comet1 - editing advice

[comet1]

Hi,
at the moment I struggle a lot with multiple " too much or too little contrast" rejections with some pics. Imo it would be advisable that this category would be divided into two seperated rejectionreasons "too much" and too little" and not together.
I know that these are taken in difficult light but imo still worth to be uploaded.


Here are my last rejections where I simply don't know, what to do anymore after multiple rejections before:

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6387656

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6387679

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6387674

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6387671

Can anybody help?


Greetings

Rainer

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Hi,
They all lack contrast, mostly due to poor light. Like the senior screener said on the appeal "white aircraft with white ground and light grey backgrounds", not easy

Hope it helps

Alex

[comet1]

Hi Alex,

thanks for your quick reply.

So adding even more contrast could help? Or is it senseless in all cases?
Ii's the first time that I have these massive Problems.

Brgds

Rainer

[LX-A343]

Hi Alex,

thanks for your quick reply.

So adding even more contrast could help? Or is it senseless in all cases?
Ii's the first time that I have these massive Problems.

Brgds

Rainer

Maybe the LH 747 has a chance, if you tweak the curves accordingly. The others are - in my humble opinion - for your personal collection.

[comet1]

Hi again,

better?

https://abload.de/img/q33a7194-2grossneufilhmu0w.jpg

BRGDS

Rainer

[dlowwa]

Hi again,

better?

https://abload.de/img/q33a7194-2grossneufilhmu0w.jpg

BRGDS

Rainer

Can't speak for all, but that would still be a contrast rejection for me.

[comet1]

Re-rejection / editing advice - Rainer Spoddig

Hi,

first upload was rejected for dark/underexposed:
https://abload.de/img/79511_1548549402first56j9q.jpg

New upload of the exact same pic with adjusted brightness.
As far as I remember I gave an extra hint that I adjusted the brightness only in the comment field:
https://abload.de/img/80901_15492099362ndreibk33.jpg

Now rejected for "undersharpened(soft) as only rejection reason.

Can any screener understand that it is very frustrating to get such inconsistent screening results.

I cannot see any appreciation of the uploading photographer.

Good Night

Rainer

[dlowwa]

Hi,

first upload was rejected for dark/underexposed:
https://abload.de/img/79511_1548549402first56j9q.jpg

New upload of the exact same pic with adjusted brightness.
As far as I remember I gave an extra hint that I adjusted the brightness only in the comment field:
https://abload.de/img/80901_15492099362ndreibk33.jpg

Now rejected for "undersharpened(soft) as only rejection reason.

Can any screener understand that it is very frustrating to get such inconsistent screening results.

I cannot see any appreciation of the uploading photographer.

Good Night

Rainer

You're right, it should have been rejected for soft the first time.

[comet1]

And, what is the conclusion? Screener decided after his personal taste of brightness and the next screener does the same with his personal taste of sharpness.
And the stupid photographer stands in between. No apologies, no acceptance, no self-criticism that something went wrong.Who cares to leave a frustrated and irritated photographer behind. Is that really the style you want to treat the photographers? I do hope not!
It would be a good style not to override the first screeners decisions and only look at the given rejection reason if it is corrected.
Especially when the photographer writes this in the comment field.

[dlowwa]

And, what is the conclusion? Screener decided after his personal taste of brightness and the next screener does the same with his personal taste of sharpness.
And the stupid photographer stands in between. No apologies, no acceptance, no self-criticism that something went wrong.Who cares to leave a frustrated and irritated photographer behind. Is that really the style you want to treat the photographers? I do hope not!
It would be a good style not to override the first screeners decisions and only look at the given rejection reason if it is corrected.
Especially when the photographer writes this in the comment field.

I think maybe it's time you took a break if something like this is making you so irritated. I agreed it was mistake that soft was missed on the first rejection, yet this was not enough to satisfy you. What would you like, to have the screeners involved punished? We've discussed the subjectivity of the system elsewhere, and if you're still not comfortable with it, perhaps you would do best to find another platform to share your images that doesn't involve any screening. In that way, you need not be concerned with the subjective opinions of others.

[comet1]

Hi dlowwa,

thank you very much for your reflected answer which reveals your attitude to the photographers.
And my point was not that I wanted to get an agree that pic is soft. My point was the inconsistency of two screening results.
Sad that my low englisch level was not able to explain it.
A simple "Oh sorry, we have made an incorrect screening and we apologize for that" would have been enough.
But instead advising me to leave the jp-photographers-community is quite astonishing, not to say something else….

A very impressed Rainer obout your style of communications says

Good Night!

[dlowwa]

Hi dlowwa,

thank you very much for your reflected answer which reveals your attitude to the photographers.
And my point was not that I wanted to get an agree that pic is soft. My point was the inconsistency of two screening results.
Sad that my low englisch level was not able to explain it.
A simple "Oh sorry, we have made an incorrect screening and we apologize for that" would have been enough.
But instead advising me to leave the jp-photographers-community is quite astonishing, not to say something else….

A very impressed Rainer obout your style of communications says

Good Night!

I somehow find it difficult to believe that adding a single word when admitting a mistake had been made would have changed your reply, but in any case, I'll try again: You're right, sorry, it should have been rejected for soft the first time.

Only advised you to find a different outlet because this is something that is not worth getting worked up about. Better if you can accept the subjective nature of the screening process and the inevitable disagreements (and mistakes) that will ensue, but demanding apologies from a volunteer crew after a mistake has already been admitted doesn't look that good either.

[comet1]

Hi dlowwa,

I regarded your reply "You're right, it should have been rejected for soft the first time." as a provocation because you didn't relate to my main point of inconsistent screening.
Sorry, that I misunderstood that you meant to have admitted a mistake instead already.
Apology accepted!

Best greetings

Rainer

[dlowwa]

Hi dlowwa,

I regarded your reply "You're right, it should have been rejected for soft the first time." as a provocation because you didn't relate to my main point of inconsistent screening.
Sorry, that I misunderstood that you meant to have admitted a mistake instead already.
Apology accepted!

Best greetings

Rainer

I'm glad you can see that, yes I was admitting a mistake had happened. Mistakes in the screening process do happen, since we're all human, but we try to keep them to as few as possible. My other point was that in the event a mistake ends up affecting you, best to not let it bother you too much, as unsatisfying as that may be.

[comet1]

Sadly the odyssee continued concerning my post from, 02-13-2019, 11:31 PM and following posts:

After adding more sharpness the pic was rejected again for soft with the comment "tail is still soft". After Appeal that I cannot add sharpness much more before getting an oversharpened rejection I got as answer "If the tail is actually blurry, no amount of sharpening will hide that fact, sorry."

Soft= can be fixed
blurry= cannot be fixed

Can any screener understand that this kind of inconstistent screening drives uploading photographers mad?

Three uplaods and three different rejections...

And yes it is all subjective only and mistakes can happen....

For me too much of that!


I really kindly ask you to work on for more quality/constistency in the screening process.