Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Badmotiv....huh?  
User currently offlineAirbusfanYYZ From Canada, joined Oct 2002, 1434 posts, RR: 25
Posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1761 times:

Hi guys,

Just looking for your opinions on these BADMOTIV rejections please.
I would have figured my motivation would have been quite obvious?
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...to.main?filename=050508_C-FWBG.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...n?filename=050514_VP-CKXengine.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...to.main?filename=050512_N710UW.jpg
Thanks in advance.

Cheers,
Kaz


t.dot photography
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineQANTAS077 From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 5856 posts, RR: 39
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 1686 times:

the 2nd shot Kaz is bloody awesome! the first one you have all that crap in front of the 737 and the the last i am not so sure about either. i'd appeal the 2nd shot!


a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1675 times:

I second QANTAS007 remark that 2nd shot is a lovely one.
Im not too sure about the 3rd was it also rejected for badmotiv or might be some other reason.
Good luck with them KAZ



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineCV63 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 106 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1677 times:

Kaz,

I agree with QANTAS077, the first one has too much ramp lice and tarmac.

I like the 2nd shot too. IMO If you crop out the wing and just leave more of the engine and seascape, it may pass the standard.  Wink

The third shot has a lot of reflection which would make it bad motive.

Regards,

Ken


User currently offlineCallMeCapt From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1672 times:

2nd photo, bad motiv because of all the background stuff. Truck, telegraph wires. To me, it looks too distracting. Similar to a bad motive rejection I got a few weeks ago. Nothing in front of the plane but too much fence in the foreground, even though it wasn't blocking the plane. I'll 3rd that opinion on the 2nd photo. Definitely appeal it.

Just had another look at the american airways. There's an odd look to it. The color doesn't match between the front half and the back half. Also, the metal "seam" doesn't line up.
What's the go there?

[Edited 2005-06-06 07:16:12]

[Edited 2005-06-06 07:19:41]


Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
User currently offlineBO__einG From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2771 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1650 times:

Sorry Kaz, but I would have to agree with the screeners that all three are indeed badmotive.
First shot has already been explained. Just not airliners.net material.
Second one is kinda nice because of the engine and the turquoise water, but the impression is "so what". Maybe a little more light like a fill flash may of highlighted the engine/rivets a bit more increasing the chances.
Third shot is mundane at best. Again better light could helped but its nothing special just some closeup of a plane lining up.



Chance favors the prepared mind.
User currently offlineCallMeCapt From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 1639 times:

Have to disagree.
Have a look at this one.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/844990/L/

(my photoid function doesn't work for some reason.)



Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
User currently offlineAirplanepics From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2003, 2734 posts, RR: 40
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1615 times:

All the pictures need some more sharpening aswell.


Simon - London-Aviation.com
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5697 posts, RR: 44
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1584 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quote:
Third shot is mundane at best. Again better light could helped but its nothing special just some closeup of a plane lining up.

I disagree, while perhaps not high art! The photo does illustrate things that have been discussed in this and other forums, eg the angle of the nose gear has been discussed but not illustrated well, the section join, Goran referred to. that is not easy to see most the time. I had to search many hundreds of my own photos to find something similar...(but not as clear)

http://www.pbase.com/chrisg/image/44398721.jpg

IMHO, there is a place here for these "illustrative" type shots

Regards

Chris



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineQ330 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1460 posts, RR: 21
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1560 times:

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 8):
IMHO, there is a place here for these "illustrative" type shots

There certainly is a place for them... and there are plenty of them in the database already! Just search for A32X nose shots.

-Q



Long live the A330!
User currently offlineFlyingZacko From Germany, joined May 2005, 583 posts, RR: 6
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1548 times:

Like others have said already, I think on the first should you wanna crop that 737 way tighter, unless your motivation was to get that hangar plus the 737, but then again the 737 is way too small in that picture. For that second shot I have to agree with Qantas332 since it is pretty awesome indeed. Great shot. And then for the third shot, I don't see why it would get badmotiv. It is clearly a noseshot, and what's bad about that motiv, I mean? I think for that one there must be a different reason for rejection. I think it's rather soft in some parts of the picture but you can probably fix that in Photoshop.

Cheers,

Sebastian



Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineAirbusfanYYZ From Canada, joined Oct 2002, 1434 posts, RR: 25
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1516 times:

Thanks for the responses everyone... The first and third ones I'm sorta indifferent about now because I will probably get similar angles in the future. The Cayman 732 engine shot I am still stunned about, I will appeal.

Quoting BO__einG (Reply 5):
Second one is kinda nice because of the engine and the turquoise water, but the impression is "so what"

Yeah I guess it's just not quite as exciting as a 50mm side-on.  sarcastic 

Cheers,
Kaz



t.dot photography
User currently offlineBO__einG From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2771 posts, RR: 18
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1471 times:

Hey man, You got some great pictures (YYZ/SXM) and I am sure that you'll get plenty more plane picts added this year including similar shots like your third one.
Those three I felt were not your usual high quality shots. Plus like the third one it was all coudy and dull weather.
YOu can appeal them I guess but it will take like weeks before Johan sees them.



Chance favors the prepared mind.
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...
Will This Get Badmotiv? posted Sun Feb 12 2006 20:36:52 by SEAchaz
Badmotiv, Badpersonal, Or Both? posted Sat Nov 12 2005 20:27:45 by Pepef
Beaten By Badmotiv Again: Any Ideas? posted Thu Sep 29 2005 02:54:35 by Philthy
Badmotiv Again - Advice Please! posted Fri Aug 26 2005 12:13:05 by Philthy
Asking For A Badmotiv On This One? posted Mon Aug 15 2005 15:45:06 by Fiveholer
Any Risk Of Badmotiv Or Other Bad...'s? posted Fri Aug 12 2005 01:30:31 by Edoca
Badmotiv posted Wed Aug 10 2005 18:08:20 by Fly747
Badquality, Badmotiv - Wrong Way Round! posted Thu Aug 4 2005 13:39:03 by Malandan
BadMotiv - Can It Be Fixed? posted Wed Aug 3 2005 05:49:48 by SEAchaz
Suggestions Re:badmotiv On This Photo posted Mon Jul 25 2005 23:13:27 by Sonic99