Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
You Vote, Should I Appeal This Night Shot?  
User currently offlineAtomother From United States of America, joined May 1999, 440 posts, RR: 4
Posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4625 times:

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...ename=20061028_IMG_4222nightF9.jpg

Rejected for motiv. I thought the motiv was pretty good, very good in fact. I don't think I would change anything if I rephotoshopped it. I like the colors and it's not like it's a grainy shot or too dark, or even blurry.

I really thought this would be a lock to make it and be a very popular shot like the one I did last year.

So do you guys want to see this in the database? Should I appeal?

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4619 times:

I am not aware of this site's opinion on those shots or what the motiv issue is but that is one awesome shot!

I would like to see it in the DB.


User currently offlineTimdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4585 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Nice shot but don't appeal it

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4714 posts, RR: 50
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4582 times:

Night Photography Rejection... (by Atomother Oct 25 2006 in Aviation Photography)

that thread explains it all. Such photo's are no longer accepted into the database (unfortunately)



For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2046 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4561 times:

Quoting JRadier (Reply 3):
Such photo's are no longer accepted into the database (unfortunately)

Very regrettable indeed, and I question the sense behind that... I would have thought that high hitting photos are good for a.net because they generate more traffic, and thus more inome from advertising?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tim Samples



98,638 views - and counting.



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4714 posts, RR: 50
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4549 times:

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 4):
I would have thought that high hitting photos are good for a.net because they generate more traffic, and thus more inome from advertising?

and more costs in bandwith  Wink.



For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2046 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4536 times:

Quoting JRadier (Reply 5):
and more costs in bandwith

assuming that this commercial website makes a profit, that should be covered by the revenue?



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11486 posts, RR: 52
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4501 times:

Quoting JRadier (Reply 5):
and more costs in bandwith

Then the site should only accept bad shots...



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineJRadier From Netherlands, joined Sep 2004, 4714 posts, RR: 50
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4499 times:

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 6):
assuming that this commercial website makes a profit, that should be covered by the revenue?

of course, was just putting things into perspective.

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 6):
Then the site should only accept bad shots...

that's why they still accept my shots  Wink



For once you have tasted flight you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and ther
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11486 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4495 times:

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 4):
98,638 views - and counting.

Yeah, it's too bad. I have to hope though that if someone else took a shot that was exemplary as that one, it would get in.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineIngemarE From Sweden, joined Mar 2005, 285 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4473 times:

Quoting Atomother (Thread starter):
Rejected for motiv. I thought the motiv was pretty good, very good in fact.

My attention is drawn far too much to the foreground in order to be an "aviation-shot". But, I must say I really like picture! Top-notch. The kind I'd luuv to print and put on a wall at home.

Should you appeal it? No, I must say. (As much as I hate saying it.)



In thrust I trust.
User currently offlineAtomother From United States of America, joined May 1999, 440 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4449 times:

Ok so after re-reading the other thread I am a bit confused now. Apparently there has not been a "rule change" but now these photos that do not show an airplane, only light streaks, are now a no-go? Do I just need to get closer and have more streaks filling the frame or something?

I am a bit upset by this as I figured it would be a "direct add" type of shot.

I will go ahead and say that I love these long exposure shots and think they should continue to be accepted. Hopefully others will voice that opinion too and "the powers that be" will change their mind. Until then I will just leave it as is and I don't think I will appeal it.


User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 12, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4437 times:

Do not appeal. That's my vote.


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2046 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4432 times:

Quoting Atomother (Reply 11):

I am a bit upset by this as I figured it would be a "direct add" type of shot.

If it's any consolation... in 1280x1024 it would have been a direct add to my wallpaper/screensaver webshots archive.



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineBubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1196 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 4420 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting Timdegroot (Reply 2):
Nice shot but don't appeal it



Quoting Viv (Reply 12):
Do not appeal. That's my vote.

I agree with Tim and Viv. Do not appeal it. The image shows little scene of airport or runway that is the reason why motiv rejection is given.

Of course, it is a nice shot!

_Hongyin_


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...
Should I Appeal This "landmark" Shot At Jeffco? posted Fri Aug 4 2006 06:39:37 by Atomother
Should I Appeal This Snowy Take-off? posted Tue Jan 17 2006 14:26:17 by Pitchul
Should I Appeal This One? posted Mon Sep 5 2005 19:28:33 by Jetmatt777
Should I Appeal This Rejection? posted Mon Jun 6 2005 02:08:42 by DC10Tim
Should I Appeal This One? posted Tue Mar 30 2004 11:45:33 by Lekky-Man
Should I Appeal This posted Fri Nov 7 2003 22:06:50 by Rsmith6621a
Should I Upload This Shot? What Do You Think? posted Mon Oct 11 2004 02:20:01 by Dlx737200
How Should I Upload This Shot? posted Tue Oct 31 2006 19:37:31 by DLX737200
Should I Upload This Shot? posted Mon Oct 2 2006 20:23:46 by Raptors
How Should I Crop This Shot? posted Mon Jul 10 2006 10:53:51 by Airplanenut