Post an image and it's rejected for over sharpening. Fine, reduce sharpening. Post again. Next screener rejects for another reason not detected by the first. Fine make changes. Next post rejected for over sharpening and something else? This is getting ridiculous. Images are now at camera settings an...
Jump to postThis was a general comment regarding shots that are making the top 5 of late. Maybe inline with my previous post regarding bots hitting shots.
Getting any image accepted on AL is hard enough but seriously, wings and clouds and aircraft bulkheads. I see nothing noteworthy. Maybe it's just me.
OMG. What is with some of the images being accepted?
They become popular because people click on it just to see what on earth it is.
Does not make it a worthy image. IMO
johnr wrote:There are many of us who agree with you PeterEde. The manipulation of the Top 5 has gotten ridiculous at the moment. Just the other day all 5 of the photos had been "selected" to be there which meant that some very deserving shots received very little exposure.
I have no problem with people promoting their photos or even others they find worthy on FB or Twitter. The 2 images I noticed like the one above were in my opinion not worthy of such excitement. What peaked my interest was the photographer only had the 2 images and had only been a member since March...
Jump to postHow abut the ability for viewing exif data for those who would like to see it.
Just basics
Camera, Lens, aperture, ISO and shutter speed
It's not exposure when it's a bot hitting a photo and it's unfair to worthy photos that a bot can steal a photographers glory. Sites as Cheateo make cheating simple. Photos should gain position on merit not by site manipulation. People take pride when a photo of theirs is recognized by their peers. ...
Jump to postExposure does not equal fair for those who do the right thing and not use such sites as Cheateo.
Photos should gain position on merit not by site manipulation
Just wondering if anyone might have had thoughts that some are scamming this site? For what benefit?
Or is it just me being skeptical?
Recently (March) a photographer joined the site. Has posted 2 photos that combined have 50K views. 39K in 2 days.
Does this site need a robot detector?
Like many things around here. People change a site only considering the $$ to be made. Many have left but the numpties who run the place don't get it. Consistency in screening is a joke.
Jump to postHow about adding the number of hits a photo has had to the details section instead of having to click on a photo.
Also instead of the 26.1K photo view count give back the total hits without the decimal?
I'll assume many photogs include processing details in the image name for reference. Just having a shot rejected I went to see what version it was so I could make changes. I see my image name is gone. I now have no idea what processing I had done to it. Can we please leave photo name as it was uploa...
Jump to postBut can miss use a work laptop to peruse Airliners ;) surrounded by border of flashing bullshit advertising. I seriously keep on failing to understand why people on this site have not been using an Ad Blocker (eg. AdBlocker Plus). I have never, ever seen an ad on A.net. (Or any other site for that m...
Jump to postWell as long as your happy. Never mind the majority.
klvk94550 wrote:Jump to postif anyone is complaining about the upgrade to this site, I just have to say, some people can't be pleased! I for one love the new layout of AIRLINERS, VERY MUCH
Was hard enough reading your reply :o. I get the feeling this was not beta tested. Rule one before going live with a new format. Beta test. Yeah, I sent two emails to them explaining that I have vision problems, I keep having to adjust the screen size and even then, the colors make the glare really ...
Jump to postNeeds more contrast
Requires sharpening
Blurry
Motif
Soon to be under exposed
Personal
Please return to the old format. Was this beta tested before rolling out?
Too much change, too many missing items.
How do we delete queued photos in the new format?
There does not seem to be a way. At least it's not obvious