Steve Rinde - Advice & Pre-screening

[rindejr]

First time posting on forum.
Question on Double Upload rejection. I recently uploaded a picture into my queue at "hot", then went to my queue and saw it had not "entered screening" yet so I deleted it from queue. About one minute later I uploaded the picture again marked at "hot", went to my queue and it had "entered screening" (the first picture I uploaded was not in the queue). It was not actually a hot photo so it was rejected rightly for that. I was surprised to see my first upload also in my rejections as well though.

I went on to appeal the photo rejected as "double upload" explaining as I did above, also questioning if there is a lag in the system somewhere that would allow me to delete it and it enter screening. I wasn't looking for it to be accepted on appeal, only removed from my rejection queue. Unfortunately, the appeal was rejected with no explanation regarding my specific scenario, only a link to the double upload sticky topic, which doesn't answer my scenario.

Is there a lag in the system that allows a picture to be deleted from queue and also enter screening?
Is it possible for a rejection to be reversed and NOT accepted as a photo into the database? Basically deleted from the rejection queue.

Thanks!
Steve

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8292887

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8292897

[dlowwa]

First time posting on forum.
Question on Double Upload rejection. I recently uploaded a picture into my queue at "hot", then went to my queue and saw it had not "entered screening" yet so I deleted it from queue. About one minute later I uploaded the picture again marked at "hot", went to my queue and it had "entered screening" (the first picture I uploaded was not in the queue). It was not actually a hot photo so it was rejected rightly for that. I was surprised to see my first upload also in my rejections as well though.

I went on to appeal the photo rejected as "double upload" explaining as I did above, also questioning if there is a lag in the system somewhere that would allow me to delete it and it enter screening. I wasn't looking for it to be accepted on appeal, only removed from my rejection queue. Unfortunately, the appeal was rejected with no explanation regarding my specific scenario, only a link to the double upload sticky topic, which doesn't answer my scenario.

Is there a lag in the system that allows a picture to be deleted from queue and also enter screening?
Is it possible for a rejection to be reversed and NOT accepted as a photo into the database? Basically deleted from the rejection queue.

Thanks!
Steve

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8292887

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8292897

The only lag is of your own making - the time it takes for you see the image is still in the queue, and decide to click on delete. Since that is not instantaneous, the time between those two events is the time it will have to enter screening. If there are screeners active at that time, your photo could have (and seems to have) entered screening in that gap, no matter how small it may have been.

Please realize that as soon as you click on 'Upload Photo' it is then live, and even if you then decide to delete it 5 seconds later, it could enter screening at any point in those 5 seconds.

[rindejr]

The only lag is of your own making - the time it takes for you see the image is still in the queue, and decide to click on delete. Since that is not instantaneous, the time between those two events is the time it will have to enter screening. If there are screeners active at that time, your photo could have (and seems to have) entered screening in that gap, no matter how small it may have been.

Please realize that as soon as you click on 'Upload Photo' it is then live, and even if you then decide to delete it 5 seconds later, it could enter screening at any point in those 5 seconds.

Thanks for the explanation. I'll make sure I take a few more minutes in between if I delete a hot photo and re-upload just to be safe. It would be nice if the system locked you out from deleting if it has truly been "picked" and entered screening, even if the user screen doesn't say "entered screening..." (the hypothetical 5 second lag). This seems to indicated the user can delete as long as their screen doesn't show it has "entered screening", 5 seconds or 5 minutes, so long as they don't refresh their page. Could be a bug?

I apologize if this is unnecessary discourse; just trying to figure out exactly how this was able to happen.

What is the answer to my second question?

Thanks again, dlowwa!

[dlowwa]

Thanks for the explanation. I'll make sure I take a few more minutes in between if I delete a hot photo and re-upload just to be safe. It would be nice if the system locked you out from deleting if it has truly been "picked" and entered screening, even if the user screen doesn't say "entered screening..." (the hypothetical 5 second lag). This seems to indicated the user can delete as long as their screen doesn't show it has "entered screening", 5 seconds or 5 minutes, so long as they don't refresh their page. Could be a bug?

I apologize if this is unnecessary discourse; just trying to figure out exactly how this was able to happen.

What is the answer to my second question?

Thanks again, dlowwa!

There is no bug that I am aware of, simply from the time you decided to delete the image to the time you actually clicked delete, the image was already screened and rejected. Invalid hot/double images can be screened and rejected in seconds, so this is not an unlikely situation.

The only way to reverse the rejection is by appealing, which you already have done, and already have an outcome. If you are asking in a roundabout way to have one less slot blocked from the rejection, that is not possible.

[rindejr]

There is no bug that I am aware of, simply from the time you decided to delete the image to the time you actually clicked delete, the image was already screened and rejected. Invalid hot/double images can be screened and rejected in seconds, so this is not an unlikely situation.

The only way to reverse the rejection is by appealing, which you already have done, and already have an outcome. If you are asking in a roundabout way to have one less slot blocked from the rejection, that is not possible.

Not asking anything in a roundabout way - just think it's odd I could delete a queued photo that had entered or been screened (couldn't have been rejected for at least a minute until I re-uploaded). That shouldn't be able to happen. 100% my fault for uploading a photo that wasn't hot.

[dlowwa]

Not asking anything in a roundabout way - just think it's odd I could delete a queued photo that had entered or been screened (couldn't have been rejected for at least a minute until I re-uploaded). That shouldn't be able to happen. 100% my fault for uploading a photo that wasn't hot.

I'm sorry.. I'm a bit slow tonight. I think I finally get what you were trying to say. I thought you were trying to ask why your image was rejected when you thought you had deleted it..with another image still in the queue. What you're saying is the first image was rejected for double BEFORE you uploaded the second image? That does sound impossible, but I can't tell exactly what happened because we can only see the timestamp for when the images were uploaded, not when they were rejected (which would prove your story if the first were rejected before the second was even uploaded). As I said, I'm not aware of images lingering in the queue after being deleted, so I don't have a better explanation for you, unfortunately.

[rindejr]

I'm sorry.. I'm a bit slow tonight. I think I finally get what you were trying to say. I thought you were trying to ask why your image was rejected when you thought you had deleted it..with another image still in the queue. What you're saying is the first image was rejected for double BEFORE you uploaded the second image? That does sound impossible, but I can't tell exactly what happened because we can only see the timestamp for when the images were uploaded, not when they were rejected (which would prove your story if the first were rejected before the second was even uploaded). As I said, I'm not aware of images lingering in the queue after being deleted, so I don't have a better explanation for you, unfortunately.

No worry, I'm sure I'm not communicating super clear - the limitations of online communication. The heart of the matter is this (disregard my pictures, rejection reasons, appeals, reversals, etc.): I believe it is possible for a user to delete a photo from queue AND for it to simultaneously be in screening. Not active/live to a user, active/live for a screener. This was my experience.

I understand if this seems like a freak scenario and not worthy of further looking into or testing by the development team. But if there is a running list of things for a development team to look into during the next round of website enhancements and development, this could be considered.

Thanks for your time and dialogue!

[dlowwa]

No worry, I'm sure I'm not communicating super clear - the limitations of online communication. The heart of the matter is this (disregard my pictures, rejection reasons, appeals, reversals, etc.): I believe it is possible for a user to delete a photo from queue AND for it to simultaneously be in screening. Not active/live to a user, active/live for a screener. This was my experience.

I understand if this seems like a freak scenario and not worthy of further looking into or testing by the development team. But if there is a running list of things for a development team to look into during the next round of website enhancements and development, this could be considered.

Thanks for your time and dialogue!

I'll make note of it in case it does happen again, but there have been issues with the exact opposite: uploaders being unhappy they were unable to delete a photo because it had already entered screening, so if your case is as described, it would certainly be an anomaly.

[rindejr]

I would welcome advice/help with this rejection and the reasons below: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8299512

Bad Info: I'm guessing the bad info is that I selected "airport overview"? Looking through the list of options, "overview" seemed the best fit for my picture, as nothing else fit and "overview" seems like it would be a catch-all for airport pictures that don't fit other options. "Airport overview" seems less-specific and more subjective. For my rejected photo, what would be the proper "airport view" option?

Bad motive: This is a very small airport with no control tower and a few unexceptional hangars. This airport signage is the most distinguishing feature of the airport, save an aerial view, and would be the first thing people notice coming to the airport. If the photo is on FR24 people would instantaneously know where they are at. Is there an acceptable motive for this photo, or similar photos of signage at small airports? Full disclosure - I did not put any motive comments to screener since I didn't think it necessary, but will in the future if it is.

Thanks!

[dlowwa]

I would welcome advice/help with this rejection and the reasons below: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8299512

Bad Info: I'm guessing the bad info is that I selected "airport overview"? Looking through the list of options, "overview" seemed the best fit for my picture, as nothing else fit and "overview" seems like it would be a catch-all for airport pictures that don't fit other options. "Airport overview" seems less-specific and more subjective. For my rejected photo, what would be the proper "airport view" option?

No, was uploaded as 'military'.

Bad motive: This is a very small airport with no control tower and a few unexceptional hangars. This airport signage is the most distinguishing feature of the airport, save an aerial view, and would be the first thing people notice coming to the airport. If the photo is on FR24 people would instantaneously know where they are at. Is there an acceptable motive for this photo, or similar photos of signage at small airports?

It is not. Airport signs won't be accepted unless something else is visible (aircraft, runway, terminal, etc.)

[rindejr]

No, was uploaded as 'military'.



It is not. Airport signs won't be accepted unless something else is visible (aircraft, runway, terminal, etc.)

Shaking my head at myself for "military"...

In this picture there is part of a hangar on the right, and a runway approach light for RWY 31 to the left of the sign. Still not acceptable?

[LX-A343]

Shaking my head at myself for "military"...

In this picture there is part of a hangar on the right, and a runway approach light for RWY 31 to the left of the sign. Still not acceptable?

No. The main subject needs to be an airport infrastructure, like for example a ramp, runway, tower.

[rindejr]

No. The main subject needs to be an airport infrastructure, like for example a ramp, runway, tower.

Sounds good! Thanks!

[rindejr]

Rejected for "backlit" and "bad info" - https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8326245

For future reference on backlit, is this very close to being not backlit? Where specifically should I focus to see if it will be rejected as backlit?

Thanks for your time!

[dlowwa]

Rejected for "backlit" and "bad info" - https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8326245

For future reference on backlit, is this very close to being not backlit? Where specifically should I focus to see if it will be rejected as backlit?

Thanks for your time!

If the tail is completely in shadow, it will usually be considered backlit.