Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How similar is similar?

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

  • How similar is similar?

    What I mean - is this reason for rejection correct?

    I have this photo accepted:



    And this one rejected



    with Admin Comments >> soft look caused by heat haze. Also: similar already in db.

    So what I appealed for was similarity in quality - heat haze affected both similary. But these are two different palnes - one seat and two seat, so why "already in db"?

  • #2
    What happened here was that you had one image of a Mig 29K Fulcrum (single seat) in the database with no registration or c/n. You then uploaded the image of the two seat Mig 29KUB Fulcrum, (BUT.... you uploaded it as a Mig 29K) also with no registration or c/n,
    The database picked up the second upload as being the same aircraft as the first on the basis of the missing registration and c/n and the fact that it was incorrectly uploaded as a 29K. If you had uploaded it as a 29KUB this error would not have happened.
    I have added the type Mig 29KUB Fulcrum under the manufacturer Mikoyan - Gureyevich for future use.
    If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

    Comment


    • #3
      Is there any possible way to return this photo from appeal rejection by power of screeners or one must reupload it?

      PS I agree that these are not of a great quality but they are very rare photos of military planes in mfd paint.

      Comment


      • #4
        Please reupload and I'll prescreened it later today. I'm doing it because there was an obvious mistake from our part but this is actually not something we usually do (prescreening).

        Regards
        Alex

        Comment


        • #5
          I'll do. I have no slots in queue left, but will delete last one to give way for this shot. Thanks.

          Comment


          • #6
            Now it's rejected again. I checked "hot" on it, and get this:

            Screener's Comments: Two seaters in database for some months now. Each sub-type is not considered HOT.

            Some month, really? This photo is of the end of this April, first time it cannot be posted because it can be only one plane with same reg (or without one) in queue and I already posted Il-38. And when it was posted second time there was no two seater in db, so I can't choose right subtype.

            I will appeal it again, but think it's last time.

            Comment


            • #7
              Thanks. It accepted at least

              Comment


              • #8
                The fact remains that you should have requested the addition of Mig 29KUB Fulcrum first and then uploaded the 2 seater under the correct type. That would have prevented all this confusion. You should consider yourself lucky that your shot has been accepted.

                This 2 seater has been in the database since September 2013.
                http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.p...822549&nseq=15

                There are many subtypes of the Mig 29. We do not consider subtypes as HOT.
                If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

                Comment


                • #9
                  I post is as Hot not because of new subtype (your example, btw is wrong, it's not carrier based one) but because of Alex's promise to screen it today and I think (may be wrong) that without "hot" it will not be seen by screeners till the end of the queue.

                  Also, I have two shots (of both planes) from the rear, where BAR hook is clearly visible. Are they of any interest for JP db?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    you shouldn't upload it as hot. Just in the normal queue, I'll find it.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Thanks, Alex. Sorry for misunderstanding.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Alex, I dealt with it when he uploaded it as hot. Apologies if I'm treading on your toes but I figured I might as well get it out of the way.
                        If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Thanks Brian !

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Sorry to push up this again but is this really not different photos:



                            and:



                            Second one was rejected as Similar and Rejected in appeal as Not much difference. I'm in doubt - is it really not interesting to show same military plane in same position but with different kind of weapons or other loads?

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X