Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Perceived intensification of similar upload rule

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

  • Perceived intensification of similar upload rule

    Dear fellow photogs,

    Purpose of this posting is to prevent you from the same fate some of my recent - and likely future - uploads have met... read below how some innocent uploads of mine recently got rejected.

    The first such upload I sent in 2 weeks ago was rejeceted for "Similar" (guidelines 2.6.) The reason given by the screener was "I think 28 shots in the database is enough, don't you." - ok that was a tough one.

    There was no (zero) picture of that registration/airport combination in the database, neither by me nor anyone else. Hence I submitted an appeal - which was refused with reference to the guidelines.
    Meanwhile, wo other images of the same rego (another different airport and a 2nd view of the former) got rejected as well. All for similar albeit the aircraft never was pictured there before.

    The rego in question appears for the past 10 years in my profile. I uploaded 26 outside shots in 2 liveries on 25 airports in 4 countries, the last two got accepted only 2 months ago!

    I'm not aware that there's a total limit of photos per person per registration, and especially over such a long period of time. Previously, the Upload Page told me me, I have 3 more photos of that registration/airport in the database. So yes I am aware that there's this rule *per airport*, such that if you're catching that aircraft several times at the same place, one should be creative and upload only their best shots at angles >45 - I've gone through rejections for not following this rule, all fine and acceptable.

    But now the screeners seem to intensify the rule and reject photos even if there is no such othe rego/airport combination in the database at all. Of course, the weird thing is, if the same unique picture were uploaded by someone else, it would have possibly been accepted!

    So if the same Swiss Airbus in Zurich is spotted with the same background etc. by 30 different spotters in 10 years (that's a conservative 3 shots per year), that's probably fine!?
    If 1 single photog reports the plane from many different locations, that's not acceptable any longer.

    I often go to shows and fly-ins, same regos but different places, other aircraft in my collection are getting in the very same manner - the most recent ones today! But where's the limit? 10 shots? 20 shots?
    Please watch out if you're a spotter which travels places and sees the same rego, show birds, specials etc, over and over again in various airports over a long period of time.
    At some unknown quantity the screeners will reject them if they look similar, even if you never have taken the shot at this airport before.

    Thanks for reading and happy shooting (but not too many )!
    .

  • #2
    Oh and I was just made aware of this thread: posting

    Screener: Those 2 Robinson scheme 737 have pretty much the same angle.
    Photog: yea...in DUS and MUC...
    ok thats not visible on the pic...but should be noticed during screening...
    Screener: Oh okay, in that case it should have been accepted. Could you please send me he rejection link ?
    So, lucky him, he's probably not (yet) having twenty odd photos of the same rego in the database. But still, what's now the rules? Not similar if on 2 airport up to the quantity of x and then similar in any case?
    Maybe someone could enlighten me and other db photogs?
    .

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Mirko,
      could you post of link of that rejection please ?
      The 45 deg rule is pretty much gone now as we have simplified the rule to "1 pic/sequence" max - Now with the new rule we also decided to be much more nicer about same regs taken at different day, with different background, and yes different airport (unless it's an approach shot in sky very similar where we "could" limit them but that's really rare) - So that's why I'm a bit surprise by what happened to you and would love to have a look at the rejection in question.

      Best regards
      Alex

      Comment


      • #4
        Dear Alex,

        https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6014125
        https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6014124

        The photos in question.

        I also sent you a PN and like to thank you for looking into this.
        .

        Comment

        Working...
        X