Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 58

Thread: Rude appeals/Emails

  1. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alex - Spot-This ! View Post
    Hi,
    Lately we have noticed an increase of people writing to us in a total inappropriate way. I'll be short about it so :

    JetPhotos offers you a FREE service and it would be nothing without the hard work of 40 people from the VOLUNTEER crew. These people are offering you their time but before being crew they are spotters, humans just like you. You have absolutely NO reason to talk to us in a rude manner. Not only does it show a total lack of basic education but it's also very demotivating to us and it wastes a lot of our time that we should be using on screening instead. For these reasons from now on :

    - Rude appeal : Automatic Reject

    - Rude email : No reply other than a link to this thread

    Note that for the worst cases a ban (permanent or not) will be issued without warnings.


    Sorry about this message but enough is enough, we're really tired of it. Also please note that we're only talking about a very little number of persons and that 99% of the people do know how to communicate in a polite and civilized way.

    Have a nice day

    Alex
    Hi Alex,

    I totally agree with you.

    But i think that some spotters are frustrated because rare rejections, for example I got 8 rejections only this weekend, all of them because "Too much or too little contrast" when I go back to my pictures and check the levels on histogram the contrast looks good and totally centered, and to be honest I canīt found any reason to reject the photo but you do it anyways, I donīt care at all, only what I can do is try to "fixed" and uploading again, but I have very loooong time uploading photos to jetphotos and probably I will do it for ever, because i like the page and I really enjoy show my photos in jetphotos. But I agree partially with other people that sometimes I donīt understand what are you looking for, looks like some screeners just reject photos because they like to reject photos.

    Donīt take this words on the bad way, just trying to help jetphotos to be better every day as you can help me to be a better spotter every day, and I know that be screener is not easy, but you have to think on the spotter too and if the photo looks good you donīt have to reject it.

    Should be a great idea to change the "too much or too little contrast" in too much contrast and apart too little contrast, because talking with other spotters this rejection reason it really confuse the spotters, and talking with some of your screeners that they are my friends looks that they are confused too.

    Have a good day.




  2. #22
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,719

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diego727 View Post
    Hi Alex,

    I totally agree with you.

    But i think that some spotters are frustrated because rare rejections, for example I got 8 rejections only this weekend, all of them because "Too much or too little contrast" when I go back to my pictures and check the levels on histogram the contrast looks good and totally centered, and to be honest I canīt found any reason to reject the photo but you do it anyways, I donīt care at all, only what I can do is try to "fixed" and uploading again, but I have very loooong time uploading photos to jetphotos and probably I will do it for ever, because i like the page and I really enjoy show my photos in jetphotos. But I agree partially with other people that sometimes I donīt understand what are you looking for, looks like some screeners just reject photos because they like to reject photos.

    Donīt take this words on the bad way, just trying to help jetphotos to be better every day as you can help me to be a better spotter every day, and I know that be screener is not easy, but you have to think on the spotter too and if the photo looks good you donīt have to reject it.

    Should be a great idea to change the "too much or too little contrast" in too much contrast and apart too little contrast, because talking with other spotters this rejection reason it really confuse the spotters, and talking with some of your screeners that they are my friends looks that they are confused too.

    Have a good day.



    Or... you could simply post one or two of your rejections in the forum to get some direct feedback. Would be more helpful than just another rejection reason listed, no?

  3. #23
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    Or... you could simply post one or two of your rejections in the forum to get some direct feedback. Would be more helpful than just another rejection reason listed, no?
    I did it before, and it doesnīt work at all, I just give a idea to improve the site, i told you donīt take my words on bad way, if I upload my photos in jetphotos is because i like the webpage.

  4. #24
    Member ErezS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Ra'anana, Israel
    Posts
    569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    Or... you could simply post one or two of your rejections in the forum to get some direct feedback. Would be more helpful than just another rejection reason listed, no?
    Dana, You see that many colleagues have a hard time with this reason, so why do not you split this reason to two different reasons that are more obvious?
    Many times many colleagues have asked for this, so why insist on the single, unclear reason for so much peoples?

    By the way, in the site from which you came here, this reason is split into two, they write clearly whether if it's too much, or if it's too little.

  5. #25
    Member mahagonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Bari
    Posts
    400

    Default

    Hi to all
    I do not think that knowing who the screener is is so important. it would be much more important, instead, to give to those who upload an endowment of tools that avoid many rejections and therefore many angry people who react in an inconsiderate way.
    I do not hide that even I get very angry when I see a photo rejected and I do not understand how I can correct the mistake. But I have never used rudeness; not all, however, have this balance, especially in these times when anyone believes he has the right to write what goes through his head, without reflecting on this.
    Sorry my bad english.
    Regards

  6. #26
    Member mahagonny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Bari
    Posts
    400

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LX-A343 View Post
    Just to give you an idea. We rejected this photo here ...
    Attachment 19724

    ... and got this appeal:


    Seems, there are indeed people in desperate need of a life. And yes, I posted this photo including his name in the copyright bar on purpose.




    EDIT: I have been asked to post a photo without the name of that idiot.
    crazy! Unfortunately there are too many people with a $ 1,200 cost cell phone that they believe to be Henry Cartier Bresson

  7. #27
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,719

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diego727 View Post
    I did it before, and it doesnīt work at all
    When was that? You haven't posted any request in the past year that I can see.

  8. #28
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Hi
    I'm not condoning threatening appeals or emails and those who do decide to behave that way should be taken off the site.
    However it is also easy to understand how some members become so frustrated. I myself recently find myself losing a little faith with some screening decisions. Having had some recent rejections for various reasons I find it difficult to swallow when I see photos accepted that blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines. Especially the little contrast reject. Next thing the "top shot" depicts an aircraft that almost blends into the sky behind it, and today I've seen a picture with clearly the wrong info.
    I get that it's not easy giving up time to screen (I've been a screener myself) but it would be nice to have more consistent screening too.
    The screeners can be so judgemental at times but as the original poster states you're human too so why the attitude that being a screener makes you better than the rest of us? I also find it frustrating that we can't use others pictures in the forums as it would make it easier to get our point over.
    I don't have any issue with rejections I don't feel the need to prove myself to the screening team or anyone else. But to then see other photos accepted that clearly don't adhere to the guidelines is a bit of a kick in the teeth.

  9. #29
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,719

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glidescopeAviation View Post
    Having had some recent rejections for various reasons I find it difficult to swallow when I see photos accepted that blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines. Especially the little contrast reject. Next thing the "top shot" depicts an aircraft that almost blends into the sky behind it, and today I've seen a picture with clearly the wrong info.

    ..But to then see other photos accepted that clearly don't adhere to the guidelines is a bit of a kick in the teeth.
    Honestly, in most case where this argument is brought up, in turns out that there is a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the guidelines, or a lack of understanding the context. An example would be someone complaining that a recently accepted image was much noisier than theirs that was rejected without realizing the accepted image was a scan from 1993 (this has actually happened).

    Quote Originally Posted by glidescopeAviation View Post
    The screeners can be so judgemental at times but as the original poster states you're human too so why the attitude that being a screener makes you better than the rest of us?
    Where has any member of the team stated that?

    Quote Originally Posted by glidescopeAviation View Post
    I also find it frustrating that we can't use others pictures in the forums as it would make it easier to get our point over.
    That is simply to avoid publically involving someone else who may not wish to be involved. You are free to contact us privately with example of images that are not your own, if you feel they support an important point you would like to make.

    Quote Originally Posted by glidescopeAviation View Post
    I don't have any issue with rejections I don't feel the need to prove myself to the screening team or anyone else.
    Not being sarcastic, but this seems contradictory. If you don't care about rejections or proving yourself, why do you submit images here, and complain about screening decisions in the forum? To me it would seem you do care - which is not a bad thing (neither is a post like this, since it shows you do care enough to ask questions)

    As I've stated above, you are free to contact me privately if you have concerns about images other than your own. While there are a few images that admittedly probably shouldn't have been accepted, you'll probably find that most of the images you claim 'blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines' actually in most cases do. Look forward to hearing from you.

  10. #30
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    Honestly, in most case where this argument is brought up, in turns out that there is a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the guidelines, or a lack of understanding the context. An example would be someone complaining that a recently accepted image was much noisier than theirs that was rejected without realizing the accepted image was a scan from 1993 (this has actually happened).

    The image I'm referring to is a recent one. I know older shots will not be of the same standard as we can produce today


    Where has any member of the team stated that?

    I NEVER said they stated it. I said it was an attitude that can come across


    That is simply to avoid publically involving someone else who may not wish to be involved. You are free to contact us privately with example of images that are not your own, if you feel they support an important point you would like to make.

    Yes I do get that, I simply stated it doesn't make things easier


    Not being sarcastic, but this seems contradictory. If you don't care about rejections or proving yourself, why do you submit images here, and complain about screening decisions in the forum? To me it would seem you do care - which is not a bad thing (neither is a post like this, since it shows you do care enough to ask questions)

    I submit to simply share I don't particularly care if they're accepted or rejected, I've been spotting and photographing aircraft for 32 years, long before Jetphotos or any other site ever existed, And I'm not complaining about being rejected. I said that some consistency is needed - to reject shot "A" for a particular reason and then accept shot "B" which clearly violates the same guideline(s) this is for the benefit of every member including the screeners.

    As I've stated above, you are free to contact me privately if you have concerns about images other than your own. While there are a few images that admittedly probably shouldn't have been accepted, you'll probably find that most of the images you claim 'blatantly don't adhere to the guidelines' actually in most cases do. Look forward to hearing from you.
    And again I acknowledge that from time to time this can happen. It's easy to miss some small details. I was referring to the more obvious instances.
    Anyway I suppose we have to agree to disagree on some matters. We all have our own views. I'm not here to cause arguments or stir things but simply to air my opinion. Nobody has to agree with me and that's fine.
    Wish you all a good day /evening

  11. #31
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,719

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by glidescopeAviation View Post
    And I'm not complaining about being rejected. I said that some consistency is needed - to reject shot "A" for a particular reason and then accept shot "B" which clearly violates the same guideline(s) this is for the benefit of every member including the screeners.
    I understand completely, and we try to be as consistent as possible, but 100% homogeneity in decisions will never be possible with a crew of 30+ sets of eyes. As I've stated, I, as well as the others, am happy to discuss specific images privately in case there are recent acceptances, or even just areas in general that need correcting or improving. You can PM me via the forum at any time to do so, as can anyone else.

  12. #32
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Diego727 View Post
    Hi Alex,

    I totally agree with you.

    But i think that some spotters are frustrated because rare rejections, for example I got 8 rejections only this weekend, all of them because "Too much or too little contrast" when I go back to my pictures and check the levels on histogram the contrast looks good and totally centered, and to be honest I canīt found any reason to reject the photo but you do it anyways, I donīt care at all, only what I can do is try to "fixed" and uploading again, but I have very loooong time uploading photos to jetphotos and probably I will do it for ever, because i like the page and I really enjoy show my photos in jetphotos. But I agree partially with other people that sometimes I donīt understand what are you looking for, looks like some screeners just reject photos because they like to reject photos.

    Donīt take this words on the bad way, just trying to help jetphotos to be better every day as you can help me to be a better spotter every day, and I know that be screener is not easy, but you have to think on the spotter too and if the photo looks good you donīt have to reject it.

    Should be a great idea to change the "too much or too little contrast" in too much contrast and apart too little contrast, because talking with other spotters this rejection reason it really confuse the spotters, and talking with some of your screeners that they are my friends looks that they are confused too.

    Have a good day.



    "Too much or too little contrast",I agree very much that it is sometimes confusing.
    The same is true for "Categories wrong or missing",Sometimes it’s really hard to figure out what is missing.

    After many failures, I can basically figure this out now, but novices may have problems.

    I think if you have a more detailed classification, it is good news for both the uploader and the screeners.

    Thanks again to the screeners's contribution.

  13. #33
    Member ErezS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Ra'anana, Israel
    Posts
    569

    Default

    Dear crew members,
    Excuse me please that I write again about these things, (I promise you not to write again about it), but as one can see, so many people asking to split the reason of the contrast, so why is it so difficult to do it?

    Also, perhaps one can add as regularly a comment about the "Categories wrong or missing".

    I have no doubt that your agreement to these requests will save a lot of time and many questions to everyone. Both for photographers and for crew members.

    Best regards and thank you!
    Erez.

    PS: For me personally it's not so critical, I do not have many rejections because of these reasons, but I think it will be good and important both for the crew and for many photographers.

  14. #34
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    ENGM
    Posts
    85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YsMilan View Post
    "Too much or too little contrast",I agree very much that it is sometimes confusing.
    The same is true for "Categories wrong or missing",Sometimes it’s really hard to figure out what is missing.

    After many failures, I can basically figure this out now, but novices may have problems.

    I think if you have a more detailed classification, it is good news for both the uploader and the screeners.

    Thanks again to the screeners's contribution.
    I totally agree. Some little improvements can help both sides. I appreciate all help that i got (many thx to dlowwa), and in appeal I try to be patient, but a little help regarding rejects would be nice. I totally disagree users who can not communicate.

    As YsMilan wrote some rejects are confusing. My favourites are: under/over saturation (which one?), and color. It would help just two words in the comment: green cast, cyan cast or something similar.

    I hope you guys continue this job, because it is important to all of us. Thx!

  15. #35
    JetPhotos.Net Crew LX-A343's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Zurich Kloten - LSZH
    Posts
    13,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by federbear View Post
    I totally agree. Some little improvements can help both sides. I appreciate all help that i got (many thx to dlowwa), and in appeal I try to be patient, but a little help regarding rejects would be nice. I totally disagree users who can not communicate.

    As YsMilan wrote some rejects are confusing. My favourites are: under/over saturation (which one?), and color. It would help just two words in the comment: green cast, cyan cast or something similar.

    I hope you guys continue this job, because it is important to all of us. Thx!
    I can understand this very good. Just to show you our side: you can't imagine, how many times uploaders simply ignore what we write. As an example, there is one uploader, who still doesn't use the colour space and thus causing a red colour cast on some systems ... after a few hundred messages!!!

    Sometimes we mention the wrong category. And then, just a few days ago: a photo rejected amongst others for missing category, uploaded 3-4 times always with the same wrong category.

    The contrast rejection is not that easy. A white aircraft on an overcast day will just give a dull aircraft with dull background, not just low or high contrast.

  16. #36
    Administrator seahawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Germany - near DUS
    Posts
    7,823

    Default

    That is the big danger. Many will simply go to the contrast setting in the editing software and add or reduce contrast and this will rarely do. We considered to point people towards adjusting the histogram, but unfortunately that also did not really help, as now some would complain that the histogram is totally fine, yet the pic still rejected. In most cases this was caused by some foreground objects like bushes or flowers influencing the histogram. I still remember a pic taken on a foggy day with a nice green bush maybe 1-2m away from the photographer in the foreground and a plane about 300m away and nearly fully covered by fog, I think it was up-loaded, rejected and appealed over 5 times in a row.

  17. #37
    Member ErezS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Ra'anana, Israel
    Posts
    569

    Default

    Dear Gerardo and Stefan,
    It is possible that some lazy people don't read the comments, just look at the reason for rejection.
    But you can see so many requests to split this reason.

    I can't see any risk with such a split, Even the very opposite,

    I think this kind of split ("Too much or too little contrast") can be very beneficial to both sides.
    Please think about it.

    PS: For me personally it's not so critical, I do not have many rejections because of these reasons, but I think it will be good and important both for the crew and for many photographers.

  18. #38
    Administrator Alex - Spot-This !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    4,407

    Default

    Erezs,
    We will not split it, move on. We need people to learn and we will help them with a thread.
    Once people have learned how to read the light on their pics, their rejection drop drastically. If we split the reasons, what Stefan has explained will happen and that would help nobody (uploader or JP)

    Regards
    Alex

  19. #39
    JetPhotos.Net Crew LX-A343's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Zurich Kloten - LSZH
    Posts
    13,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ErezS View Post
    Dear Gerardo and Stefan,
    It is possible that some lazy people don't read the comments, just look at the reason for rejection.
    But you can see so many requests to split this reason.

    I can't see any risk with such a split, Even the very opposite,

    I think this kind of split ("Too much or too little contrast") can be very beneficial to both sides.
    Please think about it.

    PS: For me personally it's not so critical, I do not have many rejections because of these reasons, but I think it will be good and important both for the crew and for many photographers.
    I don't believe you. If it is not critical to you, there is no reason for you to CONSTANTLY ask for it.

  20. #40
    Member ErezS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Ra'anana, Israel
    Posts
    569

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LX-A343 View Post
    I don't believe you. If it is not critical to you, there is no reason for you to CONSTANTLY ask for it.
    Gerardo,
    Despite your unpleasant response, I will respond politely.
    It is your right to have mistake in your thought and your lack of belief.
    It is also your right not to appreciate me enough in the right way.
    However, I will continue all the way to appreciate you and all the team members.
    I think that with 96% acceptance of my uploads, with only a small number of rejections, mostly for technical reasons, maybe you may come to the conclusion that you are wrong with your thought, and with your lack of belief as well.
    Have a nice weekend.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •