taken there.

Quoting G38 (Reply 20): I whole heartedly agree with you. They state pretty clearly that you should not upload something which you know will be rejected.

yet since the creative shots began, many times we have no idea of what will be rejected since it's subjective to the screener's opinion (s)


About the common issue .. I just don't get it. Unless there are terrible flaws in the picture, why reject for common something that is not common? For example, Wunala Dreaming came to EZE for the first time ever and the shot got rejected for common. Now, how many pictures are there in the db of this a/c in this ariport? If the pic doesn't have the quality, then that's that, but common is nonsense as it is not common for certain airliners to be at certain places.