Philthy From Australia, joined May 2005, 123 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2304 times:
Quoting KLM772ER (Reply 3): You can always try an appeal if you don't agree
Thanks Bjorn, I'm trying to get some opinions before I decide whether to appeal or not. What grounds would I appeal on? 'Motiv' is one of those "How long's a piece of string?" things that it's practically impossible to argue against.
Jid From Barbados, joined Dec 2004, 968 posts, RR: 33
Reply 5, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2297 times:
Philthy motive is subjective at the best of times. I do not think an appeal would be successful as I agree with Bjorn's assessment about the stab being cropped out. In full frame shots this is normally ok but it very rarely works in tail close ups.
G7EPN is back after 15 years! Operating all Bands 80mtrs -> 70cms QRZ DX
TZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 53
Reply 8, posted (6 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 2173 times:
The question which one asks here is: "What interesting factor does this close-up show?"
That is always the question I ask myself when screening close-ups. Some close-up images show logos not visible in an entire-aircraft shot, while others show panel detail or interesting reflections, etc. Others have a dynamic viewpoint, while further examples fill the frame in a more thorough way than a side-on shot would.
Unfortunately these criteria are not met with this shot. It is merely the tail of the plane, and no more detail is visible than a side-on would show.
It is a competent shot, of that there is no doubt. It is simply missing a factor which justifies the crop. A good analogy would be an airport overview showing a couple of administrative buildings versus one which shows the terminal building and control tower.
TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images