Walter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1309 posts, RR: 26
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4068 times:
Thanks for the feedback! But I am still puzzled, since the possible answers are a bit contradicting. I know and I accept that "motiv" will always remain subjective and I would like to bend my acceptance ratio again in the correct direction... ...but it is difficult if one tries to do something different!
Quoting Eadster (Reply 1): but eyes were not drawn to him as there were other things happening in the pic for people to focus on.
I thought that the special visor protection the pilot had on his helmet (31 Tiger Squadron) was worth showing, but being afraid for a rejection on "motiv" for showing the pilot alone, I decided to crop somewhat wider (to show also some detail of the nose (and sensors) of the aircraft.
Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 2): You have cut off all sorts of bits, no landing gear, half a drop tank, and basically just a "badcrop."
I accept your opinion for not liking the crop, I did it for the reasons also explained above and I have chosen for cropping the nose landing gear out (being better than showing only partially showing it, as I read in other threads) and hence only showing the upper half of the drop tank.
Since I got a mail for an acceptance and an extra message stating that this shot was being screened and that it had passed first screening, I had the idea that it had a chance...and that at least one other person liked this angle and crop.
I will keep it, however, for my personal collection.
Guido From Belgium, joined Sep 2001, 47 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4025 times:
I like your shot and i would love to see more of these.
Unfortunately, every site has the right to decide on the rules and we have to live with that.
Maybe one day those shots will have a chance if a "creative" or "closer" category will be made.
Avsfan From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 250 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3970 times:
Personally I love the shot. I agree with you and that there should be more upclose shots of pilots...especially in fighters. To me it does not matter if parts of certain places of the aircraft were cropped out.
In my opinion, all of the screeners dont look at the photos the same way. I have had photos rejected for one reason, and another screener will accept the photo, but reject it for another aspect that the first screener did not comment on.
"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth...Put out my hand and touched the face of God"
TimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 63
Reply 12, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3897 times:
I knew my shot was going to create a fuss. For me the key difference is though that my shot doesn't have the pilots as primary focus. irregardless of other problems people may have with the shot I think it sets it apart from the cockpit closeups.
I don't see the difference though between Walters and Staffan's shot...
With a little experience here, you know pretty well which of your uploads are safe motive-wise, and which ones risk a motive rejection. By all means do upload those if they're interesting, but accept the risk and consider yourself lucky if they're accepted.
Of course, it's disappointing when your greatest photos get shot down, but what we better try to refrain from as much as possible is making comparisons with other, accepted pictures. Yes, there's bound to be some inconsistency, because photos are screened by a team of humans, because not everything can be covered in rules, and because two photos are hardly ever equal, as there are so many factors deciding their acceptability.
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)