Long Queue and Inconsistent Screening

[Len90]

Hello,

I know screening is volunteer and there is a human element to screening that will make it always a very inconsistent process.

However, there needs to be something done on this site about inconsistency.

For instance this was rejected for soft: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued...al-large-photo I appealed the photo and got told that it is a "bit" soft. Which is extremely critical as the sharpness is within the site's acceptable limits.

Yet then we see additions like this. And this is not to single out a photographer, rather to point out discrepancy in screening:
Loose crop: xxx
Blurry: xxx
Centering with a color cast: xxx
Centering: xxx

So why am I being hit with way more critical screening?

[B7772ADL]

Hello,

I know screening is volunteer and there is a human element to screening that will make it always a very inconsistent process.

However, there needs to be something done on this site about inconsistency.

For instance this was rejected for soft: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued...al-large-photo I appealed the photo and got told that it is a "bit" soft. Which is extremely critical as the sharpness is within the site's acceptable limits.

Yet then we see additions like this. And this is not to single out a photographer, rather to point out discrepancy in screening:
Loose crop: xxx
Blurry: xxx
Centering with a color cast: xxx
Centering: xxx

So why am I being hit with way more critical screening?

You're angry with your rejection, so you decide to go and call out other uploader's photos....bad form. Go away and take some time out to calm down. We all have rejections from time to time including myself.

You're not a screener so you are not trained to know the site's exact limits and you are imposing your own standards on photos which are screened to site standards and not your standards.

[Mr Chips]

Hi Len,

I wasn't involved in any of the screening decisions but can offer my opinion as a screener.

Firstly, your image is indeed a bit too soft. "A bit" is a simple way for us to state a small bit more sharpening is needed.

Regarding the images you are asking about.

1) Loose crop - I can imagine leniency was exercised due to the interesting dark sky background and I am sure most of the other screeners would agree with and allow the slightly looser crop in this case.
2) Blurry - Indeed slightly blurry nose and again a bit soft overall, however this is the subjective part of screening and where mistakes can happen.
3) Centering - The screeners allowed the crop as the fuselage is roughly centred when excluding the horizontal stabiliser.
4) Centering - Nothing wrong with this image regarding the composition.

Also, it's really not a good idea to criticise other photographers images openly on a public forum as I'm pretty sure you wouldn't like other members linking your images and picking them apart and stating they are not good enough.

We do appreciate that our members are concerned about the long queue and consistencies. However it is completely impossible to ever achieve 100% consistency as we are all human screeners. We do take steps to ensure we can achieve an acceptable level of consistency such as discussing borderline cases amongst screeners and allowing members to appeal images. Screeners can also view their screening history to see the outcome of images they voted on and from that they can learn whether they need to be more lenient or more strict on certain things such as softness, contrast, compression, composition, etc. This all takes extra time however as screening is voluntary and we do whatever we can within the time we can devote to the website.

Longer queues are inevitable during the summer when more members get to go out spotting and the uploads increase almost doubly. Screeners also have summer holidays so we many end up screening less. We could add more screeners but then consistency will drop until they are trained and become accustomed to jetphotos screening critera.

I hope this helps you understand things a bit. We are of course always open to suggestions from our members.

Best Regards,

Dave

[Len90]

You're angry with your rejection, so you decide to go and call out other uploader's photos....bad form. Go away and take some time out to calm down. We all have rejections from time to time including myself.

You're not a screener so you are not trained to know the site's exact limits and you are imposing your own standards on photos which are screened to site standards and not your standards.

Funny thing is on appeals I was told this was acceptable to do... Then as a screener, instead of offering feedback you went ahead and mocked me and made yourself feel superior as a person with "higher training". If that is what makes you feel good, so be it. I'm fine with having rejections. I'm not fine with having such a large inconsistency in screening. If you want to call yourselves trained and stating the site has standards, I'm sure all of what I pointed out falls outside of the rules for acceptance the site has.

Hi Len,

I wasn't involved in any of the screening decisions but can offer my opinion as a screener.

Firstly, your image is indeed a bit too soft. "A bit" is a simple way for us to state a small bit more sharpening is needed.

Regarding the images you are asking about.

1) Loose crop - I can imagine leniency was exercised due to the interesting dark sky background and I am sure most of the other screeners would agree with and allow the slightly looser crop in this case.
2) Blurry - Indeed slightly blurry nose and again a bit soft overall, however this is the subjective part of screening and where mistakes can happen.
3) Centering - The screeners allowed the crop as the fuselage is roughly centred when excluding the horizontal stabiliser.
4) Centering - Nothing wrong with this image regarding the composition.

Also, it's really not a good idea to criticise other photographers images openly on a public forum as I'm pretty sure you wouldn't like other members linking your images and picking them apart and stating they are not good enough.

We do appreciate that our members are concerned about the long queue and consistencies. However it is completely impossible to ever achieve 100% consistency as we are all human screeners. We do take steps to ensure we can achieve an acceptable level of consistency such as discussing borderline cases amongst screeners and allowing members to appeal images. Screeners can also view their screening history to see the outcome of images they voted on and from that they can learn whether they need to be more lenient or more strict on certain things such as softness, contrast, compression, composition, etc. This all takes extra time however as screening is voluntary and we do whatever we can within the time we can devote to the website.

Longer queues are inevitable during the summer when more members get to go out spotting and the uploads increase almost doubly. Screeners also have summer holidays so we many end up screening less. We could add more screeners but then consistency will drop until they are trained and become accustomed to jetphotos screening critera.

I hope this helps you understand things a bit. We are of course always open to suggestions from our members.

Best Regards,

Dave

Dave,

In regards to me pointing out examples for my case. Here is the exact quote from a senior screener in an email received following an appeal from a few months ago "Pointing on somebody\'s else picture to get to your point is considered as rude and makes your appeal rejected automatically. If you want to do so, do it openly in the forum or contact the photographer directly if you have an issue with his picture."

Actually quite the contrary with your statement. Critique has helped me get better as a photographer and in post processing. with that said your response is appreciated as you offered input and insight...as opposed to James who just responded with temper and no assistance.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Hi,
I've removed the links.
Actually when the seniors get that kind of appeal, telling it to do it openly in the forum in more a rhetoric form to tell you not to do it hidden. You can do it in the forum like you did, it still is considered as really rude.
When I started uploading to JP, I remember having an argument with a screener and telling him the good old "hey but look at this image, it's way worst than mine that got rejected blablabla..." - His reply was maybe a bit blunt but I still remember it
"yeah maybe but it doesn't take away the fact your image is still bad. And I'm judging YOUR image now, now somebody's else photo"
I believe that getting your point by looking at other people's pic isn't exactly the right way to go. Take your rejections one after the other, ask in the forum what you can do to improve and we'll be more than glad to help

regards
Alex

[B7772ADL]

Then as a screener, instead of offering feedback you went ahead and mocked me and made yourself feel superior as a person with "higher training". If that is what makes you feel good, so be it. I'm fine with having rejections.

.

Len,

In reply to your comments,

I'm sorry you feel I mocked you. That wasn't my intention and I didn't intend make you feel like that and I apologise if you feel that way. However, by bringing your rejection to the table and comparing other already accepted photos against it suggests to me you are not comfortable with your rejection. If you were happy, you'd take it on the nose, re-sharpen it, re-upload it, and its dealt with. Quite often it's a good thing to walk away from it for a while, take some deep breaths then come back to it later on which is what I suggested you do.

As for feeling superior, absolutely not. That is a rash assumption on your behalf. There are a massive number of photographers which are way better than I can ever be. At no point did I say I have "higher" [standard of] "training". The fact that I said I get rejections too means that its simply not the case. I do however have an understanding of what is acceptable as site standards compared to what you do. That is a very different thing from being a "superior" human aviation photographer claiming to be a god, which is what you are illuding to with your statement. Most of the photos which you linked fall within acceptable limits. That doesn't mean that they are perfection but they are acceptable and have been screened according to the screening guidelines we have.

If you would allow me to give some feedback on your "screening decisions" then basically you are way too harsh. More leniency would be required if you were to be the screener of those photos. So now you'll say, well why aren't you being a bit more lenient about my photo? The simple answer is, in your case as it's slightly soft its an easy fix. All you need to do is sharpen it a little more and then re-submit it. It's hardly the end of the world with such a common subject.

With regards to your comments from the senior screener, I think their message has come across in the wrong way. It is very much considered NOT the thing to do whether it is in an appeal or open in the forum. You are welcome to discuss your individual rejection in the forum and you can contact the photographer directly about their photo but we ask you do not criticise already accepted photos in the database. This is what Dave also said above. I'm sorry you appear to have received the wrong message, but this should now make it clear to you what is acceptable and is what is not.

"Critique has helped me get better as a photographer and in post processing" is the quote you made. The screening team brought an issue to your attention to which can help better your future edits.

I'll leave that thought with you and once again I'm sorry if you feel mocked.

Kind regards,

James.

[Len90]

It's nice to see the responses by the crew/staff.

As for using other images in comparison. My feelings are if everything is screened to the standards/rules/etc of the site we should see a more consistent screening process thus other images could be used as evidence for an appeal case. To me it makes it seem that not being able to cite other examples to state a case means the site doesn't trust the screening or are loose on the rules/standards for screening. However that can just be another conversation for another day.

James, this picture has been looked at by the other sites screening team and is on the big blue site (I think it's blue again lol) who typically (in my opinion and with my experience) has been stricter on the more subjective aspects of screening like sharpening and contrast. In addition to their other site I had the image looked at by a few fellow photographers. On the appeal the senior screener could have said like soft in tail, soft window line or a bit soft overall. That right there is good critique to help someone out. For me it was "indeed a bit too soft" on the appeal. Does that mean overall or was there an area that was of concern? I'll leave that question for you to answer.

Now as for me being angry, happy, etc. I have a Monday-Friday and also some weekends career and photography is my hobby. In the end I don't care and it is easy to correct small issues.

It's nice to see understanding but it seems like you are stating I don't have an understanding of the acceptance rules of the site. I would argue quite the contrary on that as my acceptance rate is right now over 70% in the last 30 days and is usually even higher than that but with a longer queue and my main focus in life limiting my photography and uploading time. So ultimately I find that statement a bit false as I do have an understanding of the acceptable uploading criteria for the site.