Where's The Aviation In This Photo? — Aviation Photography Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

Where's The Aviation In This Photo?

QantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 35
Posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3175 times:

While recently browsing through some photos I came across the following:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Pavel Nohel

Where's the aviation? Surely this sort of photo would warrant badmotiv according to current A.net standards...

This thread is in no way meant to pick on this particular photographer or photo - in fact, as an aerial photo it's quite nice - but I'm genuinely curious as to how this shot got in.

Cheers,
QantasA332

[Edited 2005-04-01 12:00:39]

15 replies: All unread, jump to last

Jaspike From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2008, 1 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3169 times:

In one of the editors files we've got this:

2.2.1.3. The subject of the photo is nor another aircraft, nor an airport : the photo shouldn’t be in the database. But maybe in very special cases an exception can be made on decision of Johan.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chris Sheldon

Suppose that covers it Smile

Tom

Oly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6191 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3164 times:

There might be a runway just below the clump of buildings on the left.

wheat and dairy can screw up your brain

QantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 35
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3163 times:

Cool, okay! Perhaps Johan should branch out and create "aerialphotography.net"?

Cheers,
QantasA332

*Edit: Oly720man, I noticed that too, but even if it is an airport surely the photo would still warrant baddistance? Wink

[Edited 2005-04-01 12:07:08]

Qantas077 From China, joined Jan 2004, 5746 posts, RR: 49
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3153 times:

i guess the NYC is aviation related in a way due to the way the towers were bought down, but the first one, well, i'm stuffed as to the relevance and i can't really see it. bums n tits get removed with airplanes in the shot yet a coral reef makes it without an ounce of aviation relevance?!?!

as for the runway, its clear that its not the focus of the photo so the motive would have to be questionable?!?

[Edited 2005-04-01 12:12:46]

a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.

Skymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3130 times:

The pic from Egypt at top shouldn't be on the database and it will be removed. The rules changed quite some time ago, after the New York photo was added. Now, there must be either significant components of the airplane or an airport in the picture.

Andy

Granite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5542 posts, RR: 67
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3126 times:

AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Hi all

Mistakes happen and as Andy said, it should not be on the database.

Any stuff like this should be directed to the Head Screeners at headscreeners@airliners.net

This will result in faster actions.

Regards

Gary

LGA777 From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1101 posts, RR: 22
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2996 times:

Just to clarify the photo at the top of the thread would be acceptable if there was a wing and or engine in part of the photo ?

Thanks LGA777

Skymonster From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2965 times:

It would need to be a reasonable amount of the wing and/or engine...

Andy

TZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 54
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2922 times:

Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting QantasA332 (Thread starter):
Where's the aviation? Surely this sort of photo would warrant badmotiv according to current A.net standards...

It is indeed badmotiv and was added by mistake. It has now been deleted from the database.

Tamsin

TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images

Wanderer From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2004, 233 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2778 times:

Quoting Jaspike (Reply 1):
In one of the editors files we've got this:

2.2.1.3. The subject of the photo is nor another aircraft, nor an airport : the photo shouldn’t be in the database. But maybe in very special cases an exception can be made on decision of Johan.

*Photo of World Trade Center*

Including a photo of the WTC is, I think, understandable...

Newark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 33
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 2772 times:

Quoting Wanderer (Reply 10):
Including a photo of the WTC is, I think, understandable...

It did have a helipad on the top, after all.

Harry

Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?

Bobster2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2739 times:

Quoting Newark777 (Reply 11):
It did have a helipad on the top, after all.

Are you sure about that? I don't remember a helipad on the WTC.

edit: I found a picture of the helipad. I was wrong. Sorry.

[Edited 2005-04-02 02:25:43]

A346Dude From Canada, joined Nov 2004, 1198 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2664 times:

I might be wrong on this, but I have always felt that once a photo was added it should stay. To remove a photo because by today's standards it would be considered badmotive doesn't make sense to me, because photos from 5 years ago (for example) are not removed - even though today the vast majority of them would be considered badquality.

My

.

A346Dude

[Edited 2005-04-02 06:06:58]

You know the gear is up and locked when it takes full throttle to taxi to the terminal.

Q330 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1460 posts, RR: 24
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2634 times:

Quoting A346Dude (Reply 13):
To remove a photo because by today's standards it would be considered badmotive doesn't make sense to me, because photos from 5 years ago (for example) are not removed - even though today the vast majority of them would be considered badquality.

The coral reef photo that was just removed was only removed because it got in very recently and by mistake. Although, I must say, it really would have been badmotiv by any standards, old or new.

-Q

Long live the A330!

TZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 54
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 2604 times:

Quoting A346Dude (Reply 13):
I might be wrong on this, but I have always felt that once a photo was added it should stay. To remove a photo because by today's standards it would be considered badmotive doesn't make sense to me, because photos from 5 years ago (for example) are not removed - even though today the vast majority of them would be considered badquality.

Photos are judged by the standards of the time they were accepted. A five year-old photo would not be judged by the same quality / sharpness / etc levels that today's photos are.

However, that was a recent photo and by today's standards it was unfortunately badmotiv (for airliners.net), despite being a nice picture.

Tamsin

TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images

Top Of Page

Forum Index

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

Printer friendly format

Similar topics: