Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Consistency vs. adding more "interesting" photos to the database.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Consistency vs. adding more "interesting" photos to the database.

    After lively discussion on facebook. I think it is time to ask in the jp forums. We had demands that jp.net should accept "interesting" photos (defined as subjects usually scoring many views) even if they have technical faults, that would warrant a rejection.

    While I think views should not be used to define interesting, I think the general idea is worthy to be discussed.

    So in a nutshell. Would you like to see a reduction in screening consistency and more influence of the individual screeners decision in exchange for more "interesting" (how to define this I have no idea) shots are accepted?

    This would mean it will happen that a photo might be accepted, while your up-load (with similar faults) would be rejected, although you might find the accepted shot not interesting at all and your shot very interesting.

    Typical examples resulting from the idea presented to us:

    Delta 737 backlit and landing at SXM -accept
    Delta 737 backlit and landing at ATL - reject

    Plane X in a scrapyard and soft but first up-load - accept
    Plane X in the same scrapyard and soft but third up-load to the db - reject

    SXM shot with naked woman and backlit plane - accept
    AMS shot of the same plane similar backlit but a man in full clothes - reject

    The jp.net team is very sceptical of this approach, as it conflicts with some of our basic site rules, like to never (except hot photos) consider all photos in the database when screening an up-loaders shot and to only consider his portfolio. But still we would like to know, if our users want to trade consistency for more "interesting" or popular shots being accepted.
    37
    Yes, I want more interesting / popular shots added
    45.95%
    17
    No, consistency is more important to me
    54.05%
    20

    The poll is expired.

    Last edited by seahawk; 2013-10-03, 20:08.

  • #2
    Hi
    I come here to view images of aircraft rather than to look at technically perfect photos, whilst its nice when the two are combined. Personally I would class myself as a spotter who takes photos, rather than a photographer who uses aircraft as a subject. A bit of backlight, a little softness, a 0.3 unlevel, slightly less than perfect histogram doesn't really bother me, its aircraft that matters. As for the women at SXM, gawd bless 'em, as you all know there are way better sites to them on the interweb....
    I'm not saying you should go down the same road as myaviation, but a bit of lateral judgement and leeway should be ok, you screeners should know an unusual/interesting shot when you see one, after looking at endless side on images uploaded my the likes of me
    Regards
    René

    Comment


    • #3
      What inspired me to be an aviation photographer was the artistic shots on this site and other aviation sites. Many of them are not technically perfect, but are amazing to look at. I believe the normal daylight side shots of planes should be of high quality/technically perfect, but the artistic shots don't have to be; example: people who click on a backlit sunrise shot most likely didn't click it to see the aircraft and its livery in the highest quality, they clicked it to see the whole scene.
      So I vote adding more interesting photos.
      Thanks to the screeners who brought this discussion up

      Comment


      • #4
        Having ploughed through the often interminable (and sometimes belligerent) Facebook exchanges my opinion remains unchanged. If it ain't broken - don't try and fix it. JP has always been consistent and it has always allowed a certain degree of flexibility particularly regarding older shots (scans from prints/transparencies etc.). The rules are there for a reason, and most of us long-term uploaders don't have an issue with that. These rules still produce 'interesting shots' and continue to do so! As an aviation enthusiast since 1976 I think I have a reasonably honed perception of what interests me. JP currently satisfies that interest. A look at the top photos reflects just that. This argument started over a clearly backlit shot of a subject already in the database - a flawed argument built a little too much on one photographer's ego perhaps. Go with consistency - as simple as that.

        Comment


        • #5
          Imho

          IMHO...."Interesting" isn't black & white, and I don't think it can be measured in clicks alone. It might be more interesting to one person, less to another and only once they've clicked on it. Ultimately, I'd want to have the reaction along the lines of "that's a great photo", as opposed to just marginally interesting to warrant an exception to some technical rules.

          I've seen plenty of photos that are rather plain looking (uninteresting in my view) that have garnered thousands of views (and I give it more views clicking on it to see why it got to the top four!), in fact one of my higher-viewed photos on an Air Canada 777 is nothing special - have no idea why it got that many views.

          I am all for allowing a range of artistic photos on this site, keeping near enough to the bounds of the guidelines...and since I do see those shots frequently, I conclude that there is a way to get them in today.

          Comment


          • #6
            Its a great idea.
            Im sure some will have there toes tread on(me even) when a photo they(i) think is interesting gets rejected.
            But it will open the site up to even more creative input.
            Great idea me thinks!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by rmk2112 View Post
              Hi
              I come here to view images of aircraft rather than to look at technically perfect photos, whilst its nice when the two are combined. Personally I would class myself as a spotter who takes photos, rather than a photographer who uses aircraft as a subject. A bit of backlight, a little softness, a 0.3 unlevel, slightly less than perfect histogram doesn't really bother me, its aircraft that matters. As for the women at SXM, gawd bless 'em, as you all know there are way better sites to them on the interweb....
              I'm not saying you should go down the same road as myaviation, but a bit of lateral judgement and leeway should be ok, you screeners should know an unusual/interesting shot when you see one, after looking at endless side on images uploaded my the likes of me
              Regards
              René
              I totally AGREE with you Rene, you took the words right out of my mouth
              Blessings
              Frikkie

              Comment


              • #8
                Hello all,
                Well... I understand that this discussion was opened following the case of Colin Parker. Isn't ?
                I vote positively, also I think there is a lot of sense in the response from René (rmk2112).
                I'm not saying in any way should lower the criteria, I think, as I wrote in some occasions in the past, that sometimes desirable, in some cases, to think "outside the box".
                I do not want now to express my opinion whether you should accept the Colin's shot, It does not matter now.

                I also think that if a picture is full of drawbacks, you must not accept it even if it is interesting.
                But if there is only one small drawback, maybe It's the case I think you should to consider before reject outright.
                Maybe this is a case to transfer it to decision of five screeners.

                It's only something to think about it as well.

                All the best,
                Erez.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I haven't voted in the poll, mainly because there is no 'both of the above' option. Personally, I would like the screeners to screen consistently, but if there were some photos that don't exactly meet the criteria, but are brilliant photos in their own way, I say allow them on the site/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Let me clarify. We already do accept outstanding, creative or rare photos with technical faults. The suggestions was to accept every photo with such faults, if it is likely that it will score many views. The question is would you like that?

                    Within the crew we already have agreed to be more open for creative shots. We are also looking at ways to open the site to more such shots. (it is too early to give you details, but we are considering using the artistic category for such shots, to be selected by the screeners).
                    Last edited by seahawk; 2013-10-04, 12:04.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Regarding to the SXM shots.

                      Don't know if its only my opinion but this style of pics starts to get kinda boring!! Ten years ago it was amazing to see this kind of pictures, with people on a beach and a 747 approaching over there heads. But nowadays its a common sight on every aviation photos website and I don't even click on them anymore. So I would handle pics from SXM like every other upload.

                      But what about the digital manipulation of pictures and the usage of filters like the Color Efex for PS make pictures looks like a HDR?
                      Will we see more accepted photos in the future or is it still an exception.

                      Have a question about Photo Editing software (Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, etc.), improving your photos, etc.? Our crew of Photo Screeners is here to help you out!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        This is one of the points under discussion.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hi everyone and thank you for your contribution in this conversation !

                          In my opinion, we're looking at the problem from the wrong side of it... I mean, isn't the real question :

                          what is an interesting shot ?

                          And for that question, I'm afraid we're opening a HUGE can of worms...

                          Just my favorites
                          - Historic aircraft/Slides/Warbirds
                          - Soviet aviation
                          - Swiss aviation

                          But on the opposite I would most probably never click on :
                          - cabin shots showing seats (Pffffff I just don't care at all)
                          - terminal shots
                          - most wing views
                          And you know the funny part is that, those last 3 are the most popular shots categories, by far. Those are BIG high hitters. And it's always been the case, nothing has changed here.
                          So Who am I to decide what's interesting or not ? EVERY each of us has special interest and dislikes. Add the ego on our own pictures (Maaaan I had to walk 40min in the hard sun to get that not soooo blurry shot !!!) you know that feeling right ?

                          I could go on for hours but You got my point right ?
                          Screeners aren't god and I really wish I don't have to screen on a "interesting shots" policy... I mean no more than what we do right now. Trust me, the crew is full of people with a HUGE aviation knowledge and who have been around for long time and we're doing our best to prove it by our selection of "non-standarts" shots that we do accept on a daily basis. Those shots might not always be High Hitters, but we're trying to use our aviation knowledge to be fair to everyone, have a consensus between screening guidelines and photographers/viewers "interest"
                          I'm not saying that nothing that has to change, but let's not make a problem bigger than the one we're trying to cure...


                          Cheers

                          Alex
                          PS :For me, the whole discussion on Colin's picture, either here or FB was an excellent sign on how crew members used a LOT of energy to handle a legitimate question.
                          Last edited by Alex - Spot-This !; 2013-10-04, 16:16.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Rene,

                            As said once before; You took the words right out of my mouth!

                            I am here to look at aviation pictures and to show the world my pics. Just to know what's flying around on the globe.....
                            Don't care about 100% technically perfect or technically "ïnteresting" shots.
                            Consistancy in screening is more important for me.

                            Keep it that way!

                            Freek

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              I guess many of you may know my views on this if you have read the other thread.
                              I do take offence at being called to having an ego. Nothing can be further from the truth for those who know me personally. What started as an innocent question about a rejection became a big debate and it was no longer about that photo in question but was asking questions which I am glad Stefan and most other screeners have decided there is merit in discussing further.

                              I realise that we all have different interests within the umbrella of aviation. Some love cabin shots, some hate them. Some love historic aircraft, others hate them etc etc. SXM for me is boring, I agree with the above poster. LAX air-to-air shots are beginning to get boring as well for me, HOWEVER, people in general do like them. How do we know this? Because they get plenty of views. Now I admit there are anomaly photos out there which get many more views than they deserve, whether they have linked it to an e-mail somewhere to all their friends or whatever. This happens under current screening guidelines and will continue to happen under whatever new guidelines (if any) are chosen. Its just a fact of life that it will happen so should be eliminated from the thinking process. What it boils down to, is that in general, photos which are interesting to a large number of people will get high views. Not everyone will think it is interesting - that is a given. However, the majority obviously do...hence the high views. This is evidenced by the fact that the top of the day/week/month etc... are normally interesting photos. The general JP pubic normally gets it right.

                              I have a photo on the front page at the moment...two in fact but one I want to highlight is the DC8s stored. It is, by the screeners definitions (based on the same lighting conditions of my previously rejected shot) "very backlit". However it has been accepted. I am very greatful for that, and it is proving its worth of being interesting to people and having made it to the front page. Not everyone will like it of course, but a majority did. I think the screener who accepted it, thought that it would be interesting enough to the majority out there and it is this type of thinking which JP should continue to persue. A shot of a Delta 737 landing at ATL as Stefan says, with the same lighting conditions as this DC8 shot I am talking about, would be rejected. So, what the poll is asking for is actually already happening on JP. It is just that it doesn't always happen because not all screeners are on the same page in their thinking. Moving this emphasis into the guidelines would in my opinion be a good thing since some screeners seem to stick to the black and white guidelines more than others.

                              My 2 cents, and feel free to disagree with me.
                              Last edited by Colin Parker; 2013-10-05, 03:44. Reason: grammar
                              Have a look at my photos, including Kai Tak crazy landings!http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=460

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X