Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Creative Images  
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 7031 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi All

Thought I would start a thread where we could once again discuss creative images. We're getting some uploads already but I think we could get many more. I think a lot of people are still scared of images that would break our rules too much. Before submitting those it might be a good idea to discuss them here if you dont want to risk your acceptance ratio. I'd like to have more images from more people.

As you may or may not know all creative images we come across are looked at by around 10 screeners before we make a decision to reject or accept so my input here would just be my personal views on the image.

Some recent ones I really liked


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © James P Matthews



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Maciek Wolanski



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Pedro Becken - Porto Spotter



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Johan K



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Anton Dovbush



Tim


Alderman Exit
174 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6976 times:

I'm still wary Tim - I uploaded a few I thought were pretty creative but they were rejected for various motive issues. I think the word 'creative' needs defining here really. It seems to me that, although a shot may be creative, if the screeners don't personally like it they'll simply reject.

Karl


User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 2, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6952 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting JakTrax (Reply 1):
It seems to me that, although a shot may be creative, if the screeners don't personally like it they'll simply reject.

Yes that is actually true. Creative would be hard to define I think, I wouldnt even know where to start.

Like I said, images are discussed by a fairly large group of screeners and we make decisions based on how many people like an image. Sometimes one or two dont like while 8 others think it's a great shot and sometimes those numbers are reversed. In the end it's the same as with our other rules, to a degree those can be objective but there is a certain subjective element as well where we have agreed to reject for this or that. That too is a screener's decision and some people may disagree, even within the team, but we try to screen to de agreed upon standards.

Dont think we can ever get a clear cut rule on this because it will remain subjective. Speaking for me personally I dont like some creatve images that were added and I loved some that were rejected, and I'm sure everyone else feels both ways too.

I think that's why discussing images here would be productive, to see if we can at least try to give some directive on what we think works and what doesnt. So while we cannot get a clear cut ruling on creative images I think we can at least provide as many examples of rejections/additions to see what we think works and what doesnt.

Keep in mind that almost all our rules can be bent when it comes to creative images, except for the obvious rules like border etc.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1991 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 6941 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting TimdeGroot (Thread starter):
all creative images we come across are looked at by around 10 screeners before we make a decision to reject or accept

Couldn't that be why we see so few new creative images in the DB? Views of 10 different people at what's creative and what's not could differ vastly. Even the regular screening for straightforward defects is subjective; and the criteria for creativity is not really an exact science.

Tim, do you remember the discussion around your first image with which you started the "creative revolution" on the site? People's opinions about that shot were divided about fifty-fifty. If it was a team of screeners, it wouldn't stand a chance.

With the regular screening, it only takes one screener to reject a shot. How many screeners out of 10 does it take to reject a creative shot? Also just one?

Andrei


User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 4, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 6936 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Chukcha (Reply 3):
With the regular screening, it only takes one screener to reject a shot. How many screeners out of 10 does it take to reject a creative shot? Also just one?

No actually any creative shot cannot be rejected until many screeners have seen it.

Yes I remember the discussion Smile When we are divided it doesnt take one screener to reject it. 50-50 images will probably get in. But if say only 2 out of ten screeners like it it will probably be rejected.

Before we used to send really difficult images to Paulo to make a decision on, like Johan did in the past as the owner of the site. Sadly of course that option is no longer available to us.

Actually the word creative is probably misplaced, I think for lack of a better word. An image doesnt have to be creative, as long as it's just "stunning" or "different" it's to be considered in this manner. Sorry if this doesnt make sense, cant really explain it that well Smile Like the image above by Anton I personally dont think is really creative but I do think it's an unusual and good looking image



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1991 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 6932 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Tim, while I was typing my post, you posted yours, and it does answer my question to some extent.

User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1991 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 6914 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 4):

No actually any creative shot cannot be rejected until many screeners have seen it.

But what if it wasn't even recognised as such by the first screener and simply rejected for 'motive'?


User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 7, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 6901 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Chukcha (Reply 6):
But what if it wasn't even recognised as such by the first screener and simply rejected for 'motive'?

yes a possibility I admit but we are all aware of what is "different" from what we usually accept and unless the quality is truly awful we do not reject those even if one personally doesnt like it. In fact that is our whole policy, to put a.net's standards above our personal standards. Every screened accepts shots he personally doesnt like, for me personally for instance common sideons shot in cloudy weather, but a.net does accept.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineApgphoto From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2008, 40 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6873 times:

I hadn't noticed that Tu154 shot before you posted it in this thread Tim .

That's a stunning shot congrats to the snapper Anton



Brought back to A.net by popular demand :-)
User currently offlineEksath From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 1317 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 6853 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
ARTICLE EDITOR

Tim,

Thanks for the thread again!

However, as mentioned above we have enough rejections with "motiv" that these "creative" shots push "motiv" rejections to Nth power.

So what happens when the first screening yields a screener who deems it worthy of a "motiv" rejection? Does this mean that if the first screener deems it a "motiv" rejection does he pass it on to the rest of the group to get a census? My understanding is that one needs only one vote to reject and if that is the first person then the shot is canned PERIOD.Hence, in my experience, I feel I am just setting my self up for a "motiv" rejection right off the bat. I hope I get my point across.

It is my perception that the stars have to really line up for these shots to sneak into the database i.e. the first screener must like it.



World Wide Aerospace Photography
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 10, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6842 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi Suresh

The way it usually works is like this. Screeners do not HQ or reject a shot like these but leave a second opinion with a comment

screener1: nice shot but bit soft

screener2: crop doesnt work for me

screener3: HQ for me

screener4: great images

etc etc until about 10 screeners have had their say

Then it is passed to the HS. If 9 of the other screeners liked the image it's an obvious acceptance, if 8 people wanted to reject for motive then most likely it will be rejected for motive. For those 50/50 shots the HS will usually discuss. We have 3 HS so if 2 of them pass it it will be added.

Hope this gives some insight in how we handle this now. We thought this would be the best way to be fair to all images.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineLochgilp From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 28 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6823 times:

Can i ask what aspect ratios are acceptable as the crop used could fall, to some extent, under the being 'creative' guise? Is it purely 1:1, 3:2 and 4:3?

This isn't a moan based on my rejection just a request for clarification so i know for future. I'm actually glad that my recropped shot was accepted as i know the quality was marginal so thank you for accepting it  Smile


User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4968 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6804 times:

I'm sorry because i appreciate the effort and idea of this thread, but i am still not convinced nor happy with this method. 10 screeners decide if the shot works, and I see 2 problems with that right away:
1) 10 people can't decide on the creative aspect of a picture. No one really can, but 10 people is nothing. I understan screeners' experience and talent is perfect for finding technical flaws, but not on creativiy.
2) Screeners screening their own creativity? not good.

again, I made an effort in these months, but something is still wrong with the concept and the way it's been put in practice.

rgds



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineDeaphen From India, joined Jul 2005, 1428 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6776 times:

Another question, does creative mean a creative shot from the beginning, or also the way its been edited?

Take of example this image, i would love to upload it.... but will be rejected. Opinions? I am not asking for prescreening, just trying to weigh the extent to which we can be creative.

http://i40.photobucket.com/albums/e213/deaphen/blacknred.jpg

regards
Nitin



I want every single airport and airplane in India to be on A.net!
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 14, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6774 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 12):
1) 10 people can't decide on the creative aspect of a picture. No one really can, but 10 people is nothing. I understan screeners' experience and talent is perfect for finding technical flaws, but not on creativiy.
2) Screeners screening their own creativity? not good.

1000 people couldnt decide, they'd probably end up divided along the same lines. We have limited time and resources, understand that we cannot let every shot see by more than halfthe crew. Even more importantly please understand that this site has rules laid down by the screeners, not by anyone else. That's why we screened creative and non-creative shots, because we make the rules. The alternative to this is letting the public decide, but I dont think that would be such a great idea either, you'd end up with eurovision songfestival practices Smile

We are NOT screening our own creativity! Dont know why you would think that but we cannot screen our own shots!

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 15, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6753 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi Nitin

A shot like that would still be unacceptable. So yes a shot would have to be creative "out of the camera", creative editing is not allowed at the moment, although a complete B&W image is acceptable in some cases.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineSovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2648 posts, RR: 17
Reply 16, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6750 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I tried uploading several creative shots early on when this rule was started but they were all rejected for motive. I think the first screener didn't see them as creative while I certainly thought they were outside the box.

May I suggest a "creative" category which you can tick while uploading? This category would not show up on photo searches but would be used just for the upload process so that the screener knows what your intention with the motive is. Hence "the stars don't have to line up" as one person put it.


User currently offlineDeaphen From India, joined Jul 2005, 1428 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6750 times:



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 15):
A shot like that would still be unacceptable. So yes a shot would have to be creative "out of the camera", creative editing is not allowed at the moment, although a complete B&W image is acceptable in some cases.

Thanks!

Nitin



I want every single airport and airplane in India to be on A.net!
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 18, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6744 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi Sovietjet

Any chance you could show the images here, might give some valuable input.

You can always leave a comment with an upload explaining why it should be considered creative. Just ticking a creative category will not work I think, again unless you can explain why it is creative, or why the shot works.

Just saying an image is creative and not explaining any further doesnt mean it will be treated as such by the screeners.

If creative images do get rejected, and you feel it was not justified, please consider the appeal function.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4968 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6741 times:



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 14):
That's why we screened creative and non-creative shots, because we make the rules

Agreed and accepted, but that's the point about the creativity, it breaks all the rules that you (the screeners) implemented, and uses new rules based on ... well, on nothing really, since the technical aspect is less important (technical as to "common" a.net standards).
When it comes to creativity, you don't screen a picture, you judge it and admire it's art or hate it all together, but all the other rules don't apply (or rather, don't need to apply).

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 14):
The alternative to this is letting the public decide, but I dont think that would be such a great idea either, you'd end up with eurovision songfestival practices

I'm inclined to agree with you on this one. But there has to be another way, more open and that leads to less speculation on to who is getting their pictures in and why.

Maybe have a separate webpage; "creativeairliners.net" and have a whole new concept  Wink



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4968 posts, RR: 25
Reply 20, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6732 times:



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 18):
Just saying an image is creative and not explaining any further doesnt mean it will be treated as such by the screeners.

I did, and I explained, and still got motive and another "common" rejection (I think it was distance) ... and I appealed providing the example of a similar shot (as far as motive) but the appeal was rejected without a comment.

rgds



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 21, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6727 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting EZEIZA (Reply 19):
Agreed and accepted, but that's the point about the creativity, it breaks all the rules that you (the screeners) implemented, and uses new rules based on ... well, on nothing really, since the technical aspect is less important (technical as to "common" a.net standards).
When it comes to creativity, you don't screen a picture, you judge it and admire it's art or hate it all together, but all the other rules don't apply (or rather, don't need to apply).

Yes we agree that creative images can break one or more or even all our rules. There are certainly a large number of images in the db that do so.

But that doesnt mean we will throw all our standards overboard when it comes to creative images.

The technical aspect does remain important, primarily because we strive for the highest quality images. Now for certain images that means we will let standards slide quite a bit, for example on difficult nightshots, a2a images, pics in bad weather, or 1200mm shots. For other shots, creative ones too the technical requirements will remain high. Say you shoot a creative shot at 50mm in full sunlight. There would be no reason why that image should be very grainy or out of focus. Even thought it may be a nice image it would still be rejected for grainy/blurry.

Thanks for the input so far. I'm trying to explain our policies a little better since I was not sure they were clear. Also hoping to see some more images we can comment on.

Also the current process whereby we let around 10 people see the image was just recently agreed upon. We specifically did it because we felt 1 or two people couldnt decide on these often very difficult to screen images.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineSFO2SVO From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 403 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6724 times:



Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 16):
May I suggest a "creative" category which you can tick while uploading? This category would not show up on photo searches but would be used just for the upload process so that the screener knows what your intention with the motive is. Hence "the stars don't have to line up" as one person put it.

I like the idea.

New category will ensure that images are not rejected by the first screener and, of course, will generate some abuse. The penalty should probably be same as for abusing priority category.

...or was priority category removed because it was abused too much?...



318-19-20-21 332 343 717 727 737-234578 743-4 752 763 772 D9/10 M11/8x/90 F70 RJ85 ATR72 SF340 E120 TU34/54 IL18/62/86/9
User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4968 posts, RR: 25
Reply 23, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6717 times:



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 21):
The technical aspect does remain important, primarily because we strive for the highest quality images.



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 21):
For other shots, creative ones too the technical requirements will remain high

I'm not saying you'll let anything pass by because it's creative, but some of the classic a.net rules are completely overlooked in many (most) of the creative, such as distance, for example.

In any case, and again appreciating the idea behind this thread, the current system (although i admit 10 screeners is better than 1 or 2) is still a potential for controversy and suspicion, as well as all the rest of the things I have mentioned (artistic cant' be screened, etc.)

rgds and sorry to bother, but i feel I need to have a saying at this as I was in the first thread one of the big critics; about this system and about some of the pictures accepted.



Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineSpencer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1635 posts, RR: 17
Reply 24, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6715 times:



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 18):
Just saying an image is creative and not explaining any further doesnt mean it will be treated as such by the screeners.

But Tim, with your experience (the screeners, I mean), you'd surely be able to see whether an image is creative or not, the addition of the photog's comment that it is such a shot would only help to serve as a reminder? Why would it need a full blown explanation?

Spence.



EOS1D4, 7D, 30D, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS USM, 70-200/2.8 L IS2 USM, 17-40 f4 L USM, 24-105 f4 L IS USM, 85 f1.8 USM
25 TimdeGroot : Hi Spence. yes I think we are able to judge pics on their merit. But it never hurts I think to point out certain things. I always appreciate comments
26 Post contains links and images UnattendedBag : I'd like to see a shot that breaks "ALL" the rules and can still be considered creative and acceptable. Even this shot was rejected for level the fir
27 Mirage : To tell you the truth, I don't understand what Airliners.net wants, I send a photo that is creative for me but the first screener looking at that phot
28 Spencer : Agreed, Tim! Spence.
29 TimdeGroot : Hi Luis, that is out of the screeners control Keep uploading your images, you certainly had some nice creative ones accepted. John I love that shot,
30 Stil : Hi everybody. Thanks for rising this thread. I tried to start a similar one time ago, but I was requested to post on 'post-screening' megathread. Coul
31 AKE0404AR : Creativity is still so subjective and unless you can objectify it (which I can't at the moment) it will be still subjective. The one Tim posted above
32 ZakHH : Well said. I'd even say it is impossible to objectify creativity. In my eyes, there is only 2 alternatives: acceptances and rejections under the crea
33 Raedervision : Tim, I'm glad you started this. Personally I think airplanes and art have a lot in common and creative photographs can inspire all of us. If a creativ
34 AKE0404AR : John, care to explain what a "leveling issue" has to do with creativity. A creative shot should also meet the requirements, at least some of them. Va
35 EZEIZA : Sorry Vasco, but I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Because if we're going to use the usual requirments, most of the creative shots should have n
36 JakTrax : Tim, no offence but this isn't a good incentive for us to start (or continue) uploading shots we think are creative. These statements make me persona
37 Post contains images LGW340 : Hi everyone, Do you guys think this could get accepted? Thanks Chris
38 Post contains images INNflight : Levelling issue? Yes. Creative? Yes. Levelling issue? Yes. Creative? Yes. Not level = no good is probably one of the biggest flaws in the system here
39 TimdeGroot : Hi karl, while I want to encourage uploads I do want to say up front that creative shots will also get rejected. It would be misleading of me to say
40 AKE0404AR : Florian, thanks for posting them. There is a huge difference between the shots posted and some general leveling issues! john, I'd love to see the rej
41 Post contains images UnattendedBag : I agree with that statement and I was referring to the ability to "break all rules" when it came to "creative" shots. Leveling is a post processing t
42 Post contains images RMW : A photo I recently received a "motive" rejection for. Technically the photo is in good standing. would this be an example of something that is "creat
43 EZEIZA : A perfect example! I'm curious to see the replies to that, anbd if maybe now that 10 screeners get a look at it it would have a different outcome?
44 Javibi : That is the spirit, IMHO. I do not think we could or even should define a set of rules that would determine which "creative" photos should be accepte
45 Post contains links and images Plainplane : Do you think this motif would be considered?
46 UnattendedBag : I don't see anything...
47 Koryo : I do not think so nothing special going on.
48 Stil : Hi again. The thread went slightly off-topic, so i'll try to rise a question. What was this thread for? initially it seemed as this thread encouraged
49 TimdeGroot : Those pictures in my first post all are in the 10-25k range in terms of hits though. Not every shot is going to get there but people certainly want t
50 Stil : Tim. I for one know you, as an excellent photographer, want to encourage uploaders to go one step beyond and try something different and to look the f
51 Ivandalavia : Employees of aviation safety kill any creative revolution. Likely you will agree with me - to make a creative shot, it is desirable is near planes all
52 Lennymuir : I've read this thread and I'm no more convinced to upload anything out of the ordinary in here. I don't feel comfortable uploading an outragous photog
53 Ander : Gerry, IMHO this is not the spirit of the thread. I think what Tim is trying to put across is that there is more hope for creative photogs than befor
54 JakTrax : I don't mean any offence here at all but is a screener really in such a position to judge whether a shot is creative or not? I can't see this issue of
55 Ander : No Karl, I don't think so. He is not saying it is not creative. He is just saying it does not fit here in A.net. For now. It is our job to push the l
56 Post contains links and images 2H4 : I really like shots like this, that show a new and different perspective of aircraft we're so used to seeing from all the usual angles. I had a go at
57 TimdeGroot : Yes Ander makes a good point. Creative is meant to be read as "creative for a.net". having a shot rejected here for whatever reason doesnt make it a
58 McG1967 : Tim, Do BW conversions fit into the creative images field, or are they treated as a normal photo? Regards Mark
59 TimdeGroot : If an image works better in B&W than in color then yes it will certainly be treated as creative. Tim
60 McG1967 : Thanks Tim, I've put a B&W conversion in the queue. Not something I would normally consider, but it seems to work better than the colour version. Mark
61 Post contains images RMW : I know what the problem is my photo is not of an "airliner". Just poking fun not trying to attack screeners. Thank you for the supportive comments ab
62 Ivandalavia : This conversation very complex, because all of us we understand Art everyone on the . For example, I like Ayvazovsky, but I at all do not understand L
63 Post contains links and images LH526 : Selfplug ... but this photos was discussed some years ago for being on the edge ... View Large View MediumPhoto © M C E Freese
64 Spencer : Got one question regarding creative rejections. Can they be appealed? ie. is it worth it? I only ask as Tim mentioned they only get accepted if the ma
65 Post contains links Ander : I'd like to post a recent rejection of mine for disussion. No objection to the screeners decission, but I'd like to know their views that led to final
66 Spencer : I'm loving that one Ander!! Shame it didn't get in! I can only assume it's because of the zooming effect, which sadly I would disagree with. Would mak
67 Psych : A very interesting thread, and I am very pleased to see Tim so involved in the debate, responding to points raised. I d feel these two-way debates are
68 Spencer : No offense here but I've been doing this for nearly 30 years, Paul's been at it for a bit too I've no doubt. We both like that image that Ander got re
69 INNflight : I'd be curious too, especially as it's immaculate in terms of quality, and the blur was done by zooming, not in post-processing, so what's no good ab
70 Ander : Thank you for your always valuable contribution Paul. The reason I posted the photo is exactly the question that you brought up. What is it that A.net
71 EZEIZA : But not based on technical quality, but rather on a like or not approach by a few. Tim, but a creative shot being rejected means exaclty what then? I
72 Dehowie : Taking a look at some of the examples some guys think are creative makes me want to say you rerally should take a look back at Tim's first post. Many
73 Silver1SWA : All I have to say about the issue is that I have been very interested in attempting to be more creative. I have the access to do so, however I admit I
74 Psych : I think I may have to launch another thread, because I don't want to take this interesting one off track too much, But - what causes that anxiety for
75 TimdeGroot : Hi Alberto, I think that I should repeat this point again. A.net is not a free for all, even when it comes to creativity. Think of it like an art gal
76 Post contains links and images Codeshare : You mean something like this (plug no shame) : View Large View MediumPhoto © Krzysztof Skowronski Personally, no offense Ander, I don't see your pic
77 Ander : Krzysztof, if you simplify like this, every photo in A.net is a plane in front of the camera. It is Ok if you don't like my photo as many others will
78 JakTrax : And so many of us feel like it's simply not worth the effort when we could just stick to our sure-fire sunny side-ons..... "Ander's image isn't for A
79 Psych : I think that is a fair analogy Tim. But - like an art gallery - one key element is for the membership to understand the basis on which decisions abou
80 Dendrobatid : Paul Here is my critique of Ander's image...... I am a big fan of this type of zoomed image when done well though with an appropriate subject, somethi
81 Acontador : One thing that seems to be a bit confusing is the term 'creative'. It's by all means not a synonym of artistic, but should be rather understood as pic
82 EZEIZA : Tim, Absolutely, I agree that a shot should not be accepted just because it says it's crative, but nor should i be rejected because 2 or 3 don't like
83 TimdeGroot : I never said that if 2-3 people dont like it it would be rejected, in fact I pointed out the opposite of what you were saying. If 2-3 screeners dont
84 Ander : Mick, I swear to God my PFD gives me this kind of vertigo after 10 hrs of flight in complete darkness with nobody on the radio, in the middle of the
85 Spencer : Hi Mick. That's a fair enough comment but, when it's an image that (I assume) the majority on here would like (to see), then what gives? And just bec
86 Leadingedge : I support the idea of introducing a more creative approach. The danger is that the acceptance criteria of this and competing sites are becoming regard
87 TimdeGroot : no manipulation of which you speak will probably never be allowed on here, e.g. the cloning of object etc. Dead space can definitely work in some cas
88 Clickhappy : Are we talking about images such as side on, centered shots? If so, of course, this website did not create that standard, the hobby of slide collecti
89 Dendrobatid : Spencer Perhaps I should have added IMHO at the end of the comment to which you refer Ander has certainly shown creativity with that shot but IMHO (t
90 Leadingedge : This statement was intended purely as an observation and was not a criticism of A-net or any similar site. I understand the reasoning behind the way
91 EZEIZA : My bad ... I intended to say that a very few group of people have the decision making based on if they like the feeling of the picture or not. Oh wel
92 Post contains links Sovietjet : Here they are. The second one may not be that outside the box but still an effect which I have never seen here. http://www.airliners.net/ufview.file.
93 TimdeGroot : " target=_blank>http://www.airliners.net/ufview.file...x.jpg Thanks for showing them. The first one I have to say does nothing for me. I see what you
94 AirKas1 : " target=_blank>http://www.airliners.net/ufview.file...x.jpg I can't view those photos?
95 TimdeGroot : try them from the original post, dont seem to work in my quote
96 AirKas1 : That's what I did in the first place, but all I get is 1 white pixel and the "close window" button.
97 Post contains links Ivandalavia : http://www.airliners.net/photo/Korean-Air/Airbus-A330-223/1496406/M/ ======================================================== creative or motiv???????
98 INNflight : It totally works, because of the chord
99 WILCO737 : I guess this is the perfect example that it works for somebody and for somebody it doesn't work. I uploaded several "creative" shots, but most of the
100 Stil : Creativeness is on comment, that gives sense to the picture. The question is what was first: the picture or the comment... Stil
101 Walter2222 : I assume Tim made the comment when he took the shot. Creativity is about seeing things differently...Some will see this, for others it may pass by un
102 Ivandalavia : ======================== good words. only for Nobody it doesn't work
103 Post contains images Mirage : I swear for what is more important to me that, without seeing the name of the photographer of that image and the comment, 1 second after seeing it, I
104 EZEIZA : exactly! you have summarised my thoughts since day 1.
105 Deaphen : I am sorry, but i dont agree with that, not because Tim is a screener or anything, but images like that have been accepted on a.net way before the "c
106 Spencer : Respectfully, I have to agree with Luis' comment. Tim's image does nothing for me, seems like it's trying to be different just for the sake of it. It
107 Deaphen : Sorry for the second message, but for some reason i cannot edit the above post, but IMHO, "creative" = "artistic". The above image is NOT artistic. I
108 WILCO737 : Maybe we shouldn't discuss about all the creative shots which have been uploaded and accepted. They wouldn't be online if not enough screeners have ac
109 Post contains links and images Mirage : Sorry but in case you're talking about this kind of photos: View Large View MediumPhoto © David Moore it's an absolutely different theme, where
110 Mirage : As I told before, my instant reaction was made before seeing the name of the photographer. Luis
111 Post contains links and images Deaphen : I totally understand your point mirage, but im sure there are a few pics from Japan with a very similar motive, but to be honest, i tried looking, bu
112 Post contains links and images AKE0404AR : I like that shot....... I hear ya and I am with you on that one......it is certainly a tough call! Keep trying.....Ander was not sure about this one
113 Mirage : Of course not One thing I'm proud of is to be open minded about saying my opinion and listening others opinions, anyone can criticize my photos here
114 Deaphen : Ah thats why i love this site thanks Nitin
115 Spencer : That just about sums it up for me too. It won't stop me from trying to upload one however, but it's hit or miss, if you like. Spence.
116 Koryo : This thread appears like it is slowly transforming itself into a Creative Image post/pre- screening mega-thread. Cheers, Koryo
117 EZEIZA : No disrespect to the photog, but since the shot has been exposed in the thread, if it doesn't fall under "creative" (which i believe it doesn't) then
118 Deaphen : From what i have gathered from the screeners, since i am a cockpit whore, is that persons can be shown in the pictures so long as they are carrying o
119 TimdeGroot : Well I half expect a little controversy about this image. Clearly some like it and some dont but that will usually be the case with "creative" shots,
120 EZEIZA : I agree with you, but at the same time, this I thought was one of the purposes of this thread, to try to get a better idea of what's acceptable withi
121 Deaphen : But thats my whole point, in my opinion, its NOT a creative picture, if it was black and white, and half of the gear was cut out intentionally by the
122 TimdeGroot : That doesnt make a shot creative either necessarily Nitin as I have mentioned
123 Deaphen : Haha.... yes, i was just merely giving a random example.... though i do know of some which were "highly artistic" but were rejected... haha HMPF! Kid
124 EZEIZA : Agreed But Tim, although I see where you're coming from with this shot, "different" is just not enough either. Again, with all due respect, and empha
125 Jez : I'm sure Tim's shot would get a 'distance' rejection over on 'airportworkers.net'. But seriously, the eye is strongly drawn to the person (and the hig
126 TimdeGroot : Yes I do. Looks pretty aviation related to me in any case as it has the gear prominently in view as well as someone who works with aircraft. I think
127 WILCO737 : I'd like to rise one other point which happened to my twice. I uploaded a picture which got rejected for motive, so I guess it was not artistic enough
128 Ander : I thought we were discussimg about creativity and the limits for acceptance, and all of a sudden all I see is a discussion about the screening process
129 TimdeGroot : Could also be due to quality issues if more reasons were given besides motive? If for motive only and motive is very or exactly similar you would hav
130 WILCO737 : It got motiv in the first rejection, so I appealed and then it got motiv and grainy. It was shortly after the new rules were introduced. wilco737
131 Post contains links and images Mirage : I guess I dared too much with this one MyAviation.net photo: Photo © Luis Rosa Luis
132 Ander : Luis, he is too easily rcognizable.... Ander
133 EZEIZA : :D True, and that's why I mentioned it. Sorry for that, but you do have more exposure than most uploaders, and that has its disadvantages too Well, t
134 Post contains links and images Airplanepics : Very interesting thread. I've been looking through my images a lot recently. Where I've been working out on the ramp for the past few years my collect
135 Xenon : Simon, For me it doesn't work as creative, sorry. Daniel
136 TimdeGroot : Have to agree with daniel. I think it would have been better if you had centered the marshaller more to the right filling the empty space there
137 Airplanepics : That's what I thought - but it's always worth another opinion! Thank you for your opinions!
138 UnattendedBag : I have to ask, what do you find creative about that photo? You ask if it is creative "enough". Im not trying to pick a fight, just curious...[Edited
139 Post contains links Eksath : Since we have been encouraged to be "creative", i would like to show the following that just got rejected. If we thought regular photo screening is su
140 Deaphen : Suresh: The link does not open, probably because you appealed it, if you can link it to the appealed photo instead of the rejected photo it will show
141 Codeshare : The caption helps out a lot, but I think motiv is correct here. If it were a film it would make it. But since it's a photo it doesn't exactly give th
142 TimdeGroot : HI Suresh. No offense but since there is no aircraft runway or airport visible here I can only agree with the rejection. On the creative side it does
143 Mirage : I don't get the relevance of the captions / comments to make a photo more interesting. Please keep in mind not everyone here speaks english or has eng
144 TimdeGroot : I can assure you we dont Luis. Tim
145 Airplanepics : I just thought the image was different, a typical view of a GA apron I guess . . .
146 Post contains links Eksath : Tim, Thanks for the input. I am trying to understand this "creative" area too so any insight your and/othe screeners/headscreeners provide is benefici
147 Post contains links KarlADrage : I've had this one rejected for motive and dark overnight: http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...90313_c1236687469.6332img_0643.jpg Must admit being a
148 Damien846 : Now I like this shot.......may be it would be good to hear from the screeners as to why they did not? So we can get some idea of what they are thinki
149 AKE0404AR : Karl, this is not a Screeners opinion. this is me commenting: I don't like it. The idea is nice but honestly the image is dark, there is not a lot you
150 KarlADrage : Please ignore my post above. The image now appears in the database.
151 Damien846 : Well done, and the other shot?
152 Post contains links and images AKE0404AR : Luis, Sometimes you win, sometimes you loose..... View Large View MediumPhoto © Luis Rosa Keep trying and don't loose your faith. Vasco
153 Koryo : Negative, too low quality,grainy and over processed.[Edited 2009-03-14 16:01:04]
154 Post contains images Ghostbase : I just don't get it! How can we encourage creativity within a system which is designed to reward conformity? The whole concept of a small minority of
155 Post contains links EZEIZA : First of all, great post by Ghostbase And second, yet again, the creativity really depends on if one of you 10 guys that saw this picture liked it and
156 WILCO737 : My personal opinion: I like that shot, great perspective of that beautiful bird. Does the B&W works? For me it somehow does. The atmosphere of that p
157 EZEIZA : Thanks Wilco! Which has always been my main point against the way this has been approached, which is that art can't be screened, and there is no way
158 WILCO737 : THe problem is, there need to be some kind of screening. You cannot just accept the picture if the quality is good. That would mean: every shot what
159 Codeshare : I like the shot, but I'd like to have a comparison in colour. Well you can write a book about why you think an uploaded creative shot is worth it, an
160 WILCO737 : Exactly. That's the "problem" with artistic shots or with art in general. Some like it, some don't... It will take time and all photographers should
161 EZEIZA : True, but in most cases, they are rejected. Maybe the idea of the thread was for us to see what they are looking for, but it0s not working. Somehting
162 WILCO737 : Have you any statistic about that? I don't have any numbers here. So I don't know. Oh and I don't care There are many great shots accepted which I en
163 EZEIZA : True, but is it too far fetched to ask for an explanation for motive rejections? I did, now I don't. I'll just keep on shooting for myself. there are
164 TimdeGroot : I dont see what the problem is here. By uploading here you agree to have a relatively small group of screeners look at your work. They decide what is
165 Codeshare : Yes, but for years you have been screening to the a.net standards. Open up a little more. No wonder Tim, you get rejections also, but you have a bett
166 TimdeGroot : I believe that's what we are doing
167 EZEIZA : And I realize this, and therefore I won't be trying anything else creative in this site. Why? because every time I'va tried I'va had motive rejection
168 TimdeGroot : As said before the creative rules are working itsself out in practice. We cannot make a rulebook on this because the possiblities are virtualyl endles
169 Post contains images Codeshare : The outcome is like a sinusoidal wave, very hard to determine where it's at the moment. Stabilisation needed   ...and a sense of humour (of the ones
170 Post contains images EZEIZA : I honestly was unaware that there was a shot with the same motive ... but two out of over a million would still be considered a litle bit creative ma
171 Post contains links and images WILCO737 : View Large View MediumPhoto © Wilco737 Not exactly the same view, but close to that wilco737
172 EZEIZA : Nice shot!
173 Mirage : This one was accepted but it doesn't mean I'm confortable with these "creative" pictures Airliners.net is looking for. Since a long time ago I try to
174 TimdeGroot : Luis I think that is the key. I dont expect anyone to go out now and suddenly shoot creative pics because a.net is now more open to them. I totally u
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...
Creative Images - The Next Stage posted Sun Aug 24 2008 03:24:38 by Granite
Airliners.net Images On Youtube posted Sun Feb 22 2009 10:57:03 by Koryo
Internet Usage Of Airliners Images posted Tue Jan 27 2009 06:52:56 by Malandan
Too Creative As Unlevel? posted Thu Dec 11 2008 08:40:16 by Opso1
Could This Be Creative? If Not Any Chance Anyway? posted Mon Dec 8 2008 08:03:41 by JakTrax
5D Mark II High ISO Sample Images posted Mon Oct 13 2008 12:39:14 by GuamVICE
Square Images. posted Sun Oct 5 2008 08:27:38 by Spencer
Creative Photos, Gone Too Far posted Wed Sep 17 2008 14:18:39 by Rsg85
Creative Screened As Non-creative? posted Wed Sep 10 2008 05:37:53 by EZEIZA
So I Tried Uploading A Creative Shot posted Tue Sep 2 2008 20:13:30 by Sovietjet