Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Badmotive- Why This And Not Others?  
User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2679 times:

What makes this one bad motive when compared to some of the others in the Database. It is ridiculous how standards are applied differently sometimes. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/n739maengineedit.jpg

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3766 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2665 times:

What other photo are you referring to?

Being a bit polite wouldn't hurt either.

[Edited 2005-08-09 21:55:00]


Jet Visuals
User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2638 times:

Quoting INNflight (Reply 1):
What other photo are you referring to?

Being a bit polite wouldn't hurt either.

I don't want to post other ones as all that does is bring out fanboys like you who dont address the topic but rather just say how it is frowned upon to post other peoples work.


User currently offlineUA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2629 times:

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 2):
I don't want to post other ones as all that does is bring out fanboys like you who dont address the topic but rather just say how it is frowned upon to post other peoples work.

While rejections are frustrating, I wouldn't get your balls in a knot and take it out on a fellow member whom provided adequate advice. The shot is not level. You are in an odd position. It's a doable shot but needs to be releveled and I suggest cropping closer.

While I do feel the whole screening system is very controversy and at many times I do not agree with screeners, I, at no time, think that taking your issues out on a fellow member, regardless of what they say/said, is appropriate conduct.

Here's a quick rework that I did for you, I have not shot anything like this before so the angle is new as is the edit.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/ua777222/n739maengineedit.jpg

Take care and calm down,

Matt



"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2621 times:

Quoting UA777222 (Reply 3):
While rejections are frustrating, I wouldn't get your balls in a knot and take it out on a fellow member whom provided adequate advice. The shot is not level. You are in an odd position. It's a doable shot but needs to be releveled and I suggest cropping closer.

While I do feel the whole screening system is very controversy and at many times I do not agree with screeners, I, at no time, think that taking your issues out on a fellow member, regardless of what they say/said, is appropriate conduct.

What advice did florian provide exactly? And how is it not level.


User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3766 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2621 times:

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 2):
I don't want to post other ones as all that does is bring out fanboys like you who dont address the topic but rather just say how it is frowned upon to post other peoples work.

With a thread title like yours you better should post that photo!!!

I'll tell you why yours got rejected if you post the other photo, so go and get it in here!
If I don't find a real reason why yours didn't make it... ok well ... then the screeners really are that baaaad.  Yeah sure



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineEdoca From Belgium, joined Mar 2005, 688 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2619 times:

APFPilot1985 I don't see why you seem so angry, I think objectively you could think of many reasons, such as, for example, the fact that the crop of this picture is cutting a light on the wing and a landing gear wheel in half. There is some stuff on the background as well.

Now whether this deserves badmotive can be debated about (but I'm not a screener, so my opinion is not really irrelevant), but all I can say is that there MAY be good reasons, so it might be better to look for those rather than bluntly say how ridiculous standards are being applied.

Just my opinion... relax...


User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3766 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2612 times:

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 4):
What advice did florian provide exactly? And how is it not level.

The advice to better get the photo you are talking about online! You say there are double standards, so show them to us!

[Edited 2005-08-09 22:20:34]


Jet Visuals
User currently offlineUA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2601 times:

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 4):
What advice did florian provide exactly? And how is it not level.

He originally stated that the shot was not level. For all I know it is level based on objects not in the picture but judging by the lines of the aircraft its not level and though the poles might be level I would think that's grounds for a badcameraangel rejection, no? That's what the angle is doing to you, IMO. With a crop like the one that I provided I feel it makes the viewer/screener focus on the engine and the engine alone. When I first looked at the picture I was wondering why the a/c was, or appeared, to be crooked. It was only after I cropped, and posted that I realized the cool reflection on the engine, which I feel is better represented with a tighter crop.

Take it however you want just my  twocents 

Matt



"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2596 times:

Im not talking about double standards as in one person gets accepted because of name and another not (although that does exsist) but rather the objectivity that badmotiv requires and how it isnt applied consistantly.

User currently offlineFergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 52
Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2589 times:

Rejections are hard but they are also things we can learn from. Trust me I nearly blew a gasket last night when I got a bad info rejection as I was so carefull but it turns out I was wrong and so were the two photos in the DB that I used for reference. Although I wasn't rude I still apologized to the screeners.

I have to agree with Matt's version it's much better and I think I know the photo you are refering to in the DB but if you look at it again you will see that it is croped very tight similar to Matt's version

Take care

Fergul Big grin  sun 



Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2577 times:

you want examples florian here:

Now mind you I am posting these because these are my favorite kind of shots on airliners. I love closeups on technical parts of a/c that we normally wouldnt get to see


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Guy Daems - Brussels Aviation Photography



User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3766 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2574 times:

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 9):
but rather the objectivity that badmotiv requires and how it isnt applied consistantly.

Badmotive can only be decided on case to case basis. The are rough guidelines, like a blocked gear, or clutter blocking other parts of the aircraft, but otherwise it's not a rejection like badjagged, which you can always apply in the same case.

Said in a thread before:

( Free quote )
Badmotive is likely to be applied when the screener(s) can't see the real motive of a photo or what the photographer wanted to point out.

So, we all know it is an engine close-up, probably it simply wasn't too close, like Matt suggested.



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3766 posts, RR: 59
Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2565 times:

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 11):
you want examples florian here:

Now mind you I am posting these because these are my favorite kind of shots on airliners. I love closeups on technical parts of a/c that we normally wouldnt get to see

The photo you linked has more engine, less fuselage. This would be the main difference that makes the rejection reason, in my eyes.

The photo you linked is more wide angle, so it looks more impressive.

The photo you linked is taken from a lower point of view, again the impressive part.

cheers,
Florian



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineUA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2561 times:

I have to agree with to you a degree.

While they are both very similar photos I think that photographer gets away with it by covering up the aircraft so the angle is not confusing. I keep stating that the angle kills the shots as it's what was bugging me, for all I know someone might feel the complete opposite. If the rework that I provided isn't what you are looking for then try to acheve the same thing while still using your photo;

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v626/ua777222/n739maengineedit-1.jpg

And I agree that badmotiv is a hard one just got a badmotiv rejection myself;

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/N175UA_INFLIGHT_INTERNATION.jpg

Take care,

Matt



"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
User currently offlineChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 16
Reply 15, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2545 times:

That's some cracking good light you got on that FR engine. If the cropping was the problem then maybe a badpersonal would've been good, but atm it seems the screeners are working at warp-speed so. I'll bet that shot goes in recropped, and will do very well.


regarding the Cook shot above, it's very overexposed



what seems to be the officer, problem?
User currently offlineFergulmcc From Ireland, joined Oct 2004, 1916 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 2520 times:

Reid  white 

Quoting APFPilot1985 (Reply 11):
I love closeups on technical parts of a/c that we normally wouldnt get to see

You have just answered your own question. Look at the one you have posted and your own. Your shot is very good, well exposed and the blades are tack sharp. In fact the whole image is flippin sharp, by the way what equipment did you use, more so what lens.

Crop tighter and reload.

Take care

Fergul Big grin  sun 



Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
User currently offlineAPFPilot1985 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 2490 times:

Quoting Fergulmcc (Reply 16):
You have just answered your own question. Look at the one you have posted and your own. Your shot is very good, well exposed and the blades are tack sharp. In fact the whole image is flippin sharp, by the way what equipment did you use, more so what lens.

Crop tighter and reload.

Take care

Nothing more than a 20d and the 18-55 that was in the kit.


User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (9 years 1 month 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 2464 times:

Half of the starboard main gear, half of the cabin windows, and more then half of a maintenance stand = badmotive. Easy when you break it down.  Wink Maybe you just missed all of that before uploading?

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...
Why Theirs And Not Mine? :-) posted Sat Apr 8 2006 18:49:47 by Glapira
What's This? And Why Does A.net Think It's A 747? posted Tue Feb 7 2006 08:00:21 by D L X
Should I Upload This, Or Not? posted Fri Oct 6 2006 15:29:02 by Raptors
Can Someone Explain Why This Was A Quality Reject? posted Sun Oct 1 2006 18:20:48 by AIRBUSRIDER
Can Someone Tell Me Why This Is Bad Quality? posted Mon Apr 24 2006 21:59:34 by AIRBUSRIDER
I Saw This And I Nearly Fell Off My Chair! posted Fri Jul 22 2005 14:44:48 by Chris78cpr
Will I Get Badmotive For This One? posted Tue Jun 28 2005 01:04:33 by AirKas1
Any Idea Why This Photo Got Badcategorie? posted Mon Apr 18 2005 21:13:28 by APFPilot1985
Now How Did This Photo Not Get "bad People"? posted Thu Jul 1 2004 01:40:33 by Pacallen
Do I Charge For This And How Much? posted Sat Mar 20 2004 03:36:22 by CFIcraigAPA