Inconsistent Screening

Good morning folks,

I've sent a number of images through and had them rejected twice. Two of my images did make it into the database, but the rest didn't, which is perfectly fine. I understand that it will take some time to get acclimated to the sites seemingly rather harsh standards. What I don't understand is how an image can get rejected, I fix it, and then it gets rejected again for something that had nothing to do with the original rejection, and it was not something I altered during my re-edit. I've got 3 images out of the 5 I've had rejected that demonstrate this issue. Some advice or method to avoid this would be appreciated.

Thanks,

John McGee

Not being a screener I will only give you my own opinion.

Screeners are, fortunately or not, just human being, with their own personality, judgement, way of screening and, even if there are some "standards", you will never get an image screened the same way by 2 different screeners.

Did you try the appeal solution ?

It's sometimes also useful to put a comment for the screener, explaining that the former try has been rejected for X reason and that you reworked on that specific issue.

Hi,

I did indeed appeal one of the rejections. All three of my photos that have gone through screening twice had an additional or separate rejection reason the second time around. I understand fully that there might be some inconsistency, but so far, my rate of inconsistent multiple screenings is 100%. That, in my opinion, is not acceptable. I'll try your comment suggestion next time. Thanks for the help! More opinions are certainly welcome. I'd like to know if this is a widely-experienced issue.

Thanks,

John

Hi John,

things like this can happen because fixing one problem can introduce others, for example:

- rejected for being too dark, fix this by increasing exposure can introduce noise

- rejected for lack of contrast, fix this and it can lead to sharpening issues

- rejected for noise, fix this can leave the image soft.

It really is a balancing act.

This post has been edited by Michael Carbery on 2nd July 2014 - 10:41

John, we live only miles apart if you're in the Olympia area. I would be more than happy to spend some time with you if you need any advice :)

That is a good advice John!

I live at the other end of the world but with the tips of Andre my acceptance ratio increased very much!

Hi Everyone,

Thank you all so much for the help! Michael, the second point is indeed one of my issues. Andre, I do live near Olympia, I don't think I need help at the moment, but if you ever see me out in the area, don't hesitate to say hi! I frequent the local airports like OLM, BFI, SEA, TCM and occasionally PAE.

Thanks again,

John

Sounds like a plan :)

Hello screeners,

I think this is the most appropriate topic to post this note, but feel free to move it somewhere else if you think otherwise.

Many of us have noticed that there have been a lot of discussions on the forum recently about inconsistent screening on the website.The number of such posts has dramatically increased lately. In fact, if you do a quick google search, you can find many aviation forums where people discuss their disappointment in AP. Correct me if I'm wrong, but AP was sort of meant to be an alternative for those who wanted to capture the beauty of aviation in a different way from the ones we're used to seeing on competitor sites, such as A.net or JP. This worked very well at the beginning, but as someone said earlier, this site has changed a lot.

There are some absolutely stunning photos on this website, but in between them you can find many low quality ones. There are photographers with mad editing skills, there are photographers with creative eyes, and a handful who does both very well. Many photographers have complained that there are a lot of images that do get accepted although they could have been rejected for the very same reason as theirs was rejected. Also, many photos get rejected on AP that have passed screening on other sites and received thousands of views, photographers' choice awards, etc. Clearly, this leads to frustration and makes the photographer think that the screener here is wrong.

Based on this thought, I was wondering if there is a way to establish some sort of screening standards while keeping AP as a more creative aviation photo page than the other ones. Not sure if such screening rules are in place yet, but I think some sort of standard upload guide could add value to the site which would help keep existing contributors and attract new ones. This would also make communication between screeners and uploaders smoother. A brief guide about skyshots has already been put on the page, so expanding that could be a start.

Just food for thought. I would be happy to hear what others think of this idea.

Happy snapping!

Hi Tamas,

Thanks for your opinion. You are right that there have been several complaints recently published here and on Facebook. It is worth pointing out that some of them were made by inexperienced very young photographers who are relatively new to AP and are disappointed with their rejections. Some of the complaints were also made by members who have been permanently opposing AP for a long time or they are screening elsewhere. There has also been a topic complaining about Screeners not doing their job properly while the photo in question was uploaded by Full Member and it was not screened at all.

The quality bar you mentioned is unrelated to our focus on creative photography. We accept wide range of photos, but we have the bar set up on the technical quality similarly to other sites.

There are photos that were rejected at AP and were accepted elsewhere. It is also true that we accept very successful photos that were rejected on other sites. Does it mean that other sites are worse than AP?

What kind of screening rules do you have in mind, can you point out something particular? We have had a well defined list rejection reasons since 2008.

If you are after guidance on how to get photos published on AP, our Screeners as well as the community publish very good tutorials and tips on how to produce photos that are passable in terms of technical quality in our Aviation photography forum. We also encourage photographers to discuss their rejections with the AP community in the Photo feedback section of our forum.

After I read your post I extracted database statistics of accepted/rejected photos over the last 12 months. It is true that we now reject slightly higher percentage of photos than we used to. The Team will work on this issue.

This post has been edited by Martin Krupka on 14th March 2015 - 12:54

Hi Martin,

Thanks for your prompt reply and thanks for looking into the upload statistics. I know AP accepts a wide range of photos, which makes is more difficult to define any kind of standards. However, as you pointed to the forum discussions, why not take a few examples from there and create a short photo guide for uploads. You can probably also pull statistics on what the most common rejection reasons are and start from there.

I think the guide could provide example images of how an undersharpened or soft image looks like, what a blurry image looks like, what a low contrast image looks like, poor quality, etc. and the corrected or up to standard image next to it to see what would be acceptable to screeners. There could be also a link to the forum where people discuss how to fix those issues.

Different screeners have different standards on AP, one might like something, one might find some issues with the photo. Your acceptance ratio often depends on who you get for screening. That's where most of the problems come from in my opinion. This guide could help to bridge that gap and bring everyone to the same norms.

This post has been edited by Tamas Kolos-Lakatos on 14th March 2015 - 12:57

Thanks Tamas,

I get you idea about comparing sharp and unsharp photo, but how would you apply it in screening? Imagine that you are a Screener and you need to decide a borderline case.

Yes, photography is very subjective and therefore two Screeners might come up to a different conclusions.That's why there is a two stage screening process and the third opinion on appeal.

You jumped to the conclusion that the screening process is inconsistent at AP, but how would you explain photographers who have consistently high acceptance ratio and who are awarded Full Membership based on that?

Martin

This post has been edited by Martin Krupka on 14th March 2015 - 15:41

I didn't conclude that the screening process was inconsistent, I just said there are differences between screeners so I was wondering if there was a way to set the bar equally high for everyone.

I have no doubt that there are photographers who have high screening ratios and become FMs based on that, but I wouldn't be surprised if they're outnumbered by FMs whose screening ratio would have dropped after reaching FM status or by FMs who left the site after reaching status. Also, for some reason we don't really see them publish anywhere else.

I think this site attracts people for mainly two reasons: relatively short screening time, and personalized screening (there is a name behind the screener, so you can actually get to know each other). Both of which are great and should be kept! However, I think making the screening more formal would be of great value.

Thanks Martin for your feedback!

I wouldn't draw any conclusion on FMs without having any data - 125 Full Members out of 161 have uploaded at least one photo to AP over the last 6 months.

Regarding the personalized screening, our Screeners have been 'attacked' on FB on several occasions so we will partially or fully withdraw the Screener names from the communication to protect them.

This post has been edited by Martin Krupka on 14th March 2015 - 14:46

I'm in the process of creating a number of tutorial videos where I'll cover the most common problems we face when screening photos. They will cover everythin from cloning out foreground/background clutter to addressing sharpness and exposure. This will hopefully address some of the questions out there.

Like Martin said, it's very hard to define standards or specifics around expectations as every photo is treated on its own merits. What I can say is that we go to lengths trying to give recommendations as to where we see things that needs work. Other sites will give you generic check box answers only.

I used to get frustrated as well when I first joined the site as I didn't see the things that screeners pointed out at me. This frustration led me to get hung up on the personal feelings behind the rejection. What helped me turn the corner was to sit back and carefully look at my product after a rejection and I saw the flaws in most cases. This pushed me to work harder and eventually my acceptance ratio went up.

The biggest problem is that people upload photos that don't carry enough quality out of the camera. I often snap 1000 raw files in a quick session at the airport. Out of those 1000 shots I usually only find maybe 10 that are worth editing for website upload.

There are days where I simply just don't bother going out there as weather and light conditions are unfavorable for aviation photography overall.

We are all here because we have a passion for aviation photography. The same can be said for all aviation upload sites. However, in order to maintain a quality sites that measure up as a premium database for photography high standards have to be implemented.

Are we perfect? No

Do we miss things here and there? Absolutely

Do all screeners have the same opinion about the photos in front of them? No

Do we get satisfaction in rejecting photos? Absolutely not!

My biggest reward in what I do is to gain friends and help fellow photographers grow.

Hello guys,

Andre, excellent response. I feel the same! However, I have noticed inconsistent screening as well where a lot of my photos are going to second opinion, particularly after being seen in the first screening by a certain screener. Out of respect for the gentleman, I won't mention his name. However, I must say that it is quite frustrating to have the same 4 "rejection" reasons listed by said screener, and then have the photo accepted on second opinion. If I may be so bold as to make a suggestion, I think that there should be some screener training required, if there is not already such a system in place. That might up the rate of consistency. Having photos rejected is not where my frustration lies, it is rather finding that some photos have defects according to one screener's personal standards when everyone else finds them perfectly fine.

Regards,

John

John, there is indeed a training process in place already. We all go through an extensive time period where we work hand in hand with senior screeners before we step into a self sufficient role.

I've learned a lot during my time on the team and I continue to evolve every day.

The fact that a photo is accepted by second screener after seeing comments on first doesn't necessarily mean anything. Comments on first screening doesn't automatically mean that the shot won't go through. It's more of a heads up for the second screener to assess whether it's noticeable enough to reject due to quality. First screening is the toughest part of the process as you evaluate the photo before someone else gets to put their eyes on the shot. Second screening is more of a cross check evaluation if that makes sense.

We're in no way shape or form perfect. Some screeners spend an extraordinary time screening on a daily basis and this takes time away from "life". However, we all try to work hard on keeping the queue short so photographers can have a more immediate response to their upload.

You will see that while other aviation sites often take weeks to look at a shot, ours are usually reviewed within 24 hours.

Additionally, the bar is set so high on other sites that most photographers (including myself) quit uploading there a long time ago. I don't want to wait for weeks before someone reminds me of the fact that a photo I submitted wasn't good enough. Regardless, there has to be a bar for everyone to reach in order to maintain a renowned resource for aviation photos.

I've always let my email open to anyone wanting some guidance. Im not a "know it all" kind of a guy but I can at least provide some lessons based on what I learned myself.

Like I said, I'm also in the process of doing some basic video tutorials that may help someone along the way.

I can always be reached via sanordheim@gmail.com

This post has been edited by Andre Nordheim on 15th March 2015 - 22:49

Hi,

Accepted that everyone is human and that mistakes do occur by screeners.

I used to have pretty good screeners, but lately I've the distinct notion that every time one particular screener sees my name, he finds a reason to reject. I've already written an email separately to the administrators about this.

The question is, how are photos in the queue allocated to screeners? What are chances of my or anybody's submissions being viewed by a different screener? There has to be a process whereby there is an equitable distribution of photos in the queue to different screeners.

Cheers,

Arjun

Arjun, I should probably let Martin add his two cents to your question. However, keep in mind that we push through a lot of photos on a daily basis in order to get everybody the quickest processing and feedback possible. Some screeners process more photos than others and it also fluctuates by day. Keep in mind that we all dedicate a pretty significant amount if time to maintain an avenue of sharing a quality product, which requires us to be willing to put "life on hold".

There is no way to assign photos to particular screeners as it would defeat the purpose of working through the queue in a fair manner. Even if we could, it wouldn't be fair to look at each screener individually.

All the questions and concerns were covered by Martin in this thread by earlier posts.

Trust me, no one has satisfaction in turning down photos and remember......nearly every photo goes through two screeners in order to ensure we look at things the same way.

We are the only site out there who are bold enough to actually let you see who screened each photo. This has left all of us very open to some pretty nasty stuff, far beyond appropriate.

Again, take the advice....sit back and look at the pictures with a neutral point of view and you'll see exactly what the screeners are saying 95% of the time.

Screeners aren't random people picked up from just anywhere. They have proven over time as photographers and editors that they can do this job.

This is why out of thousands and thousands of members only about a dozen or so get the opportunity to give back in form of advice.

Thanks!

Hi Arjun, photos are allocated to Screeners on the first comes first served basis. News photos have priority, but the oldest news photos are also served first.

Arjun Sarup> [...] lately I've the distinct notion that every time one particular screener sees my name, he finds a reason to reject.

The same with me. I know that if one particular screener screens my photo it will definitely be rejected. 99% probability.

It is life and I don't complain; this all is just a hobby, but ... you know...

Przedima, send me a couple of your picture examples to sanordheim@gmail.com. I would like to take a look at them to see if I can offer guidance. I would prefer to see some that have been rejected. I'd like to see them just as they were coming out of the camera instead of edited versions.

I think this site is just becoming too exclusive. You have to have the gear, the knowledge, the creative idea, put it in place, and then be an editing master. A bit too oversharpened, out. A bit too soft, out. At least in my case, borderline pics are 99% of the times rejected .. the only reason I still keep uploading every now and then is because I'm really happy with some specific picture, but that's it, most of the time I don't even bother, it's not worth it.

As a side note, is i possible that once uploaded, the pictures are somewhat compressed or something of the sort? I see some of my pictures more sharpened than the original. thanks.