JetPhotos.net "Similar" rejection criteria

Note
This forum is no longer automatically anonymous. If you require anonymity, please log out of your account and post as a guest. Posts require moderator approval, which may take up to 48 hours.
Post Reply
User avatar
Cary
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1740
Joined: Dec 22, 2013
Contact:

JetPhotos.net "Similar" rejection criteria

Post by Cary »

For those of you who upload to JetPhotos, you know they won't accept similar photos of the same plane on different dates, unless the new one is significantly better quality, at a different airport, or at a different angle:
Means that you have a similar photo already in the database. Please upload only your best photos, try other angles, be creative. Similar refers to same registration, same angle/composition or same background, even if taken at different dates or in different phases of flight. The angle between uploads must differ by at least 45 degrees. However, if a new upload is of a significantly better quality, we may consider accepting it. Close up views and full or partial views of an a/c taken at the same angle, are generally considered similar.
For pictures taken at different airports 1 similar photo will be accepted. For further up-loads the usual criteria applies.
For cockpit shots do not upload photos of specific instruments or controls if they appear in another full cockpit image. We will only accept a certain number of cockpit or window shots taken in the same aircraft (normally no more than 3).
I uploaded a new photo of the US Airways heritage A321 in perfect, snow-reflected winter light, over 2 years after I had the first photo of it accepted, and got rejected for similar. My first shot had terrible light, but I posted it because there were no pics of it.

Image
American Airlines (US Airways) Airbus A321-231 - N578UW, on AeroPX

compared to:

Image
American Airlines Airbus A321-231 - N578UW, on AeroPX

On appeal, I was told "The quality is hardly better than the photo currently in database." Hardly better? Guess that explains all the horribly-lit acceptances on the site. This is a pretty bad rule if you accept poorly-lit photos of an aircraft over one that's arguably the best-lit example in the database, just because it wasn't taken at a different airport or the angle wasn't more than 45 degrees from the first.
AeroPX on Instagram - https://instagram.com/aeropxdotcom

View my photos: Airliners.net | JetPhotos.net | Flickr
User avatar
Guest

Re: JetPhotos.net "Similar" rejection criteria

Post by Guest »

Cary wrote: Hardly better? Guess that explains all the horribly-lit acceptances on the site. This is a pretty bad rule if you accept poorly-lit photos of an aircraft over one that's arguably the best-lit example in the database, just because it wasn't taken at a different airport or the angle wasn't more than 45 degrees from the first.
You summed it up pretty well. Only if your own standards are rather low you would say that this is hardly better...
Take it that way, if you think quality is just an aircraft that fills the frame, that the shot is not overly blurry and that it is not totally backlit, then yes there is no big difference in your shots "quality-wise" .

Generally I like the idea ("only upload your best shots") behind this rule as well as the 10 Images per day limit, as this will at least limit or make it harder for those that just want to upload as much as they can, no matter the light, the quality or just the thought that the 85th shot from the same day might not be that interesting to others.
But then please apply it correctly.
And yes where is the point in rejecting a perfect shot and let others in awful light in, just because they were taken by another photgrapher...
User avatar
Cary
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 1740
Joined: Dec 22, 2013
Contact:

Re: JetPhotos.net "Similar" rejection criteria

Post by Cary »

Guest wrote:
Cary wrote: Hardly better? Guess that explains all the horribly-lit acceptances on the site. This is a pretty bad rule if you accept poorly-lit photos of an aircraft over one that's arguably the best-lit example in the database, just because it wasn't taken at a different airport or the angle wasn't more than 45 degrees from the first.
You summed it up pretty well. Only if your own standards are rather low you would say that this is hardly better...
Take it that way, if you think quality is just an aircraft that fills the frame, that the shot is not overly blurry and that it is not totally backlit, then yes there is no big difference in your shots "quality-wise" .

Generally I like the idea ("only upload your best shots") behind this rule as well as the 10 Images per day limit, as this will at least limit or make it harder for those that just want to upload as much as they can, no matter the light, the quality or just the thought that the 85th shot from the same day might not be that interesting to others.
But then please apply it correctly.
And yes where is the point in rejecting a perfect shot and let others in awful light in, just because they were taken by another photgrapher...
Glad someone else "gets" it. Yes, I'm hard on my own photography, but the light on my original is somewhat miserable. Much like I did for a recent poorly-lit Frontier NEO, I only posted it since it was the first in the database. If my new photo was just taken at a different airport, it would have been fine. JetPhotos (and A.net) should be trying to get the best photos of each plane on their site, not making it difficult or impossible to do so. Really frustrating.
AeroPX on Instagram - https://instagram.com/aeropxdotcom

View my photos: Airliners.net | JetPhotos.net | Flickr
User avatar
Guest

Re: JetPhotos.net "Similar" rejection criteria

Post by Guest »

I agree completely with the idiocracy of this rule. I recently had a run in with this rule as well. A shot from a year ago that was a front 3/4 with winter light was deemed similar to a rear 3/4 type shot in golden light.
Post Reply