QUALITY Rejections

[pawelm]

I don't like that idea as well. It's not even about money, but time one spended on going somewhere, making the photo and editing it. All photos should be screened equally, you can't reject photos just because you personally don't like it...

If you wan't to reduce queue, maybe it is time to intrduce new queue limits, based on number of accepted photos and acceptance ratio? Even for ex Elite Members?

For instance. 10 slots for new member, and that number should rise along with number of accepted photos and acceptance ratio, let's say above 50%. And for ex EM: if your ratio drops below let's say 60-70%, your queue limit is reduced to 60, ofcourse until your ratio will exeed given %.

cheers

[ErezS]

This already happened to me that I booked a week for spotting at NYC but the weather was just terrible. Instead of going out for spotting I kept my equipment in the bag and drove somewhere else for sightseeing. There are always other possibilities
I just hate to edit pictures which were made under bad conditions and don't like to see them on JP too.

When you live in the US or Europe it is much easier for you than for someone who lives in Israel, like me, just for example.

I don't like that idea as well. It's not even about money, but time one spended on going somewhere, making the photo and editing it. All photos should be screened equally, you can't reject photos just because you personally don't like it...

If you wan't to reduce queue, maybe it is time to intrduce new queue limits, based on number of accepted photos and acceptance ratio? Even for ex Elite Members?

For instance. 10 slots for new member, and that number should rise along with number of accepted photos and acceptance ratio, let's say above 50%. And for ex EM: if your ratio drops below let's say 60-70%, your queue limit is reduced to 60, ofcourse until your ratio will exeed given %.

cheers

(Without any more word).

I think it's pretty bad idea to have how much money you've spent to get pics dictate whether they are accepted or not. If you decide to take the chance to spend the time and money to go somewhere spotting, great, that's your decision, but it should in no way affect how your images are screened. Otherwise, the potential for a class division arises. Think of all the people who can't afford to take a flight anywhere for spotting. Are you truly saying your images deserve more of a chance than theirs simply because you could afford to spend more money?

We've all had bad luck with the weather; just accept it as part of the hobby, and don't bring how rich you are into it.

Dana,
I really can not afford to spend a lot of money.
My economic status is unfortunately low.
My cameras and lenses are also relatively simple and inexpensive.
If I plan a year ahead for the trip, but get bad weather, what can I do?
I do not live in Europe or in the United States, and every trip is very expensive for me.
I do not ask for mercy, I do what I see fit, but I do not think that photos was taken during bad weather should be rejected out of hand.
It's just a little content for thought.

All the best.

[dlowwa]

Dana,
I really can not afford to spend a lot of money.
My economic status is unfortunately low.
My cameras and lenses are also relatively simple and inexpensive.
If I plan a year ahead for the trip, but get bad weather, what can I do?
I do not live in Europe or in the United States, and every trip is very expensive for me.
I do not ask for mercy, I do what I see fit, but I do not think that photos was taken during bad weather should be rejected out of hand.
It's just a little content for thought.

All the best.

And yet you were able to take a trip that countless others could never dream of doing. My point is this: take your trip (if you are able) and enjoy it (good weather or not). Whether your trip was a success or not should not be decided by if images you took are accepted or not. Simple.

[LX-A343]

And yet you were able to take a trip that countless others could never dream of doing. My point is this: take your trip (if you are able) and enjoy it (good weather or not). Whether your trip was a success or not should not be decided by if images you took are accepted or not. Simple.

Amen to that!!

There are lots of other things to do in Amsterdam, London, Paris, Zurich, ... apart from taking photos of aircraft!

[ErezS]

And yet you were able to take a trip that countless others could never dream of doing. My point is this: take your trip (if you are able) and enjoy it (good weather or not). Whether your trip was a success or not should not be decided by if images you took are accepted or not. Simple.

Dana,
Just because you get into my money, which I think is not respectable thing, I'll tell you a secret, just to your eyes.
I giving up with other things so I can fly abroad from time to time. I'm 58 years old, but I flew for the first time after age 40.
I'm one of old-timers here, but I have only few simple cameras with few simple lenses, the cheapest equipment one can buy.


This discussion has unfortunately become disrespectful.
Why did this happen? All in all that I wrote my personal opinion that you should not reject outright photos taken in bad weather.

Another people wrote similar things, but you personally decided for some reason to respond to me in the way you responded.
I'm done here.
All the best.

[dlowwa]

Dana,
Just because you get into my money, which I think is not respectable thing, I'll tell you a secret, just to your eyes.
I giving up with other things so I can fly abroad from time to time. I'm 58 years old, but I flew for the first time after age 40.
I'm one of old-timers here, but I have only few simple cameras with few simple lenses, the cheapest equipment one can buy.


This discussion has unfortunately become disrespectful.
Why did this happen? All in all that I wrote my personal opinion that you should not reject outright photos taken in bad weather.

Another people wrote similar things, but you personally decided for some reason to respond to me in the way you responded.
I'm done here.
All the best.

There was no personal attack intended, and certainly no disrespect. I was simply trying to say that while it may have been hard for you to do your trip or buy your gear, there are so many others who can't even afford a camera and lens, let alone to travel outside their country, or even hometown. Just asking for a little perspective so you don't let JP's acceptance of your photos dictate how much you enjoy your hobby or your travels.

[ErezS]

There was no personal attack intended, and certainly no disrespect. I was simply trying to say that while it may have been hard for you to do your trip or buy your gear, there are so many others who can't even afford a camera and lens, let alone to travel outside their country, or even hometown. Just asking for a little perspective so you don't let JP's acceptance of your photos dictate how much you enjoy your hobby or your travels.

I enjoy my hobby, regardless of the photos, whether they are accepted or rejected.

[Bjorn1979]

Maybe it's better to keep this on topic guys...

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Maybe it's better to keep this on topic guys...

+1

Let's now stay on the initial subject which was QUALIY Rejections


Alex (who spent a day shooting in mostly miserable light and weather at MAKS...)

[bobh]

I've just spent three days in Beijing hoping to get some nice shots. Unfortunately the weather here isn't always the best and east asia is generally having some pretty grim weather at the moment anyway. Finally managed to see the Air Koryo Antonov that had eluded me on my previous visits and some other airlines that we don't get to see in Shanghai. The photos that I have are, what you would say, for the personal collection. This is all part of the fun that is photography and hoping for better weather at Heathrow next month . Thank you to the jetphotos team for all their hard work and wishing us all some good luck on our next visits to an airport.

[seahawk]

With options like flickr and facebook you still can share all pics you have taken without the need for any screening process. Imho this should always be your first option, with an acceptance at jp.net being just an added bonus. And the main part is enjoying the time spent at the airport.

[CO777/200]

Some people think they have to upload every picture on JP and canīt keep it for their "private" collection. I uploaded also some terrible photos many years ago. So shame on me
As seahawk said there are many other opportunities to share the photos.
So I am still hoping the screeners will keep a closer look on bad weather (quality) photos to reduce the queue.

[Sergio Canobbio]

I am now a little bit discouraged about uploading photos to jetphotos site. I checked the guidelines, and I decided not to upload a lot of photos I had in my archive. However, I had a few photos that I thought could be acceptable, but they got rejected too. Sincerely, I can not see why they are flawed, even looking to the examples in the guideline thread, and even if the rejection reasons have been explained.

Maybe some more comprehensive tutorial on how to address the quality issues in order to meet the website quality standards would be helpful, I don't know...

These are the photos I did not expect could be rejected:


- JPG compression artefacts - How to avoid jpg artefacts, since the website asks to reduce the photo size to 1280xN?


- Bad Composition (bad framing / aircraft not centered) - The mountain is a part of the photo... The helicopter is used for mountain rescue...

[flying Doc]

Ηi Sergio,

as of the 1st pic, a good way to avoid JPG artefacts is to save them at the maximum quality. At Photoshop (CS or whatever) File-> Save As-> JPG and at the dropdown menu, choose Quality 12 (the maximum value) and Progressive Scans 5.

The 2nd pic. Yes, the mountain is part of the pic but the sky above it , is not. So try to crop it better, with less sky visible

[Sergio Canobbio]

Ηi Sergio,

as of the 1st pic, a good way to avoid JPG artefacts is to save them at the maximum quality. At Photoshop (CS or whatever) File-> Save As-> JPG and at the dropdown menu, choose Quality 12 (the maximum value) and Progressive Scans 5.

The 2nd pic. Yes, the mountain is part of the pic but the sky above it , is not. So try to crop it better, with less sky visible

Thank you, flying Doc.

I always save jpgs with quality 12 (after having done all the postproduction work on the RAW file and, rarely, some other adjustement in CS6). I have also read the tip and trics thread and other threads, but I still do not understand exactly how are the quality standards of this website. In fact, even now I'm not able to see the jpg artefacts of pic 1... It is MY fault, mind you, but it is anyway frustrating not to understand completely what is going on. I never had such issues with landscape photography.

I'll crop differently pic2, I'm understanding that aviation photos follow different rules if compared with other kinds of photography. Probably, I underestimated how strict are the composition rules explained in the guideline thread.

Thank you again for your help.