Current rejection rate? [Archive] - JetPhotos.Net Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Current rejection rate?

chazzerguy

12-09-2002, 04:51 PM

Chris-

Any ballpark idea what the current rejection rate is for new JP.net photos?

Chris Kilroy

12-09-2002, 08:16 PM

Hi Chaz,

No true stats are available for this, but I'd guess about 1 in 20 photos is rejected overall.

chazzerguy

12-09-2002, 09:08 PM

Hey... I'm just about average then!

FinalApproach

12-10-2002, 08:09 AM

If you can keep that estimate (1 in 20) as your rejection rate then you will be the best, forever!
Darn and my Canadian flag is still not showing up yet! DOOOOH images/smiles/icon_eek.gif

hkgspotter1

12-10-2002, 11:34 AM

Sent 18 and you accepted 18 clap.gif

chazzerguy

12-10-2002, 01:17 PM

I've posted 61, had three kicked back... And I have no argument with two of those three, and only a marginal argument with the third, but not enough to appeal... So it looks like I'm right in line with the site average!!! nod.gif

hkgspotter1

12-11-2002, 02:11 AM

Make that 21 sent in and 21 accepted clap.gif clap.gif

chazzerguy

12-11-2002, 02:17 AM

Hey Polish Air... I think HKGSpotter is getting cocky... You better reject at least ONE of his pics soon just to keep his ego in check! laff.gif

hkgspotter1

12-11-2002, 05:27 AM

NOooooooooooo

uhoh.gif skeptical.gif

Robert

12-11-2002, 08:55 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by chazzerguy:
Yep... Your new camera will fix that for sure! And actually, your reject doesn't look bad for coming from a video camera!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And the video camera cost $900.00!!

uhoh.gif nod.gif
It takes great video and pictures but after a hard shock from video taping a firing howitzer it hasnt been the same since.. images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

I'm looking at either a Canon Rebel 2000 SLR, Minolta Maxxum STSI or the QTSI
which would you say is best?

Robert

12-12-2002, 06:50 AM

I got one out of three rejected.. cry.gif

But once I get my Canon for Christmas that will change.. The pictures that are on there now were taken from a cam/ video camera.

This one got rejected.
<IMG SRC=http://www.jetphotos.net/user-uploads/boeing777sikors.JPG>

chazzerguy

12-12-2002, 06:53 AM

Yep... Your new camera will fix that for sure! And actually, your reject doesn't look bad for coming from a video camera!

PolishAir42

12-12-2002, 11:36 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Robert:
And the video camera cost $900.00!!

uhoh.gif nod.gif
It takes great video and pictures but after a hard shock from video taping a firing howitzer it hasnt been the same since.. images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

I'm looking at either a Canon Rebel 2000 SLR, Minolta Maxxum STSI or the QTSI
which would you say is best?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heres a tip.

Dont take photos with Videocameras. Just dosent work.

Robert

12-13-2002, 06:34 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by PolishAir42:
Heres a tip.

Dont take photos with Videocameras. Just dosent work.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yo smartass.. Its made to take video and pictures hence the part about the digital camera.

"10X Optical--700X Digital Zoom / Built-in light & digital still camera / SD--MMC Multimedia Interface / 8MB SD card included"

images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

PolishAir42

12-15-2002, 04:28 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Robert:

Yo smartass.. Its made to take video and pictures hence the part about the digital camera.

"10X Optical--700X Digital Zoom / Built-in light & digital still camera / SD--MMC Multimedia Interface / 8MB SD card included"

images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Unh hun...theres no such thing as a device that takes good video and digital shots...theres simply a lack of pixels in the videocameras and a lack of room and high quality formats/storage for digital cameras.

And im sure the smartass comment was necessary
skeptical.gif

Robert

12-15-2002, 04:05 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by PolishAir42:
Unh hun...theres no such thing as a device that takes good video and digital shots...theres simply a lack of pixels in the videocameras and a lack of room and high quality formats/storage for digital cameras.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually yeah it does, the helicopter shots werent very close up so a thing called zoom was used which decreases quality.
smilewink.gif

Closeup pictures are great, so is the video. When we were in Vegas we were on top of the Stratosphere and I was videotaping down in the backyards and other motels and could somewhat clearly see people over 1000 feet below.
Then I videotaped the Palms from our room at the Luxor, it was pretty blurry but you could still see what it was.
http://www.jvc.com/product.jsp?modelId=MODL026105
I think this one is it actually..

Its my brothers and he lives in CA so I can;t exzactly ask right now. images/smiles/icon_smile.gif But I'm 99.7% positive thats it.

PolishAir42

12-15-2002, 05:55 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Robert:

Yo smartass.. Its made to take video and pictures hence the part about the digital camera.

"10X Optical--700X Digital Zoom / Built-in light & digital still camera / SD--MMC Multimedia Interface / 8MB SD card included"

images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No, zoom worsens the photo but even without zoom you simply can not get a good sharp photo from a videocamera. The videocameras of today simply do not have the sufficient number of pixels yet...

I am not talking about 800pixel shots with lots of noise...

Robert

12-17-2002, 12:16 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by PolishAir42:

No, zoom worsens the photo but even without zoom you simply can not get a good sharp photo from a videocamera. The videocameras of today simply do not have the sufficient number of pixels yet...

I am not talking about 800pixel shots with lots of noise...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Did I not just say zoom worsens the photo?
skeptical.gif Guess not. images/smiles/icon_wink.gif

Well I guess this video camera, with still digital camera is a freak of nature because it takes good pictures.

[ December 16, 2002 06:16 PM: Message edited 1 time, lastly by Robert ]

PolishAir42

12-17-2002, 12:56 AM

Robert I am saying that even closeup with no zoom you CAN NOT get the kind of image of a videocamera with a still photo capability, trust me i have a high end Sony Digital 8 Videocamera and its not that great...If so show me some good pix you got out of it.

Robert

12-17-2002, 02:43 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by PolishAir42:
Robert I am saying that even closeup with no zoom you CAN NOT get the kind of image of a videocamera with a still photo capability, trust me i have a high end Sony Digital 8 Videocamera and its not that great...If so show me some good pix you got out of it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Search Robert Cooper andd you will see two. But like I said those are WITH zoom and after the video camera got shocked by a howitzer so it looks a little more blurry.

I never said this will take perfect pictures or pics as good as a film cam, but they are still pictures waay better then a disposable camera would take.

chazzerguy

12-17-2002, 02:57 PM

FYI, I managed to answer my own original question re: the rejection rate... By my calculator the current rejection rate is a little over 10%.

I figure a good way to ballpark it is to look at the current number of photos in the DB (9729 as of the morning of Dec. 17) then divide that by the ID# of the most recent photo (in this case 10865). Maybe not entirely precise, but close enough to answer my original question.

-Chaz