Old 08-28-2009, 07:38 PM   #1
Drewster
Senior Member
 
Drewster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 147
Question Screeners, don't play these games with us

I hate when they do this, they haven't done this to me for a while by playing their little hard to get games. Seriously the screeners need to just be straight up honest, if you don't want the photo, just say you don't want it instead of wasting our time and theirs. Example:

Underexposed:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=201329206

Fixed exposure - Then Bad color
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=810130284

Added some hue and saturation
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=605613997

Distracting shadows. Not much I can do about that, I can understand the errors that are fixable and you can get in, but things that aren't fixable, that's not cool. I don't understand why they just can't cut to the chase on this kind of stuff. It's really irritating!

Last edited by Drewster; 08-28-2009 at 07:42 PM.
Drewster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009, 07:48 PM   #2
DRGW5371
Junior Member
 
DRGW5371's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio
Posts: 26
Send a message via AIM to DRGW5371 Send a message via Yahoo to DRGW5371
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewster View Post
I hate when they do this, they haven't done this to me for a while by playing their little hard to get games. Seriously the screeners need to just be straight up honest, if you don't want the photo, just say you don't want it instead of wasting our time and theirs. Example:

Underexposed:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=201329206

Fixed exposure - Then Bad color
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=810130284

Added some hue and saturation
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=605613997

Distracting shadows. Not much I can do about that. I don't understand why they just can't cut to the chase on this kind of stuff. It's really irritating!
This has really been my only complaint about this website. I don't mind getting told my pictures need improvement, but I get frustrated when I correct something - and then it gets nixed for something else. Assuming that the screeners still use the system that has been shown on here - how much harder would it be to check 'Horizon Unlevel' and 'Bad color' on one reject? And if the screener feels strongly that the picture will never get in, then PEQ it. It would save time on both ends.

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphot...=286272&nseq=2

The above image was rejected about 10 times before it got in. I was persistent with it because I really liked the picture and it's the only one of its kind on RP. But it was rejected from things ranging from being unlevel and bad color to being soft and poor cropping, etc., but all on different uploads and then rejects. Wouldn't it have been easier to do it all at once?

If the screening queue is too long, maybe RP should add additional screeners. There are plenty of capable photographers on here that I'm sure would step up.
__________________
Greg "Matt" Marck
Cincinnati Ohio

My Photos on RP

CincyPics.com
DRGW5371 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009, 08:02 PM   #3
bigbassloyd
Senior Member
 
bigbassloyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hilldale, West Virginia
Posts: 3,677
Default

Rejected three times, for three valid reasons. Yes, it would be nice to get them all at once sometimes. Since there are different screeners, it's quite likely that a different one looked at the image each time as well.

Rejections can be good, as you learn to spot issues with your photos from them. Once you can tell when your shot is flat, unlevel, or oversharpened, it will give you more time to reflect on those gosh darn forsaken PEQ rejections.. grumble..

Loyd L.
__________________
Social Media elevates the absurd and mediocre to a point where they aren't anymore, and that is a tragedy.

My personal photography site
bigbassloyd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009, 08:54 PM   #4
ottergoose
American Gunzel
 
ottergoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Eagan, MN
Posts: 1,626
Send a message via AIM to ottergoose Send a message via Yahoo to ottergoose
Default

It'd also be nice if you had to approve changes to your photo info before they went through, if screening was anonymous, and you could see more than one page of search results after clicking on a railroad with an "&" in it's title. It's not like that's been requested for years now or anything...
__________________
Nick Benson | Pictures | Website | Flickr | Profile | JetPhotos | Twitter
ottergoose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009, 09:15 PM   #5
jdirelan87
Senior Member
 
jdirelan87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Metro DC
Posts: 725
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ottergoose View Post
It'd also be nice if you had to approve changes to your photo info before they went through, if screening was anonymous, and you could see more than one page of search results after clicking on a railroad with an "&" in it's title. It's not like that's been requested for years now or anything...
http://forums.railpictures.net/showthread.php?t=76

Funny to think there was a time when people's request where not only acknowledged, but acted upon
jdirelan87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2009, 11:05 PM   #6
Drewster
Senior Member
 
Drewster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigbassloyd View Post
Rejected three times, for three valid reasons. Yes, it would be nice to get them all at once sometimes. Since there are different screeners, it's quite likely that a different one looked at the image each time as well.

Rejections can be good, as you learn to spot issues with your photos from them. Once you can tell when your shot is flat, unlevel, or oversharpened, it will give you more time to reflect on those gosh darn forsaken PEQ rejections.. grumble..

Loyd L.
Well, i knew it was the same screener the 1st 2 photo's because I noticed the que moving, with each upload as well, i used the (Note to screener) feature explaining what I changed from the last rejection. The screeners seem to be like Woman sometimes, they play hard to get, give you mixed signals and either end up rejecting you or accepting you after playing their game.
Drewster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 12:33 AM   #7
steambrake
Junior Member
 
steambrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 16
Default

Perhaps there is an issue with the graffiti on the right hand side?

Stephen
steambrake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 12:47 AM   #8
Drewster
Senior Member
 
Drewster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by steambrake View Post
Perhaps there is an issue with the graffiti on the right hand side?

Stephen
I never noticed that LOL, but still you can find stuff even worse graffiti in photos on Railcars and locomotives. I didn't intentionally include that. Would have been nice of a screener to tell me in a screeners notice if that was the REAL rejection reason.

Last edited by Drewster; 08-29-2009 at 12:49 AM.
Drewster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 12:51 AM   #9
steambrake
Junior Member
 
steambrake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewster View Post
you can find stuff even worse graffiti in photos on Railcars and locomotives...
Yes, I agree, but on railpictures.net?

Stephen
steambrake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:02 AM   #10
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,892
Default

You've got two more rejection reasons that I think will come your way. First, the shot is leaning to the left. Second is PEQ (not the type of material we are willing to publish) in regards to the spray painting. I notice that your anger isn't toward the screeners for rejecting your shot as much as it is for not giving you each and every reason. I guess that's a start. I mean, they could sit there and reject this one shot for five different reasons, I guess. (It might not be possible in their system, I don't kow.) But at some point, maybe you need to realize yourself that the only railroad equipment in this shot is in a shadow, that the color is or was bad, that there's offensive to some material painted and the shot is leaning. It's their web site, but it's your photograph. Do what you can with your part of the equation first.

Dude, they're not playing games. That's an absurd statement.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:12 AM   #11
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

There's no games being played...take a better shot.

It's a square-ish photo with the telemashed subject almost dead center covered in shadows.

Can we call the whining...game over?
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:18 AM   #12
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,892
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween View Post
It's a square-ish photo with the telemashed subject almost dead center covered in shadows.
Well, at least one more rejection reason, cropping, with a possible size dimension thrown in. Let's be honest. Drewster's right. The screeners want this shot to be uploaded seven different times and rejected seven different times. They don't have anything else to do. They just sit at the computers all day and hope a couple of really bad shots come their way so they can reject it many, many times in the next hours and days. That makes sense, right? Right?
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:22 AM   #13
Drewster
Senior Member
 
Drewster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 147
Default

I'm not whining. I'm stating my opinion that's on a lot of other peoples mind. If it's a PEQ then Cut to the chase and tell me straight out. PEQ we wish not to publish this. I'm fine with that I'll drop it. I DON'T like being ran around in circles and misled by a different reject reason each time especially with the same screener. That's ALL I'm asking. Just cut to the chase. I don't like this BSing around!
Drewster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:25 AM   #14
Drewster
Senior Member
 
Drewster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
Well, at least one more rejection reason, cropping, with a possible size dimension thrown in. Let's be honest. Drewster's right. The screeners want this shot to be uploaded seven different times and rejected seven different times. They don't have anything else to do. They just sit at the computers all day and hope a couple of really bad shots come their way so they can reject it many, many times in the next hours and days. That makes sense, right? Right?
Sarcastic enough?
Drewster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:27 AM   #15
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,892
Default

Get over yourself. I don't think thedy noted the graffitti. If they did, I think they would have given you a PEQ. Each rejection reason they gave was valid as was a few they didn't give. They can't give you every reason on every shot. If they did, there'd be a back log of shots from 2005 that were still being screened. We've given you our opinion on your shot and you're still bitching and moaning about the screeners.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:32 AM   #16
Drewster
Senior Member
 
Drewster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 147
Default

That's what PEQ's are for then, RIGHT? atleast the second time around they could have used it. Sorry not all my photos are Perfect like yours. I think you sir are out of line with your attitude! I'm done now!
Drewster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:36 AM   #17
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,892
Default

I never said my shots were perfect. Heck, I look at some of them and wonder why I downloaded them to the computer at all. But you're not understanding what I said about the PEQ. I don't think they saw the graffitti. If they did or if they had a problem with it, they would have given you the PEQ. We're the ones who brought that up. They rejected it for three different reasons. And as Loyd said, all three were valid. You haven't argued that. You're the one that came with the attitude that the screeners were playing games with you.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:39 AM   #18
Ween
Senior Member
 
Ween's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,861
Default

Quote:
I think you sir are out of line with your attitude!
But, but...Joe was just expressing his opinion. Opinion, you know, that thing you were expressing when you started this thread?
__________________
Ween is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:40 AM   #19
Drewster
Senior Member
 
Drewster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewster View Post
Underexposed:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=201329206

Fixed exposure - Then Bad color
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=810130284

Added some hue and saturation
http://www.railpictures.net/viewreje...&key=605613997

Distracting shadows. Not much I can do about that
I don't think you read my 1st post good enough. I fixed one after the other and they gave me another different reason after I fixed one. I would have been FINE with a PEQ
Drewster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:42 AM   #20
Drewster
Senior Member
 
Drewster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 147
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ween View Post
But, but...Joe was just expressing his opinion. Opinion, you know, that thing you were expressing when you started this thread?
I never Swore toward him. "Bitching"? I don't take that lightly. That's MORE than an opinion. That's crossing the line!
Drewster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:43 AM   #21
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,892
Default

I read your post. The screeners never mentioned PEQ; we did. None of us here know if they even saw a reason to give a PEQ. Since they didn't give you that reject, it's fair to think they didn't have a problem with the graffitti and were noting the other issues with the shot.
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:44 AM   #22
Joe the Photog
Senior Member
 
Joe the Photog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 7,892
Default

Wow. To say someone is bitching and moaning is swearing?
__________________
Joe the Photog Dot Com
Joe the Photog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 01:47 AM   #23
Drewster
Senior Member
 
Drewster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 147
Default

I would have been fine with Distracting shadows then, I can't fix that and I know it, and I would have left it. Apparently that was the biggest issue to everyone, instead I get 2 different reasons I can fix and fixed leading to this wasting my time and theirs. I just don't get it! And I've been trying to keep it civil as best I can, Don't come here and startgetting aggressive by saying "bitching and moaning" and throwing punches!

Last edited by Drewster; 08-29-2009 at 01:49 AM.
Drewster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 02:06 AM   #24
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

I think they think your up to making up your mind on what to send in. Right or wrong it the way it is. I add, take two days and cool off and see if you still like the photo, get past the part it's yours and you will get it in. That works for me!
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/

Last edited by milwman; 08-29-2009 at 02:13 AM.
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2009, 02:12 AM   #25
Freericks
Met Fan
 
Freericks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 4,039
Default

Probably would be smart not to get into a thread that's turning toxic, but to be honest I see both sides here...

1) I've worked like a dog on an image, fixing issue after issue, only to have the picture rejected again and again for reason after reason that was never mentioned earlier. And yet, when looking at the image days later (which is the only time you can look at the picture with proper judgement), I realized that every reason for rejection was correct.

2) It is impossible to give all the reasons for rejection as you are moving through lots of photos. For a moment, think of some of the stuff the screeners are passing through. There's a lot of garbage out there.

3) Drewster, I am sorry to say this, because I know it was a really cool catch, but Joe is 100% right, I don't think that image is getting in. That doesn't make it a nice image and you should be very happy you got it. You can post to other sites like Photobucket, Flickr, rrpicturearchives, etc. It's a cool shot. It just doesn't fit the parameters for this site.

CF

Last edited by Freericks; 08-29-2009 at 10:11 PM.
Freericks is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.