Well the aircraft maybe soft, and the wheel maybe a bit blurry going down with free-fall acceleration, and the grain - OK, that could be fixed...
My inquiry concerns mainly the 'motiv' and 'centered' reasons.
This shot has captured Kent Pietsch's act in development - first he looses an aileron, then a wheel... My question is - does such an action shot stand no chance here?
As for the 'centered' part - well, the aircraft does seem to be centered perfectly, albeit part of it is separated from the fuselage by a few feet . Of course, I could center the image leaving the wheel out, but then the whole point would be lost...
This shot is not perfect technically, but I thought the distance could be taken into consideration.
I didn't appeal the shot considering the massive rejection reasons. Besides, more often than not, when appealing, you write a long letter to the Head Screener, but then receive exactly the same rejection with no comment at all. You get an impression that you appealed to a robot; I know it is not the case, and the Head Screeners still read our comments, they just don't have the time to answer each one. And I would like some feedback.
Koryo From Vatican City, joined Feb 2009, 285 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (4 years 1 month 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1593 times:
Yes, unless if it was an accident photo if they screener doesn't see it as creative it isnt going to change if creative the quality has to be to some degree of acceptable and this photo im sorry to say is not. Nice photo though
This forum is as good as you make it. Never post a message in anger. Take the high road and others will follow.
Acontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1392 posts, RR: 33 Reply 3, posted (4 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1544 times:
This is the first time I see your picture, and when opening it I instantly asked myself: What is that? Haven't I read your comment before, I would have no idea what's going on in the picture, and I would only see a distant wheel being towed/falling off/being thrown?
I also have to say that the quality is not really there.
For me this is not a clear-cut case of unacceptable motiv, just a picture that doesn't exactly convey what you wanted to show.
Hope it helps
[Edited 2009-03-26 06:48:28]
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
Chukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1935 posts, RR: 8 Reply 4, posted (4 years 1 month 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 1536 times:
Thanks for the replies!
Quoting Acontador (Reply 3): just a picture that doesn't exactly convey what you wanted to show
It was kind of explained in the comment section to the photo:
"After losing an aileron, Kent Pietsch's airplane also lost a "wheel".
I just didn't realise that many people would be unfamiliar with the Kent Pietsch's show, because there are plenty of pictures of his aircraft on this site, and he has been recently performing at many major air shows. It is a kind of comic aerobatics, and this guy is absolutely amazing. Shortly after takeoff, he drops an aileron (it actually falls on the ground) and pretends that he has lost control of the aircraft. Of course, he can fly it perfectly well even without one aileron... Further in the flight he will also lose his "paperwork" and a mock-up wheel. Then he will "try" to land, touching the runway with the tip of his wing, doing all sorts of "silly" things. In the end he lands the plane safely, jumps out of it and kisses the ground . I guess, only a pilot can fully appreciate the outstanding skill and precision flying that Kent Pietsch demonstrates.
Maybe I should have explained it in detail in the comment.