Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Some thoughts about the screening workflow

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

  • ErwinS
    replied
    Originally posted by MAG View Post
    Hi! I'd like to share my experience and discuss a part of the screening process.
    Recently I got this photo rejected for bad info.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6520732
    I always try to do my best to find out and fulfill correct info about uploaded aircraft. Ofcourse and especially in cases with military aircrafts I can use only open sources. Often I use info from JP db. This time I explored the db and find out that most of the same aircrafts as in mine photo including exactly this aircraft are uploaded in the db as Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29 Fulcrum. Here examples from the db. All photos were uploaded in last few months so it's a quite fresh uploads.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8924007
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8909098
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8893063
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8756362
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8756354
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8746351
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8464771
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8451708
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8407939
    Based on this information I uploaded the photo as Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29 Fulcrum. The photo was rejected for bad info. In the screening letter there wasn't any information about correct type for this aircraft just reason for rejection "bad info".
    I double checked the db find out that my info in rejected photo corresponds to the information in JP db and I appealed. Only after my appeal was processed I got the answer: type should be MiG-29UB. I spent time to find out the differece between MiG-29 and MiG-29UB. I still don't know for sure the type of this aircraft but definitely screener's MiG-29UB is suits much better for this aircraft than MiG-29. It means that all links to the aircrafts in the db that I mentioned above have incorrect type. In the appeal I wrote that determining the type for my photo I used info from JP db and I added info about the same type aircraft accepted in the db as MiG-29. My appeal was two days ago and was rejected but for two days nothing has changed in the db. I don't understand this because if my photo has incorrect type why not to change data in the db for the same type aircraft. In the appeal I provided information about the aircraft that I used as sample for my upload. I can not start process of changes because I don't know for sure if it's MiG-29UB or not. But if the screener knows why he/she didn't start this process?

    This process step by step.
    The begining.
    1. The photographer spend time to find out the aircraft's data.
    2. The photographer spend time to upload the photo.
    3. The screener spend time to screen the photo.
    4. The screener find out incorrect data at the same time the screener knows the correct data.
    5. The photographer wait for the result.
    6. The photographer get the screening letter without correct data only reason for rejection.
    7. The photographer spend time again to double check everything.
    8. The photographer spend time to appeal providing the explanation.
    9. The screener spend time to process the appeal.
    10. In the appeal result the photographer received the correct data for the photo.
    11. The photographer spend time to check this information as the photographer saw many exapmles with another data in the db. It's not easy to believe that so many cases were lucky accepted.
    12. After this case there is nothing has changed in the db.
    The end.

    As experienced specialist in UX and client service I can say this process ASIS creates too much unnecessary job to everyone involved in the process and doesn't help to keep the db up to date.
    I truly don't see arguments for rejection in cases like this. If the screener knows the correct info why not to change it during the screening? It's several seconds for the screener instead much time that all participants spend fo checking, appealing, processing the appeal and so on. This fast change makes the photographer a little more happy the reject makes the photographer a little more unhappy. If the screener have information that the same type aircrafts in the db has incorrect data why not to change them?

    Hope it helps to improve the screening workflow. Thanks!
    On another note. If you find incorrect entries in the dbase you can always send in a correction via the correct info option

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by MAG View Post
    Hi! I'd like to share my experience and discuss a part of the screening process.
    Recently I got this photo rejected for bad info.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6520732
    I always try to do my best to find out and fulfill correct info about uploaded aircraft. Ofcourse and especially in cases with military aircrafts I can use only open sources. Often I use info from JP db. This time I explored the db and find out that most of the same aircrafts as in mine photo including exactly this aircraft are uploaded in the db as Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29 Fulcrum. Here examples from the db. All photos were uploaded in last few months so it's a quite fresh uploads.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8924007
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8909098
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8893063
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8756362
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8756354
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8746351
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8464771
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8451708
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8407939
    Based on this information I uploaded the photo as Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29 Fulcrum. The photo was rejected for bad info. In the screening letter there wasn't any information about correct type for this aircraft just reason for rejection "bad info".
    I double checked the db find out that my info in rejected photo corresponds to the information in JP db and I appealed. Only after my appeal was processed I got the answer: type should be MiG-29UB. I spent time to find out the differece between MiG-29 and MiG-29UB. I still don't know for sure the type of this aircraft but definitely screener's MiG-29UB is suits much better for this aircraft than MiG-29. It means that all links to the aircrafts in the db that I mentioned above have incorrect type. In the appeal I wrote that determining the type for my photo I used info from JP db and I added info about the same type aircraft accepted in the db as MiG-29. My appeal was two days ago and was rejected but for two days nothing has changed in the db. I don't understand this because if my photo has incorrect type why not to change data in the db for the same type aircraft. In the appeal I provided information about the aircraft that I used as sample for my upload. I can not start process of changes because I don't know for sure if it's MiG-29UB or not. But if the screener knows why he/she didn't start this process?

    This process step by step.
    The begining.
    1. The photographer spend time to find out the aircraft's data.
    2. The photographer spend time to upload the photo.
    3. The screener spend time to screen the photo.
    4. The screener find out incorrect data at the same time the screener knows the correct data.
    5. The photographer wait for the result.
    6. The photographer get the screening letter without correct data only reason for rejection.
    7. The photographer spend time again to double check everything.
    8. The photographer spend time to appeal providing the explanation.
    9. The screener spend time to process the appeal.
    10. In the appeal result the photographer received the correct data for the photo.
    11. The photographer spend time to check this information as the photographer saw many exapmles with another data in the db. It's not easy to believe that so many cases were lucky accepted.
    12. After this case there is nothing has changed in the db.
    The end.

    As experienced specialist in UX and client service I can say this process ASIS creates too much unnecessary job to everyone involved in the process and doesn't help to keep the db up to date.
    I truly don't see arguments for rejection in cases like this. If the screener knows the correct info why not to change it during the screening? It's several seconds for the screener instead much time that all participants spend fo checking, appealing, processing the appeal and so on. This fast change makes the photographer a little more happy the reject makes the photographer a little more unhappy. If the screener have information that the same type aircrafts in the db has incorrect data why not to change them?

    Hope it helps to improve the screening workflow. Thanks!
    This has been discussed many times. Unfortunately you base your proposal in the assumption, that "The photographer spend time to find out the aircraft's data". Believe me, some (many?) uploaders are just too lazy, arrogant, or lacking respect towards other photogs and screeners to take care of informations or categories. If we correct the info once, they rely on the easy way, that we they can upload shit and it will be corrected.

    As a long time experienced UX specialist (even if my job title doesn't say that) I surely know, that the process is not as user friendly as it could and should be. But then again, it is a free service.

    Besides, instead of appealing, another easy way is just to ask in the forum. Saves all a lot of time and is a source source for infos for other photogs and screeners.

    Leave a comment:


  • MAG
    started a topic Some thoughts about the screening workflow

    Some thoughts about the screening workflow

    Hi! I'd like to share my experience and discuss a part of the screening process.
    Recently I got this photo rejected for bad info.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6520732
    I always try to do my best to find out and fulfill correct info about uploaded aircraft. Ofcourse and especially in cases with military aircrafts I can use only open sources. Often I use info from JP db. This time I explored the db and find out that most of the same aircrafts as in mine photo including exactly this aircraft are uploaded in the db as Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29 Fulcrum. Here examples from the db. All photos were uploaded in last few months so it's a quite fresh uploads.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8924007
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8909098
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8893063
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8756362
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8756354
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8746351
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8464771
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8451708
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8407939
    Based on this information I uploaded the photo as Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29 Fulcrum. The photo was rejected for bad info. In the screening letter there wasn't any information about correct type for this aircraft just reason for rejection "bad info".
    I double checked the db find out that my info in rejected photo corresponds to the information in JP db and I appealed. Only after my appeal was processed I got the answer: type should be MiG-29UB. I spent time to find out the differece between MiG-29 and MiG-29UB. I still don't know for sure the type of this aircraft but definitely screener's MiG-29UB is suits much better for this aircraft than MiG-29. It means that all links to the aircrafts in the db that I mentioned above have incorrect type. In the appeal I wrote that determining the type for my photo I used info from JP db and I added info about the same type aircraft accepted in the db as MiG-29. My appeal was two days ago and was rejected but for two days nothing has changed in the db. I don't understand this because if my photo has incorrect type why not to change data in the db for the same type aircraft. In the appeal I provided information about the aircraft that I used as sample for my upload. I can not start process of changes because I don't know for sure if it's MiG-29UB or not. But if the screener knows why he/she didn't start this process?

    This process step by step.
    The begining.
    1. The photographer spend time to find out the aircraft's data.
    2. The photographer spend time to upload the photo.
    3. The screener spend time to screen the photo.
    4. The screener find out incorrect data at the same time the screener knows the correct data.
    5. The photographer wait for the result.
    6. The photographer get the screening letter without correct data only reason for rejection.
    7. The photographer spend time again to double check everything.
    8. The photographer spend time to appeal providing the explanation.
    9. The screener spend time to process the appeal.
    10. In the appeal result the photographer received the correct data for the photo.
    11. The photographer spend time to check this information as the photographer saw many exapmles with another data in the db. It's not easy to believe that so many cases were lucky accepted.
    12. After this case there is nothing has changed in the db.
    The end.

    As experienced specialist in UX and client service I can say this process ASIS creates too much unnecessary job to everyone involved in the process and doesn't help to keep the db up to date.
    I truly don't see arguments for rejection in cases like this. If the screener knows the correct info why not to change it during the screening? It's several seconds for the screener instead much time that all participants spend fo checking, appealing, processing the appeal and so on. This fast change makes the photographer a little more happy the reject makes the photographer a little more unhappy. If the screener have information that the same type aircrafts in the db has incorrect data why not to change them?

    Hope it helps to improve the screening workflow. Thanks!
Working...
X