Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Night Long Exposure - NOA_motiv?  
User currently offlineQantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 25
Posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3078 times:

G'day,

Just wondering if anyone - preferably a screener - could please shed some light on this NOA_motiv rejection. To me this is night long exposure stuff at its best, so I'm not sure where I went wrong.



Thanks in advance for any assistance.
Cheers,
Gabriel

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently onlineWakeTurbulence From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1297 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3065 times:

Great question. So far Anet is pretty unclear about the rules of these types of shots. Some get in, and some don't. Why some are motive rejections is a great question. This shot below is a great night shot, and from the same location (I am assuming).

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Troy Cameron


What makes these shots different? The only big difference to me is the 747 in the shot above, but not having it does not change my opinion on your overall motive. Good luck with it, I like these shots a lot, maybe you should try to appeal, look what happened to Tim Samples great night shot.
-Matt



Jetwash Images - Feel the Heat!!!
User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3019 times:

I've asked the same question many times.

I've uploaded countless night shots, trying to get one in. Each rejection very unclear as to what the problem was.

I did get the following one accepted however....


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Martin Eadie



So far all I can guess is that maybe, and this is just a maybe, that nightshots require "some" light. Like the one in the DB (mentioned a post above) has the light of the moon, mine was taken with the last light of dusk, etc. Most of the night shots are similar in this way. I don't how how right or wrong I am, but thats just what I've noticed over time.


User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2465 posts, RR: 44
Reply 3, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3001 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Nice shot Gabriel must try that at the thresh to runway 07 one day.
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2962 times:

Quoting QantasA332 (Thread starter):
this is night long exposure stuff at its best,

Bold statement. To me, that light on the building in the lower left corner gives it the questionable motive.


User currently offlineQantasA332 From Australia, joined Dec 2003, 1500 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2951 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 4):
Quoting QantasA332 (Thread starter):
this is night long exposure stuff at its best,

Bold statement.

Note the preceding "To me". No-one has to agree, however I feel that my shot's motive is exactly what makes long exposure shots what they are.

You may be right about the light, but I'd like a definitive answer from a screener if possible.

Cheers,
Gabriel


User currently onlineWakeTurbulence From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1297 posts, RR: 16
Reply 6, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2942 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 4):
To me, that light on the building in the lower left corner gives it the questionable motive.

Jeff I thought the same until I saw the accepted photo compared to the rejected one. There are a lot of similarities between the 2. Maybe times have changed since Jan of 05, but no one has really come out and given rules for these types of shots.
-Matt



Jetwash Images - Feel the Heat!!!
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2914 times:

Quoting WakeTurbulence (Reply 6):
There are a lot of similarities between the 2.

The accepted photo actually has an airplane visible in it.

Quoting WakeTurbulence (Reply 6):
no one has really come out and given rules for these types of shots.

There are no hard and fast rules. These are very subjective calls by the screeners using their judgement. Like it or not.


User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2910 times:

Am I the only one that notices the moon in the accepted shot? To me it looks like it's put in just the right place so that it gives a nice glow to the photo but doesn't steal too much focus away from the aircraft.

User currently onlineWakeTurbulence From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 1297 posts, RR: 16
Reply 9, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2907 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 7):
Like it or not.

I don't like it!  Big grin That's one of my points about long exposures and motive. If we can dig up some info on what the screeners think, it would probably help some photogs who are trying to get this 'different' type of shot. I really don't feel like plugging long exposure shots from 2005 with aircraft, without aircraft, with the sky lit well or not, with runway lights or without etc, suffice it to say they are in the DB. Writing this off as motive without any explanation as to why makes me even more curious though.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 7):
These are very subjective calls by the screeners using their judgement.

I will agree fully with that, but I have always wondered 'why'? And maybe it isn't even my place to know, but I still like to ask anyway.

Also, "Rules" isn't the right word from my post above, as photography really has no rules, plus rules are just going to be bent and broken. Just my thoughts.
-Matt



Jetwash Images - Feel the Heat!!!
User currently offlineQANTAS077 From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 5870 posts, RR: 39
Reply 10, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2896 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 7):
The accepted photo actually has an airplane visible in it.

that plane is not the focus of the accepted shot, the long exposure of the 767 is so i'm not sure what your getting at, if your suggesting that it got accepted because of the 747 and not the actual long exposure in view then i'd say it should have got bad motive, the 747 is clearly to far, obstructed and cluttered.



a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 11, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2812 times:

Quoting QANTAS077 (Reply 10):
that plane is not the focus of the accepted shot

Of course it's not, but combined with the moon as Eric mentioned, there is no comparison between the accepted and the rejected image.

Knowing what you know now, why not just reshoot it?


User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2465 posts, RR: 44
Reply 12, posted (9 years 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2785 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JeffM (Reply 11):
Knowing what you know now, why not just reshoot it?

Use of that runway is few and far between so might have to wait a while to do so but great advice .
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineQANTAS077 From Australia, joined Jan 2004, 5870 posts, RR: 39
Reply 13, posted (9 years 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 2704 times:

Quoting JeffM (Reply 11):
Of course it's not, but combined with the moon as Eric mentioned, there is no comparison between the accepted and the rejected image.

personally and no offence to the photographers, but i don't like these kind of shots, bit like the contrail shots for me, don't like them and never will so i tend not to look at them. just my personal preference...



a true friend is someone who sees the pain in your eyes, while everyone else believes the smile on your face.
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...
Long Exposure Night Time Departure Shots posted Sun Mar 5 2006 00:15:42 by UnattendedBag
Long Exposure Any Chance? posted Sun Jun 25 2006 09:53:26 by JumboJim747
Standards For Long Exposure Shots posted Wed Jan 25 2006 17:45:36 by D L X
Can I Fix This Long Exposure? posted Sat Nov 12 2005 16:54:45 by Atomother
My First Long Exposure! posted Tue Jun 10 2003 19:21:28 by Work4bmi
Apeture Setting For Long Exposure posted Thu Apr 10 2003 01:11:23 by VonRichtofen
Long Exposure On C700? posted Mon Dec 16 2002 23:32:59 by JBLUA320
How Can You Hand Hold A Long Exposure? posted Wed Oct 30 2002 11:30:15 by Alaskaairlines
How To Take Long Exposure Shots? posted Fri Oct 25 2002 02:51:14 by Continental
Best Exposure Settings - Night Photography posted Mon Oct 18 2004 18:54:36 by CYEGsTankers