Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
I Must Protest This Double Rejection.  
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Posted (6 years 8 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3891 times:

Call this sour grapes all you want, but I'm pretty annoyed by this.

The rules state that you're allowed 2 windows shots of an aircraft per side per flight.

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/reasons.php#double

However, there's one occasion where there are no less than six shots during the same flight (if you don't believe me, search for B744, SQ, window views and check the bottom of the first page of results). There was a thread some time ago discussing this and a screener (sorry, I can't remember who it was) said that more shots might be accepted if they have radically different motiv. OK, the rules don't state that; but let's go with it.

So, I decided to chance it with three shots from the same flight, as I thought that all three were very good (at least motiv-wide), My opinion; you don't agree, good for you. The shots were the following (you can also click on (b) and (c) for a larger version):

(a)


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tony Printezis



(b) (my personal favorite out of the three, I fly out of BOS a lot and I never got this view before)



(c)



I actually put a note to the screeners to explain that I think the motiv is radically different (again, my opinion), but if they didn't think so, I would be happy if they rejected (c) (I do have to admit that I think I forgot to add the comment to one of them; my bad; but two definitely had it).

Much to my surprised both (b) and (c) were rejected for double. Well, I protest! First, why were they both rejected, and not one (given that I'm allowed to upload two per flight)? Second, how, say (b) be considered a double of (a) (sure, they contain some wing, but on one you can see HPN, on the other BOS and downtown Boston)? Or, how, say, can (c) be considered a double of (a) (one shows BOS on the ground and the nice Boston skyline, the other shows HPN)?

If anything else, these two look much more similar than the last round I submitted (they are both mine, so I'm not slagging off anyone).


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tony Printezis
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tony Printezis



So, I would like some clarifications. First, when is it OK to submit more than two window shots taken from the same side and on the same flight (and please don't tell me never)? Second, why was only one of my shots accepted and not the two I was expecting?

If I'm say I'm gutted, it would be an understatement. Thanks for reading this.

Tony


Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
29 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3859 times:

Appeal if you feel so strongly about it, but honestly, what is the big deal with those images? I don't see what's so worthwhile.

User currently offlineWestJetYQQ From Canada, joined Jan 2007, 2987 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3784 times:



Quoting JeffM (Reply 1):
what is the big deal with those images? I don't see what's so worthwhile.

The deal he's making is the lack of consistency. He posted 3 images that were of completely different places that got rejected for double, but two others that both got in being nearly identical.

Personally, I LOVE the skyline shot, and I strongly hope an appeal would get that on the DB. You're right that it is completely different. Appeal it. If that one gets it, appeal the other as well.  Smile

Cheers
Carson



Will You Try to Change Things? Use the Power that you have, the Power of a Million new Ideas.
User currently offline747438 From UK - England, joined Jan 2007, 838 posts, RR: 5
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3770 times:



Quoting SNATH (Thread starter):
The rules state that you're allowed 2 windows shots of an aircraft per side per flight.



Quoting SNATH (Thread starter):
I decided to chance it with three shots from the same flight

 headache 


User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5696 posts, RR: 44
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3767 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting 747438 (Reply 3):
Quoting SNATH (Thread starter):
The rules state that you're allowed 2 windows shots of an aircraft per side per flight.
Quoting SNATH (Thread starter):
I decided to chance it with three shots from the same flight

Exactly, bitching about consistency all the while stretching the rules yourself!
Whilst I did see something of interest in all your shots the six from Hong Kong you mentioned (bad form even if in disguised manner!) were very interesting and I am glad they are there.

My unsolicited advice.. stretch yourself, expand your subject matter, this isn't A319-320wings.net  Wink

Cheers



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3704 times:



Quoting JeffM (Reply 1):
Appeal if you feel so strongly about it,



Quoting WestJetYQQ (Reply 2):
Appeal it.

I won't bother; whenever I appealed, they told me to piss off...

Quoting JeffM (Reply 1):
but honestly, what is the big deal with those images? I don't see what's so worthwhile.



Quoting WestJetYQQ (Reply 2):
Personally, I LOVE the skyline shot, and I strongly hope an appeal would get that on the DB.

Jeff, as you see, people have different opinions. I personally love such wing shots. I find them more interesting than the usual 'taxiing 737' shots. And, I don't think it's just me; they usually get a lot of hits (the one over HPN is already in the top 15 of the last 24hr, which is usual for similar shots I got accepted in the past).

Quoting WestJetYQQ (Reply 2):
The deal he's making is the lack of consistency

 checkmark 

Quoting WestJetYQQ (Reply 2):
You're right that it is completely different.

Thanks, Carson. I'm glad at least one person agrees with me here.

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 4):

Exactly, bitching about consistency all the while stretching the rules yourself!

Hey, I knew that one of them could be rejected and, as I said, I added a note for the screeners to that effect. I just didn't expect two of them to be rejected.

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 4):
(bad form even if in disguised manner!)

With all due respect, but how else could I illustrate my point. I, of course, have nothing against the photographer, given that that series was indeed very interesting and a worthwhile addition to the DB. But, the screeners are usually very quick in pointing us to the rules. And I don't see anywhere in the rules that says that you can have more than 2 pictures per flight per side, if they are very interesting.

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 4):
My unsolicited advice.. stretch yourself, expand your subject matter,

Most of my pictures in the DB are window shots. And, for such shots, you're very limited in what you can take due to (a) where you sit, (b) what the flight path of the plane is, (c) the weather, and (d) where the sun is (and usually you don't control more than (a)). The day that I took those pictures I think (again, my personal opinion, you don't have to share it) that most of the above conditions were perfect and I did the best possible job for that flight. I can't see how I can "expand my subject matter" further under the above constraints.

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 4):
this isn't A319-320wings.net

I'm sorry, I forgot that it is stationary-b737-and-a320.net.

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3696 times:

Quoting SNATH (Reply 5):
I can't see how I can "expand my subject matter" further under the above constraints.

You're constrained to sitting in airliner seats?
Take a walk out to the runway.
Some of your Castle shots are nice!

Peter 

[Edited 2008-01-17 06:01:32]


The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3696 times:



Quoting SNATH (Reply 5):
I can't see how I can "expand my subject matter" further under the above constraints.

..your inability to "expand" isn't a reason for rules to be changed. Thousands of us have our own external limitations and we live with them. As mentioned, appeal if you think you need to.


User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1744 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3688 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I agree, I would appeal if

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 6):
Take a walk out to the runway.

If only it was that easy, Peter...  Wink

I would appeal if you feel that strongly about it.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3639 times:



Quoting JeffM (Reply 7):
..your inability to "expand" isn't a reason for rules to be changed.

Ah, I think I misunderstood you. I thought you were encouraging me to take different window shots. I now realize that what you meant. Nah, thanks. I'm happy to take pictures from inside planes.

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 6):
Take a walk out to the runway.



Quoting Dvincent (Reply 8):
If only it was that easy, Peter...

What Dvincent said. I live in the US and, with the usual paranoia around here, if I go to the runway, I'll probably get arrested. I've even got hassled by straqngers being on a public path and trying to take pictures of landing planes. It got very old, very soon and I gave up.

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 6):
Some of your Castle shots are nice!

Thanks. But, right now, I'm not very motivated to edit them to be honest...

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3639 times:



Quoting JeffM (Reply 7):
isn't a reason for rules to be changed.

Sorry, I forgot to address this. I'm not trying to get the rules changed in any way (please, point me where in my original thread I claimed this). I'm only asking for the rules to be applied consistently.

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1744 posts, RR: 11
Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3635 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting SNATH (Reply 9):
What Dvincent said. I live in the US and, with the usual paranoia around here, if I go to the runway, I'll probably get arrested. I've even got hassled by straqngers being on a public path and trying to take pictures of landing planes. It got very old, very soon and I gave up.

Tony,

Give me a PM sometime the next time you want to go around BOS, I'll be glad to give you some backup. I find you get less harassment as the numbers go up. Funny how that is...



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 3627 times:



Quoting Dvincent (Reply 11):
Give me a PM sometime the next time you want to go around BOS,

Will do! (I hadn't realized you are local...)

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3507 times:

Well, my appeal was successful after all.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tony Printezis



I feel somewhat vindicated and many thanks to the Head Screener for accepting it.

Do you think it's worth appealing the skyline picture too. Or will I be pushing my luck?

Regards,

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineMichlis From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 737 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 3504 times:



Quoting SNATH (Reply 13):
Do you think it's worth appealing the skyline picture too. Or will I be pushing my luck?

Just appeal it already...this is getting annoying.  banghead 



If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
User currently offlineTZ From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2003, 1085 posts, RR: 52
Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 3464 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting SNATH (Reply 5):
I won't bother; whenever I appealed, they told me to piss off...

Perhaps this rude, offensive and inaccurate statement deserves to be wirthdrawn?

TZ



TZ Aviation - Aeropuerto de los Banditos Team Images
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3380 times:



Quoting TZ (Reply 15):
Perhaps this rude, offensive and inaccurate statement deserves to be wirthdrawn?

I apologize for the tone, but the statement was quite accurate (given that I hadn't had any successful appeals before).

Regards,

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3365 times:

Really when looking back, this was really a slander fest and not much was gained. Well done!  Yeah sure

User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 18, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3339 times:



Quoting Michlis (Reply 14):
Just appeal it already...this is getting annoying.

Getting? Now I can sleep again...not having to wonder......  rotfl 


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 19, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3328 times:



Quoting Eadster (Reply 17):
Really when looking back, this was really a slander fest and not much was gained. Well done!

Thank you for your constructive contribution to this thread.

Quoting JeffM (Reply 18):
Getting? Now I can sleep again...not having to wonder......

I am delighted to hear that my previous post was able to help you with your current case of insomnia. If it comes back, by all means, please get in touch. I will be more than happy to share with you the excitement of which photos I have in the queue and tell you later which ones were accepted. It will be no problem at all.

Regards,

Tony  Wink



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5696 posts, RR: 44
Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3307 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting SNATH (Reply 13):
Do you think it's worth appealing the skyline picture too.

No, if that was your preferred image you should have appealed it first

Quoting SNATH (Reply 13):
Or will I be pushing my luck?

Yes, is there any part of ...

Quote:
For window views we accept 2 shots per flight and side of aircraft when they show considerable different motives

... you are having trouble with?

Having said that if I was a screener, and the reasons I am not are many and varied, I would have rejected your appealed shot as too similar in motive to the original despite the different location. Your cityscape is a significantly different motive and would have appealed more to me.

Rgds

Chris



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 3295 times:



Quoting StealthZ (Reply 20):
No, if that was your preferred image you should have appealed it first

Nope, my preferred image was the one I appealed.

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 20):
Yes, is there any part of ...

Quote:
For window views we accept 2 shots per flight and side of aircraft when they show considerable different motives

... you are having trouble with?

I would (still!) like a clarification on when more than 2 shots per flight are accepted. That's all. I'm not trying to change the rules, I'd like to get them clarified.

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 20):
Having said that if I was a screener, and the reasons I am not are many and varied, I would have rejected your appealed shot as too similar in motive to the original despite the different location.

I personally feel the motiv is different, due to the different location. We can just agree to disagree on this.

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 20):
Your cityscape is a significantly different motive and would have appealed more to me.

Yes, but you see, I fly out of BOS a lot and there's a good chance I'll be able to take a similar cityscape shot in the future (depending, of course, which runway you're trying to get to). However, the shot I appealed might be more difficult to get again, given that our take off pattern that day was quite unusual (at least, I hadn't experienced it before). This is why I decided to appeal the one I did.

Regards,

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5696 posts, RR: 44
Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 3285 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting SNATH (Reply 21):
I would (still!) like a clarification on when more than 2 shots per flight are accepted.

You started off by insulting the screeners all the while pushing the edges of the rejection rule envelope but you still feel they owe you a clarification.

My guess is they will stretch the window view rule when they, the screeners, consider the additional photographs wll add value or interest to the DB.



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3243 posts, RR: 22
Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3236 times:



Quoting StealthZ (Reply 22):

You started off by insulting the screeners

How did I insult the screeners?

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineMichlis From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 737 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3227 times:



Quoting SNATH (Reply 21):
However, the shot I appealed might be more difficult to get again, given that our take off pattern that day was quite unusual (at least, I hadn't experienced it before). This is why I decided to appeal the one I did.

Then just appeal it and don't make a big dog and pony show out of it. It really dismays (and annoys) me to see that more often than not it is the photographers who have a large number of acceptances are the ones who make a huge stink in the forum with the perceived intent of pressuring an acceptance. Very unprofessional IMHO.



If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
25 Post contains images SNATH : You know, you don't have to read the thread... Me? A large number of acceptances? I wish... Tony[Edited 2008-01-24 05:57:45]
26 Michlis : Nice try at dodging the issue.
27 TZ : SNATH - I can categorically state that no appeal has ever used such foul language, so you are wrong. Furthermore you said you would not bother to app
28 SNATH : Piss off? Foul language? Come on... Maybe I spent too many years (11+) in Glasgow... Tony
29 TZ : There is simply no call for abusive, impolite and downright rude language here. TZ
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...
Coould This Get A Double Rejection? posted Sat Jun 9 2007 17:12:47 by Damien846
Double Rejection posted Thu Dec 27 2007 10:35:31 by Points
How To Fix This Centering Rejection? posted Mon Nov 5 2007 15:14:22 by LOCsta
Snow, No Snow Double Rejection- Appeal? posted Mon Oct 1 2007 21:29:04 by Opso1
Double Rejection On Cockpit Shots? posted Tue Aug 28 2007 13:38:16 by Stil
Double Rejection? posted Mon Aug 20 2007 23:58:02 by Opso1
Can I Appeal This Category Rejection? posted Thu Jul 26 2007 14:50:52 by LHRsunriser
Double Rejection posted Wed Jun 20 2007 01:57:36 by JetAv8r
Possible Double Rejection posted Mon Jun 4 2007 11:01:21 by JohnKrist
Is This Motive Rejection Fixable? posted Mon Mar 12 2007 23:21:00 by Acontador