It was shot about half an hour after sunset at 1/15 sec. and rejected because of being dark; the fact is that is fairly difficult to shoot action at NIGHT and not to get a somehow dark shot, like for example this beauty, one of my A.net favorites:
So I feel that with the actual rules night action shots are almost impossible to get accepted, though it is clear that in a lot of other cases the rules are not that strict regarding this matter. Since I wish to see more action night shots in A.net (even better if they are mine ), I request the screeners to clarify and possibly reconsider the rules regarding this kind of shots.
MarkJbeckwith From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 156 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (10 years 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2069 times:
I think pictures taken in the last or first hour of light are the hardest to get accepted, particularly if they are not backlit, because they are so hard to get right. The examples you site are truely wonderful pictures taken by very competant photographers. I hope one day to be able to shoot pics like that.
Your picture is unfortunately very grainy, a function of the conditions under which it was taken. Here's a recent one on mine that was rightly rejected for NOA_Dark
though I consider it a Motiv rejection really as the pic is exactly what I was trying for!
Ultimately, this is a Database with very high standards of technical excellence and your (and plenty of mine) picture doesn't reach the level required. It doesn't make it a bad photo, far from it as your's is a very pleasing shot, but it does mean that it doesn't make it to this database.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3074 posts, RR: 56
Reply 6, posted (10 years 2 days ago) and read 2048 times:
Hi Javier - I hope you are keeping well.
For me this rejection shows that you are still - in my eyes - the master when it comes to panning shots. However, I can understand the rejection.
I think the problem is that, overall, the photo is very dark - not just the aircraft itself - your eyes almost have to search for the subject. In Ryan's photo there is a lot more light and the motive is evidently a nighttime shot. I think if you had brighter lights in shot, or larger lights from the aircraft, the result may be different. For what it's worth, the sunset shots are completely different for me in terms of motive.
But I completely understand the basis of your question. I think this is a good example where two different rules combine - i.e. dark + motive. For a silhouette shot I would argue the motive is for there to be no detail at all visible on the plane, so I can see the rationale for such a shot not getting a 'dark' rejection. However, these are - in my mind - clearly 'artistic' photos, of which I would love to see a lot more on the site, and that challenges the 'database' notion of the site's main purpose. But, as a supporter of A.net broadening the type of shots they accept, I really like to see such motives.
I also support you in testing the boundaries of what will be accepted - please continue and ignore your acceptance ratio - yours remain excellent photos.
TimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (10 years 2 days ago) and read 2022 times:
A nice shot but I agree with the rejection. I admire your skills in getting this shot though
Quoting Javibi (Thread starter): It is dark because it HAS to be dark, it is night after all, don't you think?
This is not a valid argument IMO. Nightshots have to offer something more than just darkness, after all there has to be something to see. Ryan's shot is a fine example. It's shot at night, but several items are highlighted (tail, landinglights etc).
The other shots you mention are of a different kind. In a profile shot a dark plane only adds to the situation. had your dc8 been situated against the orange sky in the background it would have been different.
DLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (10 years 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1870 times:
Quoting MarkJBeckwith (Reply 5):
No, did you not read the sentence? I said they were hard, not impossible.
I read the sentence. I've found in my experience that getting backlit shots to work perfectly takes alot more work than frontlighting. The examples above were frontlit, would you care to see some backlit?