Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Has the quality standard req been increased?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Has the quality standard req been increased?

    I ask this based on a couple of trends I've noticed.

    Firstly I've had a couple of unexpected rejections lately ( I can take the rejections OK as I can see where the screener is coming from but I doubt they would have been rejected six months ago.)

    Secondly, and most importantly, I've noticed that the percentage of total rejections over the last seven days has dropped from around 65% to approaching 50%.

    While I would not want to see any old shots being added to the site, the main feature of Jetphotos in my opinion is that ordinary human beings with affordable cameras can share their hobby with others. I hope the trend here is not going to be that only "perfect" photos get accepted. This site has intoduced some good innovations recently and it would be a shame to spoil them by going the way of some other websites and perhaps discouraging new photographers.

    Any comments anyone?
    My aviation images website - www.picturesofaircraft.com



  • #2
    The current acceptance rate is just under 60% and has been steady at that figure for most of the year, and there have been no specific instructions for screeners to raise the quality threshold on any type of rejection with the possible exception of badinfo.

    Show some examples if you can and we will try to be more helpful



    Matt
    My gallery of transport and travel pictures.

    Click Here to view my photos at RailPictures.Net!

    Comment


    • #3
      The easy answer to this is yes...and no.

      The standards are the same. There's been no conscience attempts to raise them. Us screeners now have some new tools in place to insure consistency. We can check a photo for level, centered, dust spots, and more. This might be a reason for a spike in rejections.

      There's always going to be basically 3 types of photos: good, borderline, and unacceptable. Good, and unacceptable are self-explanatory. In the borderline cases, we will always tend to side with the photographer, unlike "Johan's blue ego" which only cares about the thoughts of what a non photographer thinks a photo should look like, consistent or not.

      B
      I like my aircraft how I like my women...old Russian smokers!

      Planes, and girls, and stuff...SeriouslyFunny Photography.
      http://myspace.com/seriouslyfunny11

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by SPOT THIS
        which only cares about the thoughts of what a non photographer thinks a photo should look like, consistent or not.
        Amazing Brian, you have managed in one sentance to sum up everything that needs to be said about that site.

        Perfect !
        Garry Lewis

        Air Team Images - www.airteamimages.com
        Air Traffic Controller - Toronto ACC (West Low)

        https://flic.kr/ps/AAWk8

        Comment


        • #5
          I regularely check the screening stats (yes, I'm a stats freak .... well, kind of ). Over the last 12+ months were somewhere consistantly around 60%, give or take a few %-points. But on short terms, i.e. a 7-days period or so, the acceptance rate can vary from 50-70% without any problems. All it needs, is for example one photographer uploading a huge bunch of pics, all with the same CMOS dust spot, which have to be rejected, and down it goes, the acc. rate.

          Gerardo
          My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

          Comment


          • #6
            Yeah, but dont be like the blue site, where an image taken with a P&S has 1% of possibilities of getting accepted.
            [SIGNATURE GOES HERE]

            Felipe Garcia

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Felipe Garcia
              Yeah, but dont be like the blue site, where an image taken with a P&S has 1% of possibilities of getting accepted.
              I use a P&S and my acceptance rate at airliners.net (why the euphemisms?) is currently 68%. Not terribly impressive, but a bit better than 1%. I upload to both a.net and jp.net and for what it's worth I've found that neither site has a monopoly on (in)consistency.

              And guys you're not doing jp.net any favours by sounding like a bunch of (to borrow a phrase) a.net refugees.


              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Felipe Garcia
                Yeah, but dont be like the blue site, where an image taken with a P&S has 1% of possibilities of getting accepted.
                I think there is only a 1% chance that we will ever be like "the blue site" We do have P&S photographers here that do a good job
                Regards
                Soren Madsen

                Spotting guide to CPH www.cphaviation.dk

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by CPH Aviation
                  I think there is only a 1% chance that we will ever be like "the blue site" We do have P&S photographers here that do a good job
                  Thats what I like to hear! I think that a DSLR is not needed to get good pictures (all my pics here at JP are with a 4MP Coolpix)
                  [SIGNATURE GOES HERE]

                  Felipe Garcia

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Felipe Garcia
                    Thats what I like to hear! I think that a DSLR is not needed to get good pictures (all my pics here at JP are with a 4MP Coolpix)
                    Well Felipe if its a Nikon it good enough for me
                    Regards
                    Soren Madsen

                    Spotting guide to CPH www.cphaviation.dk

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I would say that the standards of the actual picture quality (noise, grain) has increased somewhat over the 2 years I've uploaded photos here. My first hundred shots when I was not proficient in photoshop (nor composition) would probably get rejected if I tried to upload today.

                      For a P&S user like myself, it really puts the pressure to get a perfect composition on the spot which is of course harder on a shutter-laggy, auto-zoom machine!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Well in the long run P&S users will get problems. Next summer we will see even more DSLR users and some of them will be using 8MP+ and better cams. This effects the average quality.
                        My photo editing guide - updated and improved Feb. 2010
                        My Nikon D100,D200,D300, D800, D7200 basic spotting settings guide
                        ACIG - the best resource for military aviation information

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hi
                          I have also notice that it have been quite harder to get pucs accepted. I have yesterday got 16/20 rejected, some due to oversharpen which I donīt understand as they previous was rejected because they were to soft.
                          Best regards

                          Peter Lund

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            If we talk over period of 1-2 years or so, then yes, I guess, we had a slight increase in acceptance standards, even if we didn't give out new instructions within the screening team.

                            First of all, new cameras means more or less a better photo quality, always assuming, the photog knows, what he's doing.... Photogs also get better with the time. I have seen names here whil screening, where I initially thought, they would never get a picture accepted, now they are uploading constantly top quality.

                            I see this happening on all other sites I know as well. Apparently it's true, life is a school. One will have to learn and to develop his knowledge of everything he's doing the whole life, including his hobby.

                            Gerardo
                            My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by seahawk
                              Well in the long run P&S users will get problems. Next summer we will see even more DSLR users and some of them will be using 8MP+ and better cams. This effects the average quality.
                              You can get P&S cameras with 7MP now and as long as the pictures taken with a P&S camera is good quality, then there should not be a problem

                              Originally posted by Peter Lund
                              Hi
                              I have also notice that it have been quite harder to get pucs accepted. I have yesterday got 16/20 rejected, some due to oversharpen which I donīt understand as they previous was rejected because they were to soft.
                              Hi Peter

                              I have just gone through all you rejections. It true that some of you pictures were rejected for being too soft, but they are oversharpend now, some to the point that it has produced white halos around the aircraft. There is a fine line between soft and oversharpening a picture
                              Regards
                              Soren Madsen

                              Spotting guide to CPH www.cphaviation.dk

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X