Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why The "double" Rule Did Not Apply Here?  
User currently offlineOlegShv From Sweden, joined Mar 2006, 683 posts, RR: 2
Posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4112 times:

I happened to find two shots of the same aircraft, from the same photographer, on the same day, and on the same taxiing sequence! Is the "double" rule not enforced anymore?

Here are the shots in question:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vishal Jolapara




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vishal Jolapara



30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1745 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4106 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

That is pretty damning evidence of being in the same taxi sequence.

So here's a question - why didn't you email this to the screeners or DB editors instead of playing a "gotcha" game on the forums? Maybe they had a reason for letting it go.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineBubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1195 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4096 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

They are showing different sides of this aeroplane.

_Hongyin_


User currently offlineOlegShv From Sweden, joined Mar 2006, 683 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4094 times:



Quoting Bubbles (Reply 2):
They are showing different sides of this aeroplane.

Thanks!


User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4060 times:

Quoting Bubbles (Reply 2):
They are showing different sides of this aeroplane.

The front side and the left side... Hmm, interesting concept. I'll need to remember that.

[Edited 2008-02-29 16:10:06]

User currently offlineAnder From Spain, joined Jan 2005, 367 posts, RR: 21
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 4054 times:



Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 4):
The front side and the left side... Hmm, interesting concept. I'll need to remember that.

 rotfl   rotfl 



Born to tri.
User currently offlinePhilhyde From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 678 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4036 times:

To me this is not "baddouble". The photos are obviously same day, aircraft, etc, but are not "similar".

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



HoustonSpotters Admin - Canon junkie - Aviation Nut
User currently offlineFly747 From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1497 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4012 times:



Quoting Bubbles (Reply 2):
They are showing different sides of this aeroplane.

I sent an email to screeners before this thread was started and this was the answer I got as well.
It is a new registration to the database, however it was only changed recently as the caption of the photo explains.
I accepted the reason why both of them were let in the DB but not necessarily agree with it 100%, but that's irrelevant.

Ivan


User currently offlineBubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1195 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 4009 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER



Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 4):
The front side and the left side... Hmm, interesting concept. I'll need to remember that.

Hi Chad

My point is the first image shows the nose area AND the starboard side of fuselage, and the second one shows the larboard side of fuselage. So, two sides - different.

_Hongyin_


User currently offlineScottieprecord From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1363 posts, RR: 11
Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3995 times:

So if I have a shot of, say an EK 777 pulling into the gate, I can upload one of each angle and baddouble won't be a problem?

Mike


User currently offlineDacman From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 444 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3991 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Nose view - profile view, looks good to me and definately not a double.

My two cents.

Michael
(Dacman)
LAX / LGB local



"Airliner Photography is not a crime"
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3985 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

I think the shots are great. Besides featuring completely different angles of the aircraft, the backgrounds are also quite different. To me, this makes each photo unique in its own way.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineHAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2565 posts, RR: 53
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3972 times:

I posted a thread on the same subject but didn't get much response last week. Would it be possible to have someone edit the rejection reasons to include language that clearly states that it is the 'same side of the aircraft' that makes a difference? It seems to me the word 'similar' just isn't specific enough. I had this photo rejected:
MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © David Sperry

as being a double of this accepted photo:
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © David Sperry


The are from different locations with different views, but since they show the same aircraft on the same day and from (sort of) the same side, the nose view was rejected. I accept that by the rules it is a double, but could the posted rules be clarified so we don't have so many of the same kind of mistakes? Thanks.

David

[Edited 2008-02-29 20:16:41]

[Edited 2008-02-29 20:17:13]

[Edited 2008-02-29 20:18:27]

[Edited 2008-02-29 20:21:16]


One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3970 times:



Quoting Bubbles (Reply 8):
he first image shows the nose area AND the starboard side of fuselage, and the second one shows the larboard side of fuselage.

...sorry, what the heck is "larboard" side?


User currently offlineHAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2565 posts, RR: 53
Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3966 times:



Quoting JeffM (Reply 13):
...sorry, what the heck is "larboard" side?

Archaic version of 'Port' side. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_(nautical)

David



One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 15, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3965 times:



Quoting Dacman (Reply 10):

My two cents.

and not a penny more.

Quoting Scottieprecord (Reply 9):
So if I have a shot of, say an EK 777 pulling into the gate, I can upload one of each angle and baddouble won't be a problem?

Mike

Based on this precedent, I don't see why not!


User currently offlineUnattendedBag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2328 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day ago) and read 3964 times:



Quoting OlegShv (Thread starter):
same aircraft, from the same photographer, on the same day, and on the same taxiing sequence! Is the "double" rule not enforced anymore?

The first shot is showing the right side and nose and the second shot is showing the left side of the aircraft.

this is the same principal:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Robbins - Nashville Aviation Photographers
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Paul Robbins - Nashville Aviation Photographers



Quoting HAL (Reply 12):
as being a double of this accepted photo:

you have been here long enough to know how to post your photo properly!!

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © David Sperry




Slower traffic, keep right
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3951 times:

This type of debate intrigues me. In the not-so-distant past, I had a shot rejected, I appealed and it was rejected again.


Arrival:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas - Jetwash Images



Departure (REJECTED FOR DOUBLE):



Why?


User currently offlineHAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2565 posts, RR: 53
Reply 18, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3950 times:



Quoting UnattendedBag (Reply 16):
you have been here long enough to know how to post your photo properly!!

I'm a-pedaling just as fast as I can man!  Smile I'm used to writing, not posting photos here and I'm still in the steep part of the learning curve! It took several attempts (obviously), but I think I got it done before my 30-minute edit window expired. Thanks for everyone's advice here and elsewhere on A.net. It's a great resource for anyone interested in aviation.

David



One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3927 times:



Quoting HAL (Reply 14):
Archaic version of 'Port' side. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_(n...ical)

Wow. An entire career in the Navy and I never heard that term....not even at initiation.  rotfl 

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 17):
Why?

Same side visible in bot images Chad?


User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 3914 times:



Quoting JeffM (Reply 19):
Same side visible in bot images Chad?

Oh. It was a rhetorical question really.

Still, one is an arrival and one is a departure. The arrival photo is 500mm of in your face UH-60 metal and the departure is well, a side on. Much difference me thinks.


I'm not debating the fact that the initial photos should or shouldn't have made it, I think they are just fine. Would like some consistency though. The fact that both of these photos were accepted while many other photogs would get double rejections for uploading shots in sequence goes to show there are flaws in the system.


User currently offlineAcontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 30
Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 3863 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi All,

Quoting Maiznblu_757 (Reply 20):
The fact that both of these photos were accepted while many other photogs would get double rejections for uploading shots in sequence goes to show there are flaws in the system.

Not necessarily. The first two pictures in this thread were borderline double cases. Most probably, if the aircraft shown was a KLM 737 or a Swiss Avro it might have not been accepted. Or if the second picture was taken showing exactly same background...I hope you see my point.
I think this is another very good example that shows that actually our system of not-so-rigid rules works! Yes, this does lead to sometimes photographers believe that their picture was judged by different parameters (=not accepted) than others (accepted), but it gives us screeners a bit of more freedom to let some exceptional pictures being accepted that otherwise would have never seen the public - and I would say the many hits this two got are a proof of what I'm saying.

Chad, if you just look at the two UH-60A Black Hawk pics you posted, they show same side, both in the air, no apparent different flying attitude, although I would agree that having only 3 in the DB does give you a point in favor. In the end, your's was probably also a borderline case, but eventually the same-side part was considered the main decision criteria.

I fully understand that most contributing photogs want to have a set of clearly defined rules of what is 'allowed' and what not, but we screeners also need to have a small room in each category to accept some exceptional pictures. I would not call that inconsistency, as long as there is a good explanation for each decision taken by the team.



Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
User currently offlineMaiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 50
Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3825 times:



Quoting Acontador (Reply 21):
Hi

Thanks for the explaination. Although my examples were separated by approximately 8 hours, Ithey were both shots of the same side of the aircraft.

Im glad to see the rules relaxing enough to allow several photos of the same aircraft in sequence, different sides of course.


User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1745 posts, RR: 11
Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3818 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I believe that it helps that this is a colorful/special scheme as well, right? I see no real issues in those cases - odds are the left side may be different than the right!


From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineScottieprecord From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1363 posts, RR: 11
Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 3736 times:



Quoting Acontador (Reply 21):
Most probably, if the aircraft shown was a KLM 737 or a Swiss Avro it might have not been accepted.



Quoting 2H4 (Reply 11):
Besides featuring completely different angles of the aircraft, the backgrounds are also quite different.

So I can upload this second shot and it won't be rejected for double, or can we only do this with special airframes and good backgrounds?

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike Paschal




25 Maiznblu_757 : Both of your photos should make it. One is a landing shot, one is a taxi shot. In addition to that, they are showing different sides of the aircraft.
26 Seahawks7757 : Why not wait a few days and reenter it after the other one has gone through?
27 Flyboyseven : I really do like that nose shot. That is a very nice shot in my opinion. Graham
28 ThierryD : Andrés, all in all I agree with what you've said, however I can't agree with the screeners' decision of accepting those 2 Gulf Air shots. Sure they
29 Fly747 : That's the thing, they are not the first pictures of it. There were 30 others in the db before, most of them in that special c/s. Ivan[Edited 2008-03
30 JeffM : ...poor advice....when the photos are uploaded doesn't matter.
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...
The "Your First Accepted Photo" Thread posted Wed May 23 2007 02:57:09 by Flynavy
The "Centre" Question posted Mon May 21 2007 22:42:57 by Coninpa
The First "787" Pic In The DB...When? posted Thu May 3 2007 05:31:26 by KFLLCFII
The "One Recent Photo That Made You Go Wow" II posted Mon Apr 30 2007 17:26:25 by Rotate
Rejetction - Did Not Undestand The Personal Msg posted Sat Dec 30 2006 01:21:47 by Fhlaran
The "One Recent Photo That Made You Go Wow" Thread posted Wed Dec 13 2006 19:41:34 by Javibi
Stepping Outside "the Box"... posted Fri Oct 6 2006 14:14:20 by Flyfisher1976
Southwest N363SW "Heroes Of The Heart" posted Wed Aug 30 2006 20:09:28 by Jakbar
Always The Same: "Quality" posted Thu Apr 13 2006 22:58:06 by LukasMako
Pilot Says "Don't Post The Regestration" posted Thu Jan 26 2006 02:24:55 by UnattendedBag