Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

When you appeal....

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dfu
    replied
    Originally posted by northstardc4m View Post
    Perhaps an option would be to tie the time to the acceptance ratio of the photographer?

    Maybe something like:

    Under 66%= 14 days
    67-80%=7 days
    over 80%= 3 days
    Don't know how possible that is but would seem to promote better photos while not being "unfair".
    This would have the opposite effect - people with high acceptance rates won't need that, and they also usually have more slots.
    What you propose would again punish unfairly....

    Leave a comment:


  • northstardc4m
    replied
    Perhaps an option would be to tie the time to the acceptance ratio of the photographer?

    Maybe something like:

    Under 66%= 14 days
    67-80%=7 days
    over 80%= 3 days

    Don't know how possible that is but would seem to promote better photos while not being "unfair".

    Leave a comment:


  • jvdl
    replied
    Originally posted by dfu View Post
    I still can not wrap my head around the mindset that thought blocking slots for two weeks was a good idea. 24 hours, sure, 3 days, ok... But two weeks? That's just cruel, sadistic punishment for imperfection. But maybe that could be done even better... How about removing one slot with each rejection? And when they are all gone, the account gets disabled. That'll teach them...
    Do you want the queue to be 40 days long, instead?

    Leave a comment:


  • dfu
    replied
    I still can not wrap my head around the mindset that thought blocking slots for two weeks was a good idea. 24 hours, sure, 3 days, ok... But two weeks? That's just cruel, sadistic punishment for imperfection. But maybe that could be done even better... How about removing one slot with each rejection? And when they are all gone, the account gets disabled. That'll teach them...

    Leave a comment:


  • dfu
    replied
    Originally posted by QuocTrungTran View Post
    Seriously, you need a break. And learn from the past.
    Thanks for the lecture, I really needed that.

    This isn't really about me, anyhow, I don't think that block (or the inability to correct minor issues faster) makes other "beginners" very happy, either.

    Leave a comment:


  • QuocTrungTran
    replied
    Originally posted by dfu View Post
    Regardless of that, I still think blocking slots for almost twice as long as the queue is just overdone. Three days, ok. A week, well... But two? That's just punishment for not uploading perfect pictures from the start, and I'm not sure if you even realize how demotivating that is. Yes, I know prescreening exists, but that's not for everyone, as it's public.
    "Good things come to those who wait", and here, learn.

    Trust me, I was not more than a complete retarded demanding beginner a few months ago, when I uploaded ~10 pictures which were all rejected. Now I have 73 with ratio 65%, and 1920px allowance.

    Seriously, you need a break. And learn from the past.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    In any case, we are working on having the number of slots available tied more closely to your acceptance rate, rather than number of rejections or previous membership status. Hopefully that will level the playing field while still encouraging uploaders to be diligent with what they are uploading.

    Leave a comment:


  • dfu
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    You're basically just asking for there to be more slots after getting rejections, which misses the whole point of blocking them - encouraging uploaders to be more careful (and selective) with their uploads. Anyway, as Stefan said, thank you for your feedback, it will be taken into consideration.
    I thought I made it clear that this would be for small issues, not to fix unfixable problems. It's not "more slots", it's just not losing a slot because of something that can be easily fixed (touch more sharpness, little more exposure, small spot). It would not open a slot for another picture, and if the reupload is rejected, the slot is gone.

    Regardless of that, I still think blocking slots for almost twice as long as the queue is just overdone. Three days, ok. A week, well... But two? That's just punishment for not uploading perfect pictures from the start, and I'm not sure if you even realize how demotivating that is. Yes, I know prescreening exists, but that's not for everyone, as it's public.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by dfu View Post
    If every image that was carefully checked to the uploader's best abilities were accepted, you'd have a point. Sadly, not every rejection is totally objective and undisputed, e.g. in terms of the "correct" sharpness or exposure, and sometimes appeals are successful. Prescreening in the forum also takes someone's time. So a simple option that says "your picture will become acceptable if you increase exposure or sharpness a little bit" and an (optional) upload button with the appeal would be a nice thing. Of course rules are rules, but again, it's extremely demotivating. Not that the top uploaders with 500 slots per day would care much, but this 14-day block when you have 5 slots REEEEALLLY sucks. Literally takes months to get some stuff done. You could remove the upload-appeal option once a contributor gets more slots.
    You're basically just asking for there to be more slots after getting rejections, which misses the whole point of blocking them - encouraging uploaders to be more careful (and selective) with their uploads. Anyway, as Stefan said, thank you for your feedback, it will be taken into consideration.

    Leave a comment:


  • dfu
    replied
    Originally posted by seahawk View Post
    Thank you for your valuable suggestions, we will put it to the list of users suggestions. Just to make one thing clear though, nobody has 500 slots available. The maximum is 100 for former JP-Elite members, everybody else has 20 slots.
    I should have said 5000 to make the hyperbole even more obvious....

    Activating such an option would be at the screeners' discretion, and in case of unfixable issues (backlit, whatever) it would just not be used...
    But #22 upstairs here is a perfect example where this would have worked without having to wait two weeks after rejection...

    Leave a comment:


  • seahawk
    replied
    Thank you for your valuable suggestions, we will put it to the list of users suggestions. Just to make one thing clear though, nobody has 500 slots available. The maximum is 100 for former JP-Elite members, everybody else has 20 slots.

    Leave a comment:


  • dfu
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    For minor issues like exposure/dust spots/categories, honestly, the onus is on you to check your images either before, or while they're waiting in the queue. There are tools you can use while the images are in the queue to easily check them. Taking 30 seconds out of a ~ 10 day wait to do so doesn't seem like so much of a sacrifice.
    If every image that was carefully checked to the uploader's best abilities were accepted, you'd have a point. Sadly, not every rejection is totally objective and undisputed, e.g. in terms of the "correct" sharpness or exposure, and sometimes appeals are successful. Prescreening in the forum also takes someone's time. So a simple option that says "your picture will become acceptable if you increase exposure or sharpness a little bit" and an (optional) upload button with the appeal would be a nice thing. Of course rules are rules, but again, it's extremely demotivating. Not that the top uploaders with 500 slots per day would care much, but this 14-day block when you have 5 slots REEEEALLLY sucks. Literally takes months to get some stuff done. You could remove the upload-appeal option once a contributor gets more slots.

    The "dust spots" in my last rejected upload turned out to be flies, they move between shots....

    And you can't correct anything "while the images are in the queue". You'd have to delete and start queue time again. And yes, I've done that.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by dfu View Post
    It would be really helpful to add an (optional) possibilty for immediate re-upload of the same picture as part of an appeal, for minor issues that can be fixed quickly (dust spots, exposure, etc.). It would be up to screeners to allow a "try-again appeal" for individual pictures. It is extremely demotivating to have to wait two weeks (almost twice as long as the queue time) just to be able to upload the same thing again.
    For minor issues like exposure/dust spots/categories, honestly, the onus is on you to check your images either before, or while they're waiting in the queue. There are tools you can use while the images are in the queue to easily check them. Taking 30 seconds out of a ~ 10 day wait to do so doesn't seem like so much of a sacrifice.

    Leave a comment:


  • dfu
    replied
    It would be really helpful to add an (optional) possibilty for immediate re-upload of the same picture as part of an appeal, for minor issues that can be fixed quickly (dust spots, exposure, etc.). It would be up to screeners to allow a "try-again appeal" for individual pictures. It is extremely demotivating to have to wait two weeks (almost twice as long as the queue time) just to be able to upload the same thing again.

    Leave a comment:


  • StefBrat
    replied
    Originally posted by dfu View Post
    ID 6868871.
    Here is the photo, he already posted the ID so I guess he wants that we all can have a look: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6868871

    As I’m not a screener I can only give you my opinion. I looked on the photo on my iPad Pro and on my Macbook Pro 13“. Can not go on my 21“ full PC as I’m on work. But there is indeed a big difference in quality. It starts with lightning and with the sharpness. Then in your picture the registry is like heat haze (or how you can call that) and the plane at all does not look very good and sharp. Also colors looking a bit worse.
    The twitter picture is sharp and has nice colors and lightning. So its a indeed better picture. And things like a view angle, or position for the photo or weather does not go into account. I mean, if the weather is bad spotting is nearly impossible due the limits of the photo.

    So I would be more nicer and better work on my own photos instead of comparing. This will not help you in any way, it will most likely bring the opposite.

    Sorry for the bad english :/ Hope you can understand what I mean

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X