Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rude appeals/Emails

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

  • ErwinS
    replied
    As crew we can see that. And Off topic..... With lunatic Erez you always go off topic ..

    Leave a comment:


  • CrosswindPhoto
    replied
    Originally posted by LX-A343 View Post
    Erez, why should I believe you? You claim to have an acceptance rate of 96%. That is way wrong, it is 63%. Just as another example.
    Horrendously off topic but, how does one find out his acceptance ratio? :P.

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by ErezS View Post
    Gerardo,
    Despite your unpleasant response, I will respond politely.
    It is your right to have mistake in your thought and your lack of belief.
    It is also your right not to appreciate me enough in the right way.
    However, I will continue all the way to appreciate you and all the team members.
    I think that with 96% acceptance of my uploads, with only a small number of rejections, mostly for technical reasons, maybe you may come to the conclusion that you are wrong with your thought, and with your lack of belief as well.
    Have a nice weekend.
    Erez, why should I believe you? You claim to have an acceptance rate of 96%. That is way wrong, it is 63%. Just as another example.

    Leave a comment:


  • ErezS
    replied
    Originally posted by LX-A343 View Post
    I don't believe you. If it is not critical to you, there is no reason for you to CONSTANTLY ask for it.
    Gerardo,
    Despite your unpleasant response, I will respond politely.
    It is your right to have mistake in your thought and your lack of belief.
    It is also your right not to appreciate me enough in the right way.
    However, I will continue all the way to appreciate you and all the team members.
    I think that with 96% acceptance of my uploads, with only a small number of rejections, mostly for technical reasons, maybe you may come to the conclusion that you are wrong with your thought, and with your lack of belief as well.
    Have a nice weekend.

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by ErezS View Post
    Dear Gerardo and Stefan,
    It is possible that some lazy people don't read the comments, just look at the reason for rejection.
    But you can see so many requests to split this reason.

    I can't see any risk with such a split, Even the very opposite,

    I think this kind of split ("Too much or too little contrast") can be very beneficial to both sides.
    Please think about it.

    PS: For me personally it's not so critical, I do not have many rejections because of these reasons, but I think it will be good and important both for the crew and for many photographers.
    I don't believe you. If it is not critical to you, there is no reason for you to CONSTANTLY ask for it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alex - Spot-This !
    replied
    Erezs,
    We will not split it, move on. We need people to learn and we will help them with a thread.
    Once people have learned how to read the light on their pics, their rejection drop drastically. If we split the reasons, what Stefan has explained will happen and that would help nobody (uploader or JP)

    Regards
    Alex

    Leave a comment:


  • ErezS
    replied
    Dear Gerardo and Stefan,
    It is possible that some lazy people don't read the comments, just look at the reason for rejection.
    But you can see so many requests to split this reason.

    I can't see any risk with such a split, Even the very opposite,

    I think this kind of split ("Too much or too little contrast") can be very beneficial to both sides.
    Please think about it.

    PS: For me personally it's not so critical, I do not have many rejections because of these reasons, but I think it will be good and important both for the crew and for many photographers.

    Leave a comment:


  • seahawk
    replied
    That is the big danger. Many will simply go to the contrast setting in the editing software and add or reduce contrast and this will rarely do. We considered to point people towards adjusting the histogram, but unfortunately that also did not really help, as now some would complain that the histogram is totally fine, yet the pic still rejected. In most cases this was caused by some foreground objects like bushes or flowers influencing the histogram. I still remember a pic taken on a foggy day with a nice green bush maybe 1-2m away from the photographer in the foreground and a plane about 300m away and nearly fully covered by fog, I think it was up-loaded, rejected and appealed over 5 times in a row.
    Last edited by seahawk; 2018-11-30, 11:48.

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by federbear View Post
    I totally agree. Some little improvements can help both sides. I appreciate all help that i got (many thx to dlowwa), and in appeal I try to be patient, but a little help regarding rejects would be nice. I totally disagree users who can not communicate.

    As YsMilan wrote some rejects are confusing. My favourites are: under/over saturation (which one?), and color. It would help just two words in the comment: green cast, cyan cast or something similar.

    I hope you guys continue this job, because it is important to all of us. Thx!
    I can understand this very good. Just to show you our side: you can't imagine, how many times uploaders simply ignore what we write. As an example, there is one uploader, who still doesn't use the colour space and thus causing a red colour cast on some systems ... after a few hundred messages!!!

    Sometimes we mention the wrong category. And then, just a few days ago: a photo rejected amongst others for missing category, uploaded 3-4 times always with the same wrong category.

    The contrast rejection is not that easy. A white aircraft on an overcast day will just give a dull aircraft with dull background, not just low or high contrast.

    Leave a comment:


  • federbear
    replied
    Originally posted by YsMilan View Post
    "Too much or too little contrast",I agree very much that it is sometimes confusing.
    The same is true for "Categories wrong or missing",Sometimes it’s really hard to figure out what is missing.

    After many failures, I can basically figure this out now, but novices may have problems.

    I think if you have a more detailed classification, it is good news for both the uploader and the screeners.

    Thanks again to the screeners's contribution.
    I totally agree. Some little improvements can help both sides. I appreciate all help that i got (many thx to dlowwa), and in appeal I try to be patient, but a little help regarding rejects would be nice. I totally disagree users who can not communicate.

    As YsMilan wrote some rejects are confusing. My favourites are: under/over saturation (which one?), and color. It would help just two words in the comment: green cast, cyan cast or something similar.

    I hope you guys continue this job, because it is important to all of us. Thx!

    Leave a comment:


  • ErezS
    replied
    Dear crew members,
    Excuse me please that I write again about these things, (I promise you not to write again about it), but as one can see, so many people asking to split the reason of the contrast, so why is it so difficult to do it?

    Also, perhaps one can add as regularly a comment about the "Categories wrong or missing".

    I have no doubt that your agreement to these requests will save a lot of time and many questions to everyone. Both for photographers and for crew members.

    Best regards and thank you!
    Erez.

    PS: For me personally it's not so critical, I do not have many rejections because of these reasons, but I think it will be good and important both for the crew and for many photographers.

    Leave a comment:


  • YsMilan
    replied
    Originally posted by Diego727 View Post
    Hi Alex,

    I totally agree with you.

    But i think that some spotters are frustrated because rare rejections, for example I got 8 rejections only this weekend, all of them because "Too much or too little contrast" when I go back to my pictures and check the levels on histogram the contrast looks good and totally centered, and to be honest I canīt found any reason to reject the photo but you do it anyways, I donīt care at all, only what I can do is try to "fixed" and uploading again, but I have very loooong time uploading photos to jetphotos and probably I will do it for ever, because i like the page and I really enjoy show my photos in jetphotos. But I agree partially with other people that sometimes I donīt understand what are you looking for, looks like some screeners just reject photos because they like to reject photos.

    Donīt take this words on the bad way, just trying to help jetphotos to be better every day as you can help me to be a better spotter every day, and I know that be screener is not easy, but you have to think on the spotter too and if the photo looks good you donīt have to reject it.

    Should be a great idea to change the "too much or too little contrast" in too much contrast and apart too little contrast, because talking with other spotters this rejection reason it really confuse the spotters, and talking with some of your screeners that they are my friends looks that they are confused too.

    Have a good day.



    "Too much or too little contrast",I agree very much that it is sometimes confusing.
    The same is true for "Categories wrong or missing",Sometimes it’s really hard to figure out what is missing.

    After many failures, I can basically figure this out now, but novices may have problems.

    I think if you have a more detailed classification, it is good news for both the uploader and the screeners.

    Thanks again to the screeners's contribution.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by glidescopeAviation View Post
    And I'm not complaining about being rejected. I said that some consistency is needed - to reject shot "A" for a particular reason and then accept shot "B" which clearly violates the same guideline(s) this is for the benefit of every member including the screeners.
    I understand completely, and we try to be as consistent as possible, but 100% homogeneity in decisions will never be possible with a crew of 30+ sets of eyes. As I've stated, I, as well as the others, am happy to discuss specific images privately in case there are recent acceptances, or even just areas in general that need correcting or improving. You can PM me via the forum at any time to do so, as can anyone else.

    Leave a comment:


  • glidescopeAviation
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    Honestly, in most case where this argument is brought up, in turns out that there is a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the guidelines, or a lack of understanding the context. An example would be someone complaining that a recently accepted image was much noisier than theirs that was rejected without realizing the accepted image was a scan from 1993 (this has actually happened).

    The image I'm referring to is a recent one. I know older shots will not be of the same standard as we can produce today


    Where has any member of the team stated that?

    I NEVER said they stated it. I said it was an attitude that can come across


    That is simply to avoid publically involving someone else who may not wish to be involved. You are free to contact us privately with example of images that are not your own, if you feel they support an important point you would like to make.

    Yes I do get that, I simply stated it doesn't make things easier


    Not being sarcastic, but this seems contradictory. If you don't care about rejections or proving yourself, why do you submit images here, and complain about screening decisions in the forum? To me it would seem you do care - which is not a bad thing (neither is a post like this, since it shows you do care enough to ask questions)

    I submit to simply share I don't particularly care if they're accepted or rejected, I've been spotting and photographing aircraft for 32 years, long before Jetphotos or any other site ever existed, And I'm not complaining about being rejected. I said that some consistency is needed - to reject shot "A" for a particular reason and then accept shot "B" which clearly violates the same guideline(s) this is for the benefit of every member including the screeners.

    As I've stated above, you are free to contact me privately if you have concerns about images other than your own. While there are a few images that admittedly probably shouldn't have been accepted, you'll probably find that most of the images you claim 'blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines' actually in most cases do. Look forward to hearing from you.
    And again I acknowledge that from time to time this can happen. It's easy to miss some small details. I was referring to the more obvious instances.
    Anyway I suppose we have to agree to disagree on some matters. We all have our own views. I'm not here to cause arguments or stir things but simply to air my opinion. Nobody has to agree with me and that's fine.
    Wish you all a good day /evening

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by glidescopeAviation View Post
    Having had some recent rejections for various reasons I find it difficult to swallow when I see photos accepted that blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines. Especially the little contrast reject. Next thing the "top shot" depicts an aircraft that almost blends into the sky behind it, and today I've seen a picture with clearly the wrong info.

    ..But to then see other photos accepted that clearly don't adhere to the guidelines is a bit of a kick in the teeth.
    Honestly, in most case where this argument is brought up, in turns out that there is a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the guidelines, or a lack of understanding the context. An example would be someone complaining that a recently accepted image was much noisier than theirs that was rejected without realizing the accepted image was a scan from 1993 (this has actually happened).

    Originally posted by glidescopeAviation View Post
    The screeners can be so judgemental at times but as the original poster states you're human too so why the attitude that being a screener makes you better than the rest of us?
    Where has any member of the team stated that?

    Originally posted by glidescopeAviation View Post
    I also find it frustrating that we can't use others pictures in the forums as it would make it easier to get our point over.
    That is simply to avoid publically involving someone else who may not wish to be involved. You are free to contact us privately with example of images that are not your own, if you feel they support an important point you would like to make.

    Originally posted by glidescopeAviation View Post
    I don't have any issue with rejections I don't feel the need to prove myself to the screening team or anyone else.
    Not being sarcastic, but this seems contradictory. If you don't care about rejections or proving yourself, why do you submit images here, and complain about screening decisions in the forum? To me it would seem you do care - which is not a bad thing (neither is a post like this, since it shows you do care enough to ask questions)

    As I've stated above, you are free to contact me privately if you have concerns about images other than your own. While there are a few images that admittedly probably shouldn't have been accepted, you'll probably find that most of the images you claim 'blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines' actually in most cases do. Look forward to hearing from you.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X