Here are some shots I took while in Utah. The Southwest 737 and Delta 737 have already been rejected, and two have been passed by the first screeners. One more is still waiting.
I just can't seem to figure out what makes a photo get rejected or accepted. Almost every time I guess wrong. I honestly thought all of these, with the possible exception of the 757 would make it on a.net. I like to include a little of the background in the photo, like the mountains and/or the runway if possible. But maybe that makes the plane too small. Maybe the focus isn't sharp enough? But then again I see dozens of other recently added photos that have worse focus than mine (on my monitor, anyway!) I still get confused about whether a plane must be fully included in the shot, or if a piece of the wing or tail can be cut, so I always try to include the whole plane. But then it gets rejected because that makes the plane too small. I know that it depends on the picture, but I do feel every once in a while that a double standard exists, even with recently uploaded pictures.
I am not trying to start any arguments here complain so much as to see what I can do to improve my photos, and shoot photos that will have higher acceptance rates on a.net.
Craigy From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 1118 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (13 years 8 months 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1073 times:
You have some nice photos there. I really like the Delta 727. The buildings behind really show up the jet blast and give a sense of what is happening, rather than just another close up of a plane. Even with the aircraft taking only 50% of the width of the photo, you can still clearly read the reg. no.
I see the skies are dull and murky, probably due to the hot hazy weather conditions over there. Do you use a UV filter? Living un the UK, I am lucky to have deep blue skies scattered with brilliant white clouds (when it's not raining).
I too like to see a bit of space around an aircraft, so I sometimes frame it with the a/c taking about 3/4 width. I then crop it a bit tighter for A.net.
I see you already have three photos in the database - your NW757 is great.
Da fwog From United Kingdom, joined Aug 1999, 867 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (13 years 8 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1062 times:
What rejection reasons did you get?
That Delta 727 is a nice shot, but there's too much space around it. I get your point about getting the whole aircraft in (although it's not always necessary to include the whole wings if this makes the shot awkward or lopsided), but this shot would really benefit from a closer crop. Lose about half the space to both the left and right of the aircraft, most of the green below the runway at the bottom, and about half the sky at the top. You've still got your background, but the aircraft is now much more a part of the frame, and hopefully has more detail. Compare it with this 727 shot of my own - there's still plenty of space around the aircraft, and all the background features I wanted to include are still there, but this slightly closer crop makes a LOT of difference.
Your 737 climbout shot is a little blurry and looks like you have over-sharpened slightly to compensate. It also desperately needs to have the aircraft CENTRED. Otherwise this sort of shot just looks lopsided, I'm afraid.
Southwest landing shot - lose most of the empty space to the left of the aircraft and most of the sky. You can get the aircraft centred without losing the runway detail and get a much better shot.
United Shuttle shot looks much better for being centred. Still would benefit from a closer crop though. The trouble is, if you leave too much space around the outside, with an image of that size, you lose the fine detail in the aircraft itself. And of course, that's the main point of the pic in the first place.
These pics aren't of bad quality at all. But my comments assume that you have the detail in the originals that you can enhance by closer cropping. The United Shuttle taxy shot seems a little on the borderline to me - just not quite sharp enough, and the colours not quite right.