Hi,
this pic was successfully uploaded: https://abload.de/img/q33a2719-cr2_dxo_gros7ej4g.jpg
This second uplaod was rejected for "double" even after appeal with the notice "same date/side of the first pic"
https://abload.de/img/q33a2637-cr2_dxo_gros54k0o.jpg
It is right, that the upload rules say, that the pics must have a minumim of 90 degrees difference not to be regarded as double. If you take this rule very strictly the rejection is right.
But does this make really sense in this case? The second shot is not of the same sequence, it shows another background and it shows two different scenes (taxiing/deicing) In the rejected pic you see only very little of the same side of the accpted pic. The difference of the angle is very close to 90 degrees. Is it really not possible to handle this rule more flexible ?
What do you mean?
Best greetings
Rainer
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
-
-
beaverhunter
Screener
- Posts: 67
- Joined:
Re: Very strict "double" rejection!?
Rainer, its technically a double, but there could be an exception due to the different view and sequence. I suggest you appeal the rejection. No guarantees
Cheers,
John
Photo screener
Cheers,
John
Photo screener
Re: Very strict "double" rejection!?
Two excellent images that only serve to show why the site is dying on its feet. Both would enhance any internet photo site, but Anet, being so hung up on outdated acceptance standards, would prefer to alienate long term contributors rather than 'bend the rules'.
Re: Very strict "double" rejection!?
beaverhunter wrote:Rainer, its technically a double, but there could be an exception due to the different view and sequence. I suggest you appeal the rejection. No guarantees
Cheers,
John
Photo screener
Hi John,
thank you for your reply. I had appealed already and it was rejected again.
What shall I do!
Best regards
Rainer
-
-
beaverhunter
Screener
- Posts: 67
- Joined:
Re: Very strict "double" rejection!?
Hi Rainer,
Under the present rules, once a photo has been rejected on appeal the decision is final. It can be difficult to draw the line on doubles. Sorry
John
Under the present rules, once a photo has been rejected on appeal the decision is final. It can be difficult to draw the line on doubles. Sorry
John
Re: Very strict "double" rejection!?
beaverhunter wrote:Hi Rainer,
Under the present rules, once a photo has been rejected on appeal the decision is final. It can be difficult to draw the line on doubles. Sorry
John
Hi John,
thank you for your reply.
I take it that way: "Your db, your rules and your decisions what is attractive for the db and what not" !
So I know for the future what I uplaod and what not.
Many greetings
Rainer
Re: Very strict "double" rejection!?
comet1 wrote:Hi,
this pic was successfully uploaded: https://abload.de/img/q33a2719-cr2_dxo_gros7ej4g.jpg
This second uplaod was rejected for "double" even after appeal with the notice "same date/side of the first pic"
https://abload.de/img/q33a2637-cr2_dxo_gros54k0o.jpg
It is right, that the upload rules say, that the pics must have a minumim of 90 degrees difference not to be regarded as double. If you take this rule very strictly the rejection is right.
But does this make really sense in this case? The second shot is not of the same sequence, it shows another background and it shows two different scenes (taxiing/deicing) In the rejected pic you see only very little of the same side of the accpted pic. The difference of the angle is very close to 90 degrees. Is it really not possible to handle this rule more flexible ?
What do you mean?
Best greetings
Rainer
Oh my dear. Those two images soooo look like each other - practically identical.
Screening crew *must* know what they're doing. Definitely a "double".
I am sorry for you that an appeal didn't work, the deicing is a really cool photo. As is the side view panning shot.
Re: Very strict "double" rejection!?
beaverhunter wrote:Hi Rainer,
Under the present rules, once a photo has been rejected on appeal the decision is final. It can be difficult to draw the line on doubles. Sorry
John
I'm trying to understand how this is a double.
One is of a plane being de-iced, the second is of a plane landing/taking off. It just seems like bullying to me.
-
-
PanAm_DC10
Community Manager
- Posts: 4220
- Joined:
Re: Very strict "double" rejection!?
Hi Rainer
Unfortunately the double rule only allows 1 image for the same side. It does appear to be a harsh rejection but that is how the rules have been for a very long time. That said, as the motives are vastly different I am of the opinion it should not be double.
Regards
Paul
Unfortunately the double rule only allows 1 image for the same side. It does appear to be a harsh rejection but that is how the rules have been for a very long time. That said, as the motives are vastly different I am of the opinion it should not be double.
Regards
Paul
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests