I wouldn’t say I was “senior” – there were three head screeners, then the rest. I was one of the longer serving screeners (from the first group recruited after the original eight) until I stopped a year or so ago. There were at the time three screeners who really propped up the operation in terms of number of pics screened, out of a team of 15 or so. I liked to be in position five or six, way behind the top three but far more busy than most. For a long while I maintained that position, then gradually my numbers fell off until I did virtually none.
For a long time I defended a.net and its policies very vigourously, and I believed in what I said. Sure the adverse comments were painful at times, but all the adverse comments about bias and favouritism were untrue, and if you genuinely know that to be the case its easy to either ignore the comments or defend a.net.
My biggest problem in the longer term was that I started to disagree with some of the standards that were set, particularly in respect of things like cloning. For example I am entirely comfortable with photographers cloning out extraneous items like lamp posts in the background, etc, to make the overally photo better as long as its done so well that its undetectable and as long as the aeroplane itself is not manipulated. In this, I disagree with a.net policy. I also started getting disappointed at seeing some images rejected, especially old and potentially historically important images, images of subjects that the site didn’t have, because they didn’t meet quality standards. Some of the screeners are not aviation enthusiasts, so they make decisions based on the photos rather than on the uniqueness of the subject. There were rules that were meant to allow such images to be accepted, but it didn’t always happen like that.
As I said, there is no bias or favouritism in the screening – of that, I am entirely sure. The biggest problem is that as the screening team has grown, so the INTERPRETATION of the standards as applied by each screener may differ slightly – what one screen thinks is good enough, the next might not. There is a policing process but it is inadequate to really ensure that every screener in what is now a large team is screening to precisely the same standards and measures. And the checks and balances in the system are insufficient to catch and correct errant screeners before they end up causing upset amongst the photographers. Of course, with more and more photographers coming along with 350Ds or D50s by the day, losing one or two regulars is hardly a problem for a.net.
Eventually you realise that there are far more outlets for aviation pictures than a.net -for example, most of my new stuff goes to AirTeamImages now and I get far more out of that than I do from a.net. I still put a few pics on a.net, but not many – I can’t be bothered with battling with a process that is fair but flawed and stacked against the photographer.
Anyway, enough of all that.
Andy
Sign In
