Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Thoughts On This Rejection  
User currently offlineCFIcraigAPA From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 223 posts, RR: 4
Posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3752 times:

Take a look at this shot of mine. http://myaviation.net/search/photo_search.php?id=00042881&size=large
I thought it was acceptable, the screeners did not. Is there anything I can do for it to make it more a.net friendly, or is it just not something a.net would want?
Thanks for any honest advice.

Prior Proper Preparation Prevents Piss-Poor Performance
7 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9823 posts, RR: 64
Reply 1, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3745 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Craig, what was the rejection reason? if its bad motive you prob dont have any recourse, but if its bad color I would try rerworking it in Photoshop. The canyon blue is a funny color, even allowing for the warm color of the late evening sun.

Its a cool shot, it makes me think of "Welcome to San Diego"

User currently offlineMikec From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 247 posts, RR: 12
Reply 2, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3740 times:

The tree bits are way too distracting in my opinion and covering a lot of the aircraft - I don't think there is anything you can do to get it accepted here. Unless you have another without the tree covering the aircraft.

Aside from that, I like the lighting though!

[Edited 2004-03-11 01:12:44]

User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3737 times:

Good pic, but it looks like Badscan, seems slightly out of focus. I don't think a.net goes for the artsy-fartsy, which is a real shame, because some very good photos get rejected, while everyday photos pass through.


User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 45
Reply 4, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3712 times:

Try adjusting your position next time, so the tree wont be in the way.

User currently offlineGlennstewart From Australia, joined Jun 2003, 1124 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 3638 times:

I don't mind arty shots personally. But taking note that this is a database collection of aviation shots (more or less, keeping images for the future), we try to keep this in mind when screening.

Rare shots will always get treated with a higher priority. The aircraft that crashed 10 years ago, will never be shots again, so we take what we can get.

The aircraft that we see everyday can be shot again, and again, and again. That does lead many to try more artistic shots...
But it's hard to know where to draw the line.

When it's a clear shot of plane with a bit of art, it might be accepted. But to drive the point, I would assume that at the other end of the spectrum is a non-aviation person, who loves arty shots and includes a bit of plane.

This shot is certainly more towards the aviation spectrum.... but to make the line clear, we tend to make it a little easier to know what we want for the database. Generally the aircraft should be clearly visible.

I was browsing through some aviation books last night. After laughing at artist impressions of what we know now as the F/A-22, and spy photos of the SU-27, I realised that the majority of shots were capturing history. A B-52 that was obviously in service back when the book was printed, we know is now sitting in a desert...
The reason I know that was because it wasn't an arty shot of a B-52, but simply in flight and I could easily read the reg. Likewise, I have seen shots of the same B-52 sadly sitting in the desert.

20 years from now, I want to see a great shot of a 737. I'm not necessarily looking for an arty shot.

By all of the above though, I'm not saying that art is not the way to go. My personal opinion is that you can certainly capture an aircraft in an artistic way. And if you hit the nail on the head, we certainly won't be rejecting your shot.


Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
User currently offlineCFIcraigAPA From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 223 posts, RR: 4
Reply 6, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 3624 times:

Thanks for the honest reply, Glenn. I can respect that view.

Prior Proper Preparation Prevents Piss-Poor Performance
User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2049 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (12 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 3534 times:

I love the shot, even if it's a bit out of focus. I'd try sharpening it and maybe adjusting the colours a little.

I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Thoughts On This Rejection posted Thu Mar 11 2004 01:03:06 by CFIcraigAPA
Your Thoughts On This Motive Rejection? posted Sun Aug 6 2006 08:29:49 by Futterman
Opinion On This Rejection? posted Sun Sep 17 2006 19:31:13 by San747
Your Thought On This Rejection... posted Wed Aug 16 2006 02:49:33 by Globalpics
Thoughts On This One posted Sat Jul 8 2006 15:34:27 by Soudave
Your Thoughts On This Photo - And Viewer Behaviour posted Fri May 26 2006 18:16:46 by Psych
Can I Improve On This Rejection? posted Tue Apr 25 2006 00:39:21 by Walter2222
Your Thoughts On A Quality Rejection posted Fri Dec 30 2005 12:21:13 by Psych
Your Thoughts On This Please posted Sat Dec 10 2005 01:36:16 by AirImage
Help On This Rejection posted Sat Nov 19 2005 00:40:04 by Work4bmi