Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A Couple Rejections...  
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1852 times:

Dark
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20060831_F18F_Ship20OCT05-1.jpg


Double:

http://www.jetwashimages.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10002/F86n186fsNCF02JUL06-2.jpg


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas - Jetwash Images



It was taken the same day, at the same show, yes. Different pass, different perspective, different lens. I thought we were allowed several photos taken at an airshow even if it is of the same aircraft.  Confused

13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFiveholer From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1013 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1847 times:

The first one, as I do like sillohoutte shots, I would have to pass on this one as the whole aircarft isn't being shown. The second, its a shame. Those are some awesome shots you and Steve got up there at TVC.

Danny



Bring back Bethune!
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1828 times:

Agree with the first one Chad, just something about it that puts it somewhere between well lit, and poorly lit.

The second one rocks, as does the one accepted. I guess people would rather see countless A380 formation shots..... zzzzzzzzzzzzzz...zzzzzzzzzzzz..zzzzzzzzz Oh, sorry, dozed off thinking about them.  Wink


User currently offlinePsyops From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1822 times:

On the first one, without the ship in the background blocking the true outline - killer shot. As it is, it doesn't quite work for me. I do like the canopy color and silhouette.

The second one - I'm not all that clear on the rules for doubles, but I agree with Jeff - multiple shots of A380 flypast  yawn  don't compare to these two shots.

Pete


User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1773 times:

Thanks all for the replies. I have appealed the F-86 photo.

Chad


User currently offlineWalter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1300 posts, RR: 28
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1750 times:

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 4):
I have appealed the F-86 photo.

... and I wish you good luck with it! I can't stop looking at it... the detail on the aircraft is amazing (the 500mm perform really well).

Best regards,

Walter



canon 340d ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l is usm - ...
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5716 posts, RR: 44
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1733 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I could quote Jeff's message but that would be redundant.. suffice to say that I agree with all his points!

An OT note, as an AirForce brat.. an Aussie Air Force brat to boot, the American F-86 Sabre never look quite right to me. The Australian Sabre (technically a CA-27/28 not an F-86) had a different engine (Rolls Royce Avon) with higher gas flow requirements so the intake was considerably larger.
The 6 50cal guns were also replaced with 2 30mm cannon giving the old war horse quite some punch.

Outstanding photographs of an great looking plane none the less.

Cheers



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 20 hours ago) and read 1682 times:

Quoting Walter2222 (Reply 5):
and I wish you good luck with it! I can't stop looking at it... the detail on the aircraft is amazing (the 500mm perform really well).

Hi Walter,

The one rejected for double wasnt taken with the 500mm. It was taken with the **trusty 100-400mm. The one accepted was taken with the 500mm.

**Seizing up so it will be sent to Mack early next week.  Sad


User currently offlineGarry From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 185 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 20 hours ago) and read 1666 times:

Chad - good luck with the second one, its an awesome photo.


www.garryridsdale.com
User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 19 hours ago) and read 1655 times:

Chad, awesome shots as usual...

I think the ship in the background of the first one hides the aircraft too much if you get what I mean...

The second one, have to agree, is amazing!! Hope it gets though.


User currently offlineLanas From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 978 posts, RR: 13
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 15 hours ago) and read 1633 times:

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Thread starter):
Different pass, different perspective, different lens. I thought we were allowed several photos taken at an airshow even if it is of the same aircraft.

The rules of rejection for 'Double' apply for the same aircraft on the same sequence, shot by the same photographer. They apply always, even on great airshows. I remember a screener explaining this when talking about priority screening for this year´s Farnborough Airshow.

Quoting Fiveholer (Reply 1):
the whole aircarft isn't being shown

The whole aircraft is indeed being shown, but the silhouette gets confused with the ship´s silhouette in the background. Regarding the lighting, I believe the shot would have been perfect if taken later, with the orange colours of the sunset. I think that´s where this silhouette shots result better.

Great shots, Chad!

Cheers!
Lanas.-



"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens." J.R.R. Tolkien
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 15 hours ago) and read 1621 times:

Quoting Lanas (Reply 10):
The rules of rejection for 'Double' apply for the same aircraft on the same sequence, shot by the same photographer.


Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Thread starter):
Different pass, different perspective, different lens.


[Edited 2006-09-01 18:18:13]

User currently offlineLanas From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 978 posts, RR: 13
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 10 hours ago) and read 1589 times:

 Confused  Confused  Confused
I don´t get your previous message, sorry.
Even though it´s a different framing, the double rejection still applies. It´s the same aircraft the same day by the same photographer.

Cheers!
Lanas.-



"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens." J.R.R. Tolkien
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 9 hours ago) and read 1574 times:

Quoting Lanas (Reply 12):
Even though it´s a different framing, the double rejection still applies. It´s the same aircraft the same day by the same photographer.




Take a look in the database, its not unprecedented.

[Edited 2006-09-01 23:37:32]

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...
Couple Of Rejections...Opinions Please! posted Wed Jun 28 2006 21:19:05 by BmiBaby737
A Little Curious About A Couple Of Rejections... posted Mon Nov 7 2005 12:23:03 by Chris78cpr
A Couple Of Rejections posted Wed Nov 17 2004 06:31:59 by Paulinbna
Share A Couple Of Rejections posted Thu Jun 19 2003 20:23:11 by EGBB
Help With These Two Rejections posted Thu Nov 16 2006 21:11:41 by JoeIro
4 (harsh?) Rejections - Screener Comment Please posted Sun Nov 12 2006 08:23:56 by D L X
Colour Rejections posted Tue Nov 7 2006 00:07:15 by AirKas1
Two Rejections, Why? posted Thu Oct 19 2006 08:11:39 by Pitchul
My Rejections - This Time Qual And Soft posted Mon Oct 9 2006 02:01:17 by Lanas
Feedback For More Rejections posted Sat Oct 7 2006 09:26:53 by Monorail