Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A Question About Doubles And Motive  
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5086 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I had a very frustrating couple of hours out at MAN this morning, topped off by a cold north east wind  cold . It had looked like the clouds would lift and break, but they steadfastly refused to so do, leaving all the photos flat.

One of my problems these days it that when I am able to get a trip out I often end up seeing aircraft I have previously uploaded, in similar positions around the airport. Even though taken at different times, this leaves me vulnerable to getting a double rejection - in effect, they look too similar. I quote from the double rejection definition:

Quote:
In certain cases you can also get this rejection if there are photos in the database that are nearly identical to the one(s) rejected here, but taken on another date by you.


This got me thinking how motive and attempts to be 'creative' might affect this, and what exactly counted as the 'motive'. My question is.... would this photo below taken today be as vulnerable to the double rejection, even though here the motive is specifically a panning shot? Does the panning motive somehow override the other elements of the images that are 'too' similar'?

Big version: Width: 600 Height: 400 File size: 199kb
Panning Motive

Here is the photo already in my portfolio that I think would cause me the problem:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Markman


I think I have my answer to this question - they look too similar and that is the end of it, irrespective of one being a panning shot and the other a 'normal' one - but am interested to hear what you think.

All the best.

Paul

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2044 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5077 times:

Personally, I think this would be too narrow a definition of the "double" rule. While it is the same a/c from virtually the same angle, the light, background and technique are distinctly different.


I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineJavibi From Spain, joined Oct 2004, 1371 posts, RR: 42
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5075 times:

Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
Does the panning motive somehow override the other elements

In my experience a lot of the screeners do not give a rat's ass if it is a panning shot or not nor have any consideration about the difficulties involved; others do think the opposite, so I do wish you luck with the screeners that get to screen that picture.

Nice one, BTW.

j



"Be prepared to engage in constructive debate". Are YOU prepared?
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5070 times:

Personally, I don't think "panning" is the motive, but the means to the end. If you've already shot an A/C from the same angle, at the same airport, unless it is significantly different then the previous, what is your reason for uploading it?

User currently offlineAcontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 30
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5067 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi Paul,

Although with 40 pics in the DB I am still far away from your problems, from what I have seen in the forum it looks like it really just comes down to the particular screener(s) that eventually do screen your picture. Personally, I think the very different nature of both pictures would warrant their inclusion, but hey, I am still far from a screener  Wink



Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3149 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5062 times:

Quoting Psych (Thread starter):
One of my problems these days it that when I am able to get a trip out I often end up seeing aircraft I have previously uploaded, in similar positions around the airport.

So you only shoot for Anet and not for the joy of your/our hobby anymore  eek 

Anyway, I would say this cool picture is a double, but if I would know it like a screener I would have a few more pics here Big grin

Georg


User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 5039 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Jorge1812 (Reply 5):
So you only shoot for Anet and not for the joy of your/our hobby anymore

You interpret my words too literally Georg  wink .

Of course you are right - taking photos simply with the aim of uploading should not be one's motivation. When I referred to my 'problem', I meant it in terms of having a nice photo that I think others would be interested to see, but finding that it is too similar to a previously uploaded shot.

The experience has taught me to think carefully about what to upload. Many is the time I have taken a photo in lovely light only to find that I had a lesser quality shot already on the database from some time ago that now prevents me uploading it. This is a key 'symptom' of being a relatively new uploader - trying to get everything and anything accepted  biggrin . For me, the lighting of a shot has become one of the key factors to consider - no point sabotaging future uploads simply to get a shot accepted.

Paul


User currently offlineLOCsta From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 306 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 5013 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

can't you remove/delete an old lesser quality shot from the DB, and replace it with a new one if the "double" is a concern? If not that seems pretty silly, as one would hope that even if the planes at your local AF don't change your photo skills will certainly improve. (or you get a better camera  Wink)


Missed 4 chasing 1
User currently offlineTimdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 8, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 5000 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

No double if different day

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3149 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4991 times:

Quoting Timdegroot (Reply 8):
No double if different day

Does it apply for almost the same shot too (if not common)? Not that I want to upload a 100 pics of a LH 737 infront of a blue sky, just want to learn more about avoiding rejections.

Georg


User currently offlineDC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1406 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 4932 times:

Quoting Timdegroot (Reply 8):
No double if different day

Tim

So you're categorically saying it wont be rejected as a 'double' if taken on a different day?

Ans what if you have a similar shot taken on a different day that is from a similar angle to lots of other shots of that aircraft? Can that be a 'common' rejection?

Tim.



Obviously missing something....
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 4927 times:

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 10):
So you're categorically saying it wont be rejected as a 'double' if taken on a different day?

Sounds like it to me, though the "Common" may apply.


User currently offlineDC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1406 posts, RR: 14
Reply 12, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4900 times:

For some reason I was under the impression that two similar shots taken by the same photographer, but n different days, could be classed as 'double'.

Tim.



Obviously missing something....
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 13, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4884 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 12):
For some reason I was under the impression that two similar shots taken by the same photographer, but on different days, could be classed as 'double'.

You, me and many others Tim. In fact, possibly due to my own 'emotional involvement' with this particular rejection criterion, I would have changed your words above from 'could' to 'would'.

My interpretation of the section of the rule that I quoted at the outset in this thread, together with subsequent conversations here on the Forum, was that a shot on a different day, but looking very similar to a previously uploaded photo of that aircraft, would very likely be rejected for double.

Thus, when I read Tim's response in Reply 8, I initially thought that this was a genuine error. Certainly Tim's comment seems at odds with the quote from the 'double' rejection criterion copied in the thread leader.

But then my mind went back to a similar discussion in this thread. I am particularly referring to the posts from Reply No. 12 onwards. Here Royal also implies that the above interpretation - double rejection if it looks similar - may not be so cut and dried.

So it seems the degree of similarity is the key factor that the screeners are assessing when trying to decide whether a photo is a double or not. Thus, in my example of the BMI 330 above, the question is to what extent these photos are 'too' similar. Ultimately this is a subjective assessment - as I have seen from responses already here.

I think there are two options here: to say they are too similar, because they are photos of the same aircraft, of the same side, in the same angle of climb, departing from the same runway, taken from the same spot. Looks like a potential recipe for 'double' there.... Unless you prioritise the panning motive as key, in which case you could argue that they should not be considered doubles.

Maybe it is too much to hope that this degree of subjectivity can be more concretely defined. But this does raise a very interesting debating point for me. Many thanks for your contributions so far.

All the best.

Paul


User currently offlineTimdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 14, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4877 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DC10Tim (Reply 10):
Ans what if you have a similar shot taken on a different day that is from a similar angle to lots of other shots of that aircraft? Can that be a 'common' rejection?

Yes that is what common is for.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineDC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1406 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4861 times:

Quoting Timdegroot (Reply 14):
Yes that is what common is for.

What about lots of similar shots (I could post dozens of examples) from people stood next to each other all shooting the same plane? At what point would a 'common' rejection come into play here?

I also don't really understand Royal's comments in the linked thread regarding the issue of double rejections always being "in play". What does this mean?

Regards,

Tim.



Obviously missing something....
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 16, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4828 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hello Tim.

I interpreted Royal's use of the phrase 'in play' as meaning that this particular issue relating to doubles is always under discussion within the screening team - i.e. there is no hard and fast 'definition'. But I could have got that wrong.

Take it easy.

Paul


User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9623 posts, RR: 68
Reply 17, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4798 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

No, you have it right.

User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 18, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4758 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting JeffM (Reply 3):
If you've already shot an A/C from the same angle, at the same airport, unless it is significantly different then the previous, what is your reason for uploading it?

Sorry Jeff - didn't pay enough attention to this comment initially.....this is really my point - how do you assess whether a shot is 'significantly different'.

But, as ever, my only reason for uploading would be because I think - rightly or wrongly - that others would be interested to see the photo.

As of now this example is not being uploaded.

Cheers.

Paul


User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 4735 times:

Quoting Psych (Reply 18):
Sorry Jeff - didn't pay enough attention to this comment initially.....this is really my point - how do you assess whether a shot is 'significantly different'.

No biggie.
Special occaision, new paint, accident, etc. Would be about it.


User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3149 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4632 times:

I think my post was deleted because I linked to a pic on the other site. So try it again. Please tell me if I break any other rule with this post.

Would this be considered double?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Georg Noack



with this one




Both taken the same day, but showing, in my eyes, different motives.

Thanks for your help.

Georg

EDIT: The other thread was indeed deleted for linking to the other site, but the mail arrived late on my account. Just to say to the moderators that it's OK and I agree with your rules. Thanks for clarifying with your mail.

[Edited 2006-10-31 15:32:59]

User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 21, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4625 times:

Quoting Jorge1812 (Reply 20):
Would this be considered double?

Most likely yes.



-
User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3149 posts, RR: 8
Reply 22, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4612 times:

Thanks Peter.

Georg


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...
Question About NOA_common And Screening Procedure posted Mon Oct 17 2005 22:37:15 by Mwk
Stupid Question About Digi Camera And Lenses. posted Thu Mar 9 2006 14:15:04 by Thom@s
First Night Shot And Motive Question posted Wed Feb 1 2006 19:32:59 by Phxplanes
Question About Fit Screen And Large? posted Wed Jan 4 2006 21:44:37 by Phxplanes
Question About Canon D300 And Nikon D70 posted Sat Apr 16 2005 22:59:02 by TACAA320
Question About Motive posted Sat Mar 12 2005 02:31:02 by APFPilot1985
Question About Bangkok Suvarnabhumi International posted Sun Nov 19 2006 15:34:39 by Airimages
A Question About PS Jpeg Options posted Tue Nov 7 2006 10:02:25 by Stil
Question About Phuket posted Sun Oct 15 2006 09:56:03 by Airimages
Question About Motiv. posted Wed Sep 13 2006 04:51:41 by COIAH756CA