Author | Message |
adminSee my 107 Photos |
2014-08-19 GMT-5 hours |
Hi all,
We've reached a point where we are getting way too many photos of common everyday aircraft, and often from the same photographers. The Swiss Hornets and Patrouille Suisse come to mind. Some photographers have 20 or more photos of the same aircraft, with dates maybe anywhere from a few weeks to a few months apart, yes, sometimes even days. Thus, we've had to add a new rejection reason: Common Photo. It states: The aircraft depicted in your photo is very common in our database, with many photos of this aircraft already present on the website. In this case the standards for acceptance are higher than for aircraft of which we have fewer or no photographs in the database, and only photos of exceptional quality will be accepted. Also, I've added another line to the "Quality" rejection to make it more clear that the photo is overall lower quality than our current standards. It may not be a particular thing that can be corrected. It's just lower quality overall, possibly too many things to list, or which we feel may not be correctable. -Ray |
Author | Message |
sailingdutchmanSee my 6,134 Photos |
2014-08-19 GMT-5 hours |
Hi Ray,
I recently recieved some rejections on a basis of sequencing,is this also a new reason for rejection? grtz Jan |
Author | Message |
adminSee my 107 Photos |
2014-08-19 GMT-5 hours |
We don't have a Sequencing rejection per say, but we do have a Similar and Same Pose rejection. The angles have to be different enough. Lots of times we get photographers uploading photos that are almost from the same angle, same location, same day, etc..
-Ray |
Author | Message |
YIFLYSee my 7,078 Photos |
2014-08-20 GMT-5 hours |
i agree entirely with this new rejection reason. That is not a problem. The problem will arise when it is selectively enforced.
“There is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter.” -Ernest Hemingway |
Author | Message |
adminSee my 107 Photos |
2014-08-23 GMT-5 hours |
It will be more geared towards how many the individual photographer already has of that particular aircraft, but of course we will take the total number of photos in mind as well.
-Ray |
Author | Message |
SoundbarrierSee my 9,270 Photos |
2014-08-26 GMT-5 hours |
As David I do see and understand the need for these criteria but what exact numbers do apply? Just to be clear Ray ...
And 20 or more pics of the same aircraft? I thought 4-5 was the maximum? If you reach this maximum will it be possible to have lesser pics be deleted for better ones? |
Author | Message |
adminSee my 107 Photos |
2014-08-26 GMT-5 hours |
Hi Carl,
There is really no hard maximum, but more of a general guideline. And, as you know, there are exceptions to every rule. Unfortunately, when you are screening photos it's very hard to be exact and 100% consistent. Four to five is for the same event. Notice I said event, not day. A 3-day airshow would be the same event for example. For this rule, if you have around 15 photos or more of the same aircraft, your next upload better be a lot better than what you already have in the database. Again, it's meant to stop people from continuously uploading photos of the same aircraft with almost no difference than their previous shots taken a few weeks/months earlier. The majority of the photographers will not have a problem with this rule. -Ray |
Author | Message |
AndreasSee my 4,499 Photos |
2014-08-27 GMT-5 hours |
Author | Message |
SoundbarrierSee my 9,270 Photos |
2021-01-23 GMT-5 hours |
Ray, if you reach "this maximum" will it be possible to have lesser pics be deleted for better ones?
|
Author | Message |
adminSee my 107 Photos |
2021-01-24 GMT-5 hours |
No. We simply don't have time for that and the photo might be in several photo albums, linked from somewhere, etc. You can definitely use the ReUpload feature to replace photos which you can improve upon because your Photoshop skills are better now, or you bought a new scanner for example. I don't think you are near those limits though, Carl.
-Ray |