Photo screening decisions, opinions please.

[Frank]

This post is primarily aimed at all the photographers who upload their pictures to IrishAirPics.com / WorldAirPics.com but of course any member is free to chip in.

Over the last few days some of my screening decisions have been criticised while over the last few months I have also heard some moans & gripes about my decisions so I figure I must be doing something wrong somewhere.

The most complained about reject reasons are "Level" and "Aircraft Too Small" / "Aircraft Not Centred" (too small & not centred are interrelated), but I have also heard griped about other reject reasons too.

I'm in the process if updating the site software to (hopefully) improve how pictures are uploaded and how pictures are screened, and as part of that process I want to define (as much as possible) what I'm looking for with regards to uploads.

Now, to give you some background on how I screen pictures, here are my monitor details:

Samsung SyncMaster 226BW 22" flatscreen LCD monitor calibrated with a Spyder3Pro calibration device.


Why am I giving you my monitor details?

Well the brightness of my monitor can affect how your pictures look to me, too dark or too bright, so by default seeing as my monitor is calibrated I trust it is correct. Generally speaking if I decline a picture for too dark or over-exposed I tell you what is wrong in the comments field.

As well as that, when I switched to an LCD monitor from a CRT monitor pictures that I thought were perfect were full of grain, they were quite bad really. So that may be the cause of your picture being declined for being grainy.


My Prior Screening Experience

Well to be honest, outside of screening for IrishAirPics.com / WorldAirPics.com I have no screening experience. I base my screening decisions on my own photographic experiences & preferences, I have also used my experiences uploading pictures to the likes of Airliners.net & PlanePictures.net and adjusting my photos based on their reject reasons.


My Position On The Aircraft Too Small" Reject

All pictures on the website are automatically resized to a maximum of 1024 pixels wide.

Why is this? I do this for 2 main reasons... to minimise server usage and to minimise picture download time.

Therefore, seeing as the pictures are slightly small in these days of large monitors, i like to have the aircraft fill as much of the frame as possible. Now that doesn't mean that the nose or tail of the aircraft has to be within 1 pixel of the edge of the picture, you can find some samples of my preferences here:

http://www.worldairpics.com/screening_guide.php

What do you as a user think of this?
 

Why Am I Posting All This?

Well I need to get user feedback, I need to know what you think of my screening decisions, am I too harsh, am I too easy, am I too inconsistent?

I need your help guys, I want to attract new photographers & keep the ones I have, I don't want IrishAirPics.com / WorldAirPics.com to be seen as the website that it harder than Airliners.net to upload to while at the same time I don't want the website to be seen as the place to go if Airliners.net won't take your pictures. This is probably one of my more important posts so I'd appreciate it if you could take the time to reply with your thoughts.


Thanks in advance,

Frank.

[thurian]

For what it's worth, it's your site and your word is law and if you decide a pic is not good enough or needs tweaking then that should be accepted by anyone uploading photos. Not every picture uploaded is going to be accepted and nobody likes rejection but we have to accept it! Usually your reason for rejecting a pic becomes very clear once pointed out.

[corkspotter]

Good morning Frank and all,

I think this is a great discussion to have to iron out any questions that any uploaders may have. After looking at my stats, over the last 5 years of uploading to the site i have 632 declines out of 2608 uploads. I have probably seen all your decline reasons and you prob made up one or two reasons for some dodgy photo's aswell. Over the last 5 years I have matured from just dumping all my photo's into the que and hoping for the best to actually spending some time on the photo and making sure that I think it's ok.

In my opinion, thats the whole point of the rejection process. You get to learn where you are going wrong. If you take Frank's advise and go back to your photo you will prob see something that you wouldn't have noticed before. Now while it appears that I am brown nosing the site owner just because i've volunteered to be a screener, that is not the case, just speaking from experience. Now i do still have issues with regards to the ramp at Cork not been level and not my photo's, but they have started to re-enforce the ramp at Cork recently, must have seen my moaning!!!!

However, on a serious note Frank there is one rejection that I can't get my head around, even after 5 years. The whole picture sharpness thing. As a general rule of thumb recently, i have been using Adobe photoshop 7 and just upgraded to CS2 and when sharping the pic or ( unsharpening) i use a value of 125%, and it seems to work for screening purposes.

So my question is really, is there a general rule of the thumb sharpenning % to use or do you have any hints when sharpening the picture Frank?

Thats it really,

Best Regards,

Paul

[Frank]

Hi Lads,

Thanks for the replies.

One of the issues that came up recently was "creative differences" with an experienced photographer.

Yes I may have helped some of you out, at least I hope I did, the issue here is that I would like to attract all levels of experience and I'm trying to find a happy medium with regards to screening.

@ thurian... We shall keep you, I like your attitude!

@ corkspotter, I struggled for years with my sharpening, probably still do in fact, but I posted my pictures on UKAR and asked for feedback, I submitted to other websites and saw what rejections, if any, came back and I also researched it on the web.

I now have built up a collection of Photoshop Actions that I use, these include edge sharpening & spot sharpening tools. If you want I can email you these and you can have a try of them.

Applying the same sharpening level to the entire image can really boost the grain as well as sharpening the part of the picture with the aircraft in it. I haven't used unsharp mask on it's own in ages.


Regards,

Frank.

[corkspotter]

Thanks Frank,

That would be great! Didn't even know you could sharpen certain parts of the pics!!

Regards,

Paul

[thurian]

Hi Lads,

Thanks for the replies.

One of the issues that came up recently was "creative differences" with an experienced photographer.

Phew, that's me off the hook!

Would I be right in thinking that some photos have got to be sharp and clean whilst others can be a little fuzzy and still be worthy of the site?
For example, a simple shot of a plane landing on a runway in good daylight should be sharp and clean but a silhouette of same plane with the moon as a backdrop could be a little "soft"?

[Frank]

Would I be right in thinking that some photos have got to be sharp and clean whilst others can be a little fuzzy and still be worthy of the site?
For example, a simple shot of a plane landing on a runway in good daylight should be sharp and clean but a silhouette of same plane with the moon as a backdrop could be a little "soft"?

Generally speaking the subject aircraft always has to be sharp although the background can have motion blur. If the aircraft is a prop aircraft or helicopter (e.g. an aircraft with visible fast moving parts) you can have the props or rotors blurry but the aircraft itself would need to be sharp.

Are one of these pictures kind of what you had in mind:





If so both aircraft are still sharp.


Regards,

Frank.

[thurian]

Would I be right in thinking that some photos have got to be sharp and clean whilst others can be a little fuzzy and still be worthy of the site?
For example, a simple shot of a plane landing on a runway in good daylight should be sharp and clean but a silhouette of same plane with the moon as a backdrop could be a little "soft"?

Generally speaking the subject aircraft always has to be sharp although the background can have motion blur. If the aircraft is a prop aircraft or helicopter (e.g. an aircraft with visible fast moving parts) you can have the props or rotors blurry but the aircraft itself would need to be sharp.

Are one of these pictures kind of what you had in mind:





If so both aircraft are still sharp.


Regards,

Frank.

With all due respect, both photos are beautiful (in a utilitarian kind of way) but both aircraft are stationary so I would hope that they're reasonably sharp. I mean aircraft moving against a magnificent backdrop like a sunrise/set or moonrise/set should allow for a little unsharpness in either the aircraft or the sun/moon but not both? Personally, I think your picture is better because its silhouetted but it draws me into the picture trying to ID the other A/Cs, Shorts Skyvan on left and Dornier on right?

[SteveRendle]

Hi All

It is with immense regret that I have decided not to continue uploading to Irish Air Pics/World Air Pics.

My primary object when editing my photographs is to finish up with a the image being pleasing to the eye. (If it looks right it is right my tutor always drummed into me).

No two of use will edit the same image exactly the same. No two monitors will display the same image the same.( If you are still using a CRT monitor for editing please consider getting a LCD monitor ASAP, I am now having to rescan all my early edits ). Recently Frank rejected 3 images for being dark and he was probably right and I wish I had not uploaded them. Frank edited one of the uploads increasing the levels. On my monitor the whites appeared blown. So I sent emails to four fellow photographers with both mine and Franks edits. 2 favoured my edit saying Franks edit was to bright, The other 2 preferred Franks edit because they are brighter!!

I have add some experience in screening doing about 3 months with ABPIC and I confess to not enjoying it at all. So I do wish the new screeners good luck and hope they enjoy the experience.

I confess to having very limited editing skills and I will try and give a brief outline. I only ever shoot in jpg. Often for moving targets I use the burst mode in short spurts. I use adobe photoshop elements and once I have uploaded a jpg image I save it as a TIFF image. All editing is now carried out on the TIFF image. First like most I guess is to level the image using verticals when possible. Second is to crop the image to 6 x 4 format. Third I remove dust spots using equalize and the clone stamp tool. Fourth adjust contrast and brightness and colour balance ( I never use auto levels ). Fifth is to resize to 1024 x 683. I then use USM once (Amount 50% - radius 0.2 pixels - Threshold 0) I then use neat image to remove a little grain. And finally one or two more shots of USM and save as a jpg with new file name.

Before I go I would like to conduct an experiment with Franks consent. In that a limited number of  uploaders edit the same image and see what sort of variation we get.

Finally I wish IAP/WAP all the best for the future and I will still take a great interest in its progress.

Regards

Steve Rendle

[Frank]

Steve,

Thanks for posting. I respect your decision to cease uploading but obviously I'd prefer if you kept uploading. I started this thread in part due to our conversations over the last while. I had intended to post a thread similar to this many times but I just never got around to it.

Like I explained in my earlier posts I'm trying to find out, for good or for bad, how I'm doing, I want to attract new photographers and keep the ones that are currently upload, including yourself.

I'm hoping that the feedback that I get through this post will help put in a set of guidelines that both uploaders & screeners can reference. That way then everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet.

---------------------------

thurian,

You are talking about shots like these then:





The planes are still sharp. The second picture, the Tiger Rafale, while taken during daytime, the lighting was very poor and a slow shutter speed had to be used, giving a similar effect to dawn / dusk (low light), albeit without the silhouette.

While every picture is taken on it's merits generally speaking the aircraft should be sharp.


Regards,

Frank.

[Frank]

Another step along the road towards getting the new screeners set up... Reject reasons. The reject reasons below are what will be emailed to the photographer when their photograph is declined.

If you think some of them need clarification or have a comment / suggestion please say so. I've tried to explain as best I can what the problem is. The screening process also has the facility for screeners to include written messages.


Regards,

Frank.

---------------------


Aircraft Too Small
The aircraft is too small in the picture and cannot clearly be seen, there is too much empty space around the aircraft or the aircraft is too far away. Please try to have the aircraft fill as much of the picture as possible. If you can edit the picture so that aircraft is bigger in the frame please upload that instead.


Aircraft Obstructed
The aircraft is fully or partially obscured by another object, e.g. poles, ramp equipment, people, barriers, etc, and the visual amenity of the picture is poor. If you have a similar picture where the same aircraft is unobstructed please upload that instead.


Part Cut Off
Part of the aircraft is cut off in the picture and is out of the frame, e.g. the nose or part of the fuselage is cut off, and the visual amenity of the picture is poor. If you have a similar picture of the same aircraft where, for example, the nose is visible, please upload that instead.


Picture Size Too Small
The picture is too small, please try to have all your uploads as big as possible. The picture must have minimum dimensions of at least 1000 pixels wide by  pixels high. If you can scan the picture to a bigger size or have a bigger digital image please upload that instead.


Picture Height To Small
The picture has been cropped too much in height and as a result the height of the picture is too small. Please try to have all your uploads as big as possible, the picture must have minimum dimensions of at least 1000 pixels wide by 667 pixels high, as a rough guide the picture height must be at least 0.667 times the width of the picture. (Multiply your picture width by 0.667 to find the minimum picture height)
Please Note: All pictures that are bigger than 1024 pixels wide or 1000 pixels high, whichever dimension is greater, are automatically resized to those dimensions and as a result this can bring your picture dimensions below the minimum acceptable size. If you can scan the picture to a bigger size or have a bigger digital image please upload that instead.


Picture Width Too Small
The picture has been cropped too much in width and as a result the width of the picture is too narrow. Please try to have all your uploads as big as possible, the picture must have minimum dimensions of at least 667 pixels wide by 1000 pixels high, as a rough guide the picture width must be at least 0.667 times the height of the picture. (Multiply your picture height by 0.667 to find the minimum picture width)
Please Note: All pictures that are bigger than 1024 pixels wide or 1000 pixels high, whichever dimension is greater, are automatically resized to those dimensions and as a result this can bring your picture dimensions below the minimum acceptable size. If you can scan the picture to a bigger size or have a bigger digital image please upload that instead.


Square Picture
The picture has been cropped so that is looks square, please try to ensure that your uploads have a rectangular appearance. Sample dimensions are 1024(w) x 683(h) pixels or 1024(w) x 768(h) pixels for landscape images or 683(w) x 1024(h) pixels for portrait images.
The picture must have minimum dimensions of at least 667 pixels high by 1000 pixels wide.
Please Note: All pictures that are bigger than 1024 pixels wide or 1000 pixels high, whichever dimension is greater, are automatically resized to those dimensions and as a result this can bring your picture dimensions below the minimum acceptable size.  If you can scan the picture to a bigger size or have a bigger digital image please upload that instead.


Grainy Picture
The picture is very grainy.
Factors that can cause grain in pictures are:
- Oversharpening
- Using a high ISO setting on your camera
If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead. Your picture editing software may have a built in noise reduction facility, software such as Neat Image and Topaz DeNoise can also help to reduce the noise.


Blurry Picture
The picture is very blurry, this can occur, for example, if you used a very slow shutter speed when taking the picture. If you have another picture of this aircraft that is not blurry please upload that instead.


Oversharpened Picture
The picture is over sharpened, the edges of the aircraft are jagged, have a saw-tooth edge or there is a halo effect from excessive sharpening. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Halo Around Aircraft Picture
There is a halo effect around the aircraft that can result from excessive sharpening or excessive use of the shadows / highlights tool. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Dust Spots / Dirty
The picture is dirty or has dust spots, this probably means that you have specks of dust on your camera sensor or scanner. These blemishes can usually be edited out of the picture using a photo editing program, the Equalize tool in Photoshop can be used to indicate where these dust spots are. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Dark Picture
The picture is too dark, this could be due to the picture being underexposed, taking the picture in low light conditions can also cause the picture to be dark. Sometimes bright white cloud or a bright fuselage can fool the camera light meter into underexposing the picture. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Brightening Required
The picture required some extra brightness to be applied. Sometimes bright white cloud or a bright fuselage can fool the camera light meter into underexposing the picture. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Backlit
The aircraft is backlit, making the background too bright or even overexposed while the aircraft itself may or may not be too dark, this could be caused by shooting into or against the sun. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Overexposed
The picture is overexposed, it is too bright or overexposed all over or in parts, and picture detail is lost. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Level - Clockwise Rotation Required
The picture does not appear to be level with the horizon and it appears that some clockwise rotation is required. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Level - Anti-Clockwise Rotation Required
The picture does not appear to be level with the horizon and it appears that some anti-clockwise rotation is required. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Aircraft Not Centred
The aircraft is not centred in the picture. The aircraft is either too high, too low or too much to one side in the picture, the picture appears to be un-balanced. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Heat Haze
The aircraft / subject is distorted by heat haze, this is caused either by taking a picture of the aircraft through the jet exhaust plume of another aircraft or you were too far away from the aircraft when you took the picture and heat haze from the ground between you and the aircraft is excessive. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Poor Contrast
The picture has poor contrast and has a washed-out or hazy appearance, blacks do not look to be black and whites do not look to be white, a lot of the time this problem can be fixed by applying some additional contrast using your picture editing software. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Poor Aesthetics
The picture has low aesthetic value. What this means is that the photo has a bad motive or has been badly composed, it has poor visual amenity. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Poor Quality
The picture is of poor quality. What this means is that, for example, the picture appears to have been over-edited, saved or taken at a low picture quality, or taken using a camera that has low pixel resolution or has a poor quality sensor. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Sharpening Required
The picture is not sharp and some extra sharpening is required. What this means is that while the picture is good it does have a soft appearance, especially around the edges of tha aircraft, and a bit of additional sharpening should make it ok. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Out Of Focus
The picture is out of focus. A possible cause of this is the camera not focusing correctly or focusing on something other than the subject. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Badly Scanned
The picture appears to have been badly scanned, has borders visible around the picture or was saved with a low quality / small file size and this gives the picture a pixelated, discoloured or distorted look, jpeg artifacts could also be present. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can scan / edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Borders Visible
The picture appears to have been badly scanned or edited as borders are visible around the picture. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can scan / edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Pixellated
The picture look like it was saved with a low quality / small file size and this gives the picture a pixelated, discoloured or distorted look, jpeg artifacts could also be present. If you have a better picture of this aircraft or if you can scan / edit this picture to improve it's quality please upload that instead.


Bad Upload
For some reason your picture did not upload properly. Please reply to this email, making sure to leave all this text in the reply, and send the original picture as an attachment. It will be put it back into the system and put it through the approval process again.


Duplicate Upload
This picture or a picture very similar to it taken by you has already been uploaded / added. If you have a different / non-similar picture of this aircraft please upload that instead.


Not Copyright Holder
This picture appears to have been scanned from a magazine or post card, taken from some other form of media and it appears that you are not the copyright holder for this picture.

[thurian]

Yep, prefer the top pic with city skyline though, military stuff just doesn't float my boat!
Re: Stephens decision to quit uploading, I like his pictures and I'm sure he has tons more that could grace this site but he obviously thinks his stuff doesn't need screening because he's done a bit of screening himself. I've three words to say. Baby, Rattle and Pram.

[Andrew Martin]

I think the inconsistency of what passes for a good shot is what most users of the forum will find annoying. For example, I've had a few shots which I considered to be perfectly adequate rejected and then seen shots appear on this site of aircraft where the software used by the photographer has actually removed the airline titles and registration of the aircraft!
There is however, one very easy way to bypass this problem. I set up a fotopic page and I'm the arbiter of what appears on my pages and this works very well for me.
The page is at andrewmartin.fotopic.net if anyone is interested and the basic set up is free!  

[corkspotter]

I think the inconsistency of what passes for a good shot is what most users of the forum will find annoying. For example, I've had a few shots which I considered to be perfectly adequate rejected and then seen shots appear on this site of aircraft where the software used by the photographer has actually removed the airline titles and registration of the aircraft!
There is however, one very easy way to bypass this problem. I set up a fotopic page and I'm the arbiter of what appears on my pages and this works very well for me.
The page is at andrewmartin.fotopic.net if anyone is interested and the basic set up is free! 

Andrew,

I'm afraid I have to totally disagree with you on your point. The website is a quality website with good photo's from all photographers that contribute. If your photo's were rejected, instead of getting into a hump about it why don't you take the advise and try to improve whats wrong. I have to say that ypu do have a great selection of shots on the site and would hope that you keep uploading.

With regards to shots were the software removing the titles and logo, i hope you don't mean this shot!

http://www.worldairpics.com/photo/1038241/M/Boeing-737-8AS/EI-DAV/Ryanair-FR--RYR/?&sid=4384325913&sp=0

  Only a bit of light humour !!! No offense intended!

Regards,

Paul

[Andrew Martin]

Hi Paul,

I have no problem with you disagreeing with me and I don't have the hump about having pictures rejected but what I do have an issue with is the inconsistency in determinig what constitutes a 'good' image. As an example, how does this pass the guidelines laid down regarding the quality of a shot...??
http://www.worldairpics.com/photo/1012247/L/British-Aerospace-BAe-146-100/G-BKMN/Dan-Air-DA--DAN/?&sid=4022394632&sp=1616
The registration has been altered as has the tail logo. So, how did this image get through when other perfectly good shots are rejected?
Personally, I prefer having my own site and it was something I decided to do, not because I had shots rejected but because I get a greater deal of satisfaction arranging the galleries myself! And if you enjoyed some of my shots on this site you can see plenty more at my fotopic page.

Andrew

andrewmartin.fotopic.net