Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

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

RE: HDR Images

Sun Mar 30, 2014 11:45 am

Quoting Psych (Reply 48):
Most of us understand how difficult it is to ensure that 30 odd people will interpret things in exactly the same way. But that's why I feel that certain criteria will benefit from really being spelled out - in terms of what the underlying principles relating to them are and what is trying to be achieved.

For example, for me the principle about the 'centre' rule should not be about having the subject 'technically' in the centre of the image (in a way that can be measures in pixels from the top/bottom/left or right) - it's all about whether the resulting image has a 'balance' that works. I agree that really it is 'composition', not 'centring'. If it is kind of there, give any benefit of the doubt to the photographer (IMHO).

The problem is in the first para you want the criteria spelled out - but in the second you talk about balance. I don't think you can achieve this.

Yes we could say that the subject must never deviate more than 10% from the center of the frame, but "balance" can't be measured in this way, as, in the Concorde shot, there was some difference of opinion as to whether or not the clouds provided sufficient balance.

My view is that you simply cannot apply "rules" to creative elements of the photo (ie composition). Each photo must be judged on its own merit. Some have spoken of the "rule of thirds" as a standard for composition, and yes, this is a good guideline BUT many great photos are great simply because they break the rules.

Once again, I will stress I am not advocating "anything goes". I'm saying that screeners should be able to accept or reject images based on their subjective opinion of the image, and not have to justify their decision against a specific rule.
(though obviously on technical matters, such as exposure, noise, levels rules could still apply).

Clearly there would been to be some form of consensus to avoid prejudice. There would also have to be a greater acceptance of the screeners judgement so a change in attitude for uploaders would be needed as well.

Just thinking outside the box - what if all uploads went to MyAviation.net by default, and from there screeners would review and pick candidates for "promotion" to A.net?

Cheers,

Colin
 
mjgbtv
Posts: 1121
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 2:18 am

RE: HDR Images

Sun Mar 30, 2014 12:53 pm

The problem with the status quo appears to be that some people can and will use banned techniques anyway, and also that technology is evolving to the point where it is hard to know where to draw the line for a rule anyway. Either way it seems that the end result can be images with that 'something extra' that attracts more interest, and potential frustration to those who cannot or choose not to utilize these techniques/technologies. So, I agree that fewer rules and more discretion would be a benefit to the site and to the contributors.

As an aside, I would be very interested to know how many of these controversial/debatable images were instant-added by one screener. My feeling is that requiring two screeners to agree on accepting (or rejecting) all images would go a long way toward getting consistency.
 
Psych
Posts: 3011
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: HDR Images

Sun Mar 30, 2014 5:51 pm

Quoting ckw (Reply 50):
The problem is in the first para you want the criteria spelled out - but in the second you talk about balance. I don't think you can achieve this.

You're right that I haven't expressed myself well here.

I do appreciate that it is impossible to be really specific defining what are, effectively, subjective judgements. I just think it would be informative to establish the principles upon which something like an outlawed editing technique is banned - rather than 'it just is'.

Paul
 
User avatar
derekf
Topic Author
Posts: 888
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2001 4:05 am

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 11:31 am

Well, I'm rather glad I asked the question and that this thread has stayed the distance. It's good to see that these things can be debated even although some of the opinions seem to be stuck in the pre-digital era.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20131
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 12:14 pm

Quoting mjgbtv (Reply 51):
My feeling is that requiring two screeners to agree on accepting (or rejecting) all images would go a long way toward getting consistency.

If you don't allow an experienced screener to 'direct add' images on first view, you'll slow the whole screening process down by at least 30%. Like most things in life, there needs to be a balance.
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 5:19 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 54):
If you don't allow an experienced screener to 'direct add' images on first view, you'll slow the whole screening process down by at least 30%. Like most things in life, there needs to be a balance.

I wouldn't think anything said would necessarily prevent direct adds - multiple views only being required for "subjective" rejections (ie. the pic is technically sound, but the screener just doesn't like it).

Quoting derekf (Reply 53):
It's good to see that these things can be debated even although some of the opinions seem to be stuck in the pre-digital era.

Absolutely. I'm not sure if it's a pre/post digital issue though - perhaps more a different understanding of what a "photograph" is. The digital era has spawned a term I hate for a photograph - "a capture" -, but it does perhaps accurately reflect what some people would prefer - the untouched original. And this has some merit - the image is an unadulterated record of what was seen.

Others (myself included) see the "capture" as a starting point for creating an image.

I suppose it's not really that different from slide shooting (which requires maximum care and precision at the time or exposure) and shooting negatives which rely on darkroom work to produce a quality image.

But I don't think there is a middle ground between processed and unprocessed images - as soon as you allow any manipulation, then it becomes very difficult to arbitrate between various types of manipulation. With the allowed use of masks and tone curve, a skilled practioner can make radical changes to an image without breaking any rules.

Of course with the addition of extra features into cameras, the definition of a "capture" is getting difficult. What about the the use of so called "art filters" - and is this fundamentally any different to putting an optical filter on a lens?


Cheers,

Colin
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 12663
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 5:48 pm

Quoting ckw (Reply 55):
I wouldn't think anything said would necessarily prevent direct adds - multiple views only being required for "subjective" rejections (ie. the pic is technically sound, but the screener just doesn't like it).

I've said it many times before, but this already happens, even though it's not a rule.

Seriously, you'd be amazed at how many photos get at least a second look, if not a 3rd, 4th, 5th....10th....
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20131
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 5:57 pm

Quoting ckw (Reply 55):
I wouldn't think anything said would necessarily prevent direct adds

My comment was in response to mjgbtv, who specifically said "My feeling is that requiring two screeners to agree on accepting (or rejecting) all images would go a long way toward getting consistency." (My emphasis).
 
User avatar
acontador
Posts: 1397
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:54 pm

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 6:43 pm

Quoting ckw (Reply 55):
I wouldn't think anything said would necessarily prevent direct adds - multiple views only being required for "subjective" rejections (ie. the pic is technically sound, but the screener just doesn't like it).

Sorry Colin, I take quite an offense from what you are saying, I have never seen any screener rejecting a picture because he "doesn´t like it". We have a clear set of guidelines which we apply to judge pictures. Please remember that the screening team consists of passionate people who devote a lot of their free time to learn how to correctly judge pictures (according to our criteria) and then apply this on a daily basis many times, supervised by the headscreeners. Rest assured that we take screening very seriously.

Quoting ckw (Reply 55):
Others (myself included) see the "capture" as a starting point for creating an image.

Fair enough, photography is many things to many people, but by uploading on A.net you are accepting our criteria and standards.

Now, getting back into the original thread, HDR is not allowed because it is the result of merging multiple exposures into one single frame, not one picture. By the way, our Acceptance Guide is pretty clear on what is allowed:
"Editing of images should be limited to rotating to correct horizontals and verticals, cropping, color and level corrections, and some careful sharpening. Cloning should only be used to remove minor imperfections such as dust marks and scratches. We do not allow double exposures or HDR images."

Having said that, as Mick already indicated, there are some instances where the editing has been done in such a way that it is hard to detect exactly what was done, and for sure some HDR images might slip through, too.

Cheers,

[Edited 2014-03-31 12:20:46]
 
Silver1SWA
Posts: 4770
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:11 pm

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 7:22 pm

Quoting Psych (Reply 48):
I'll freely admit, Ryan, that I don't understand much at all about HDR. Can you explain more what you mean about a 'detail enhancer'? Certainly the Reds' photo looks 'striking' - almost like a painting.

There are many third-party developers that offer photoshop plugin software containing dozens of filers that can be applied to an image at various strengths. One of the more popular plugins is Nik Software's Color Effex Pro. Topaz Lab's Topaz Adjust is another popular one. Many filters can be applied to give images a lot more punch by enhancing details. It's common for these filters to give a photo a signature look that can be spotted as being from Topaz, for example.

I use a few of these plugins to add creative styles to my other photography work and more often than not my final result will be mistaken for HDR when it's really one photo with creative filters applied. HDR is associated with a surreal look instead of what it really is.

Quoting acontador (Reply 58):
Now, getting back into the original thread, HDR is not allowed because it is the merging of multiple exposures into one, not one picture. By the way, our Acceptance Guide is pretty clear on what is allowed:
"Editing of images should be limited to rotating to correct horizontals and verticals, cropping, color and level corrections, and some careful sharpening. Cloning should only be used to remove minor imperfections such as dust marks and scratches. We do not allow double exposures or HDR images."

With all due respect, we know what the rules state. This is a discussion about why "HDR" could and perhaps should be allowed. It's just a discussion, and a very good one that I hope can continue in healthy debate.
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 8:25 pm

Quoting acontador (Reply 58):
Sorry Colin, I take quite an offense from what you are saying, I have never seen any screener rejecting a picture because he "doesn´t like it".

No offense intended, I have complete respect for the screeners having been one myself. I was speaking of the hypothetical situation in which a more liberal acceptance policy was allowed and you would NOT have a clear set of guidelines to judge pictures.

In that situation, recourse to another opinion would be required since as been demonstrated in this thread, we all have our personal likes and dislikes.

I am not arguing that the screeners are doing a bad job, but rather that the rules you are asked to apply are too inflexible, arbitrary and, due to technical advances impossible to fairly impose. I have said in earlier posts that greater trust should be placed in the ability of the screeners to assess a good shot.

Cheers,

Colin
 
mjgbtv
Posts: 1121
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 2:18 am

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:26 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 54):
If you don't allow an experienced screener to 'direct add' images on first view, you'll slow the whole screening process down by at least 30%. Like most things in life, there needs to be a balance.

If that is what it takes to expand creativity and improve consistency, would that be such a bad thing? Or, this suggests a way to compensate:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 56):
you'd be amazed at how many photos get at least a second look, if not a 3rd, 4th, 5th....10th....

So don't let images be seen so many times. If 3 screeners cannot agree that an image should be rejected then let it in. How bad could it be?
 
User avatar
alevik
Posts: 1202
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 3:50 am

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 10:20 pm

Quoting mjgbtv (Reply 61):
Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 56):
you'd be amazed at how many photos get at least a second look, if not a 3rd, 4th, 5th....10th....

So don't let images be seen so many times. If 3 screeners cannot agree that an image should be rejected then let it in. How bad could it be?

I know Vik did screen for a period of time, but I think he has overstated to a certain extent. I have been screening for 6 or 7 years, so have a pretty good sense of how often this happens (no offense Vik, just the way it is having screened over 150,000 images versus 4,000). Generally when we get a bunch of new screeners we see the "Second Opinion" rate go up - the newer screeners are less decisive and therefore defer more often. Even some more experienced screeners HQ instead of instant adding, perhaps because it takes away some of the "accountability" for accepting an image in error. The Head Screeners try to push the team to be as decisive as possible on the first screen - add or reject.

It is rare to see images with more than two or three Second Opinions on it; they are generally either then decided upon or sent to the Head Screeners queue. For those images that get quite a few second opinions it is generally over the more subjective reasons, and the desire to avoid being inconsistent. Given the numbers this happens with I don't see it as a problem.

As it stands today, most of the more experienced screeners have an instant add rate of 30-40%, with an equal number of rejections and the rest where they have given HQ and asked that another screener look before adding or asked for a second opinion. If you make it so that two screeners have to look at every image, you're talking a serious slow down in screening and all hell will break loose on the forums with complaints.
 
vikkyvik
Posts: 12663
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 1:58 pm

RE: HDR Images

Mon Mar 31, 2014 10:51 pm

Quoting alevik (Reply 62):
I know Vik did screen for a period of time, but I think he has overstated to a certain extent. I have been screening for 6 or 7 years, so have a pretty good sense of how often this happens (no offense Vik, just the way it is having screened over 150,000 images versus 4,000).

None taken.  

I wasn't intending to say that 80% of images get looked at by more than one screener. Just that images that are questionable for whatever reason (motive, quality, etc.) frequently get more than one look.

I was actually surprised myself when I screened at how many images got multiple views - and not just from new screeners.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20131
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: HDR Images

Tue Apr 01, 2014 5:50 am

Quoting alevik (Reply 62):
As it stands today, most of the more experienced screeners have an instant add rate of 30-40%

That was my recollection from my shortish career as a screener, hence my "at least 30%" comment.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 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