Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Are we inconsistent?

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

  • Darren Howie
    replied
    Sorry guys the Qf image is incorrect this is the correct one which was rejected for badmotive.

    [photoid=183282]

    Here are a couple of more duds>

    [photoid=183287]

    [photoid=183252]

    Leave a comment:


  • Darren Howie
    replied
    "Yes, I think there is inconsistancy at JPnet.

    Those of you that cannot get photos into anet, are just dumping them here, with exception"

    Given the inconsistency of over the road its any wonder people are deserting airliners to come here and post photo's.
    Here are a few examples of some of my stuff which ws rejected by a.net mostly for the infamous badmotive!!
    Given some of the shots i have seen over there if anyone is inconsistent it is actually a.net.
    Al least here if the screeners think it is aviation related and of interest to the crowd it will get in.
    That is consistency.


    [photoid=190820]

    [photoid=184154]

    [photoid=184180]


    As for the screening here with traffic going up you have to expect slip ups from time to time.
    At the end of the day WE are our own screeners,you only look at photo's you like to look at.
    If you don't like a pic move on.
    Sounds like an engine test cell round here with all the whining going on.
    Cheers
    Darren

    Leave a comment:


  • boeingbill
    replied
    I like the fact that I get reason to why the photo is rejected. Not just bad quality. Many times I have gone back and fixed the problem and resubmited the photo with no problems.

    Bill

    Leave a comment:


  • indian airlines
    replied
    Or because it is not the subject of the photograph - the subject being a terminal overview.

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffinDEN
    replied
    Originally posted by indian airlines
    The deal here is that if you got a picture of that cop car, flipped up on it's back, on the airport premises, then you could probably take a shot at uploading it.
    Or during a dark thunderstorm, so you can barely see it....

    Leave a comment:


  • indian airlines
    replied
    I agree with Colin, but I'm still confused. Am I or am I not able to upload this picture of a Los Angeles World Airport Police Car taken at a road near LAX??? Some of you are saying Airport Vehicles are ok, then some of you are saying it isn't. So what's the deal here?
    The deal here is that if you got a picture of that cop car, flipped up on it's back, on the airport premises, then you could probably take a shot at uploading it.

    Leave a comment:


  • SWA733Captain
    replied
    I wouldn't waste your time Eagle_Driver.

    Leave a comment:


  • Eagle_Driver
    replied
    I agree with Colin, but I'm still confused. Am I or am I not able to upload this picture of a Los Angeles World Airport Police Car taken at a road near LAX??? Some of you are saying Airport Vehicles are ok, then some of you are saying it isn't. So what's the deal here?

    Leave a comment:


  • ckw
    replied
    J.net / A.net different sites and should be kept as such. While J.net initially was seen as a haven for A.net refugees, it has established a style of its own which many A.net photographers enjoy.

    The relaxed vibe is the reason I upload here, and I can try stuff that wouldn't have a hope at A.net. Sure, there are pictures that I don't much like - so I skip them by. But if it makes someone happy to get those shots accepted, it's no skin off my nose.

    Inconsistent? Yes. Is this a problem? I don't think so, as it seems to err in favour of the photographer. In my experience, multi-screener screening simply offers more opportunities for someone to find a reason to reject - it raises the standard perhaps, but because any one screener can decide to reject, it doesn't really address the inconsistency problem.

    Cheers,

    Colin

    Leave a comment:


  • Freightdogg
    replied
    Of course the process is inconsistent. Any subjective process will be by nature, that is not necessarily a bad thing. The only way to eliminate inconsistency would be to eliminate humans from the screening process. Until someone chooses to donate a Cray computer capable of artificial intelligence to the site then we will still need human screeners and as with all art forms there will be variances of opinion. That does not mean that the screening process is broken or needs to be revamped.

    As for those who have been questioning the validity of a couple of recently included photos I would say - worry about that sort of thing when you become a screener. Deciding what is and isn't to be included in the database is their responsibility under Chris' guidelines.

    If you feel that your own photos have not been included but should have been then use the proper appeals process. That is what it is there for. If you appeal a photo and it is still rejected then either find a way to improve it or abide by the reasons for rejection and learn from them. Don't forget that you can always ask for help in improving a rejected photo. When you ask for help then listen to the suggestions you are offered and make them a part of your shooting and post-processing techniques on future photos.

    Above all quit being so nit-pickey. Sure this is an aviation related photo site, but there is room for a wide interpretation of that concept. After all, since the name of the site is "Jet Photos" does that mean that only photos of jets should be accepted? I have a number of photos in the database of propeller aircraft as do many others. If we were being absolutely purist then those shots should not have been accepted either. Lighten up people, this is a free site so it isn't going to cost you anything if a screener decides that a fire truck or an airport view is relevant enough to be included.

    Leave a comment:


  • JeffinDEN
    replied
    Yes, I think there is inconsistancy at JPnet.

    Those of you that cannot get photos into anet, are just dumping them here, with exception.

    Leave a comment:


  • CPH Aviation
    replied
    I think that things are okey as they are right now. The screening has become better since the beginning, and thats fine. I have had some rejections of my pictures, but they have been fair rejected, not like over there where they reject almost everything!

    Leave a comment:


  • indian airlines
    replied
    You screeners are great. Fantastic photographers, and not to mention, fantastic screening times.

    Keep it as it is.

    Leave a comment:


  • screaming_emu
    replied
    Maybe a little bit, but as was stated you guys are human...except for clovis, he's French

    Seriously though, even if things are little inconsistant, its still much better than over there. There I got one of my pictures rejected, re-uploaded the exact same thing and got it accepted "without warning" (whatever the hell that means). I think the only reason that the idea of jp.net being inconsistant has come up is because people have nothing better to do but complain about other people's photos. Seriously, get a hobby. Try to improve your own photos, forget about everyone elses.

    Leave a comment:


  • FlyingPhotog
    replied
    I think any aviation-related vehicle is groovy.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X