Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Do You Agree This Should Get A Motive Rejection?  
User currently offlineSAA738 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2009, 261 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4437 times:

Not everyone will agree on this but I think images like this ( http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...dy/k1241985570.7803img_3137111.jpg ) shouldn't get a motive rejection. They show what everyone sitting in a window seat sees when flying on a jetliner and I believe they would get alot of hits (views) as people like viewing interesting images like this. Imagine seeing lots of shots like these, each with a different City or Landmark in the background. I really think the rule that the shot must include a part of the wing should be changed, anyone else agree with me  Smile ?


''To fly as fast as thought you must begin by knowing that you have already arrived'' - Richard Bach
28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirKas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 4028 posts, RR: 55
Reply 1, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4430 times:

Hi Daniel,

I do agree with themotive rejection. Either leave the windowframe out or put the it in whole,


-Kas


User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 2, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4427 times:

The fact remains that there is nothing of the aircraft in the picture (except part of the window frame).

It's a nice shot, but not for a website that hosts pictures of aircraft.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4427 times:

It should definitely get a motive rejection, among others.


-Jeff


User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 4, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 4421 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Bit surprised you ask the question since I already told you in private it would be rejected for motive Wink


Alderman Exit
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 5, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4417 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR

Another thought....there is nothing unique about the edges of a window frame, but there are a lot of unique aspects of a wing.

In many cases, window shots without a visible wing amount to nothing more than a random landscape with a big dark border.

In other words, a wing adds a lot more to a photo than a window frame.  yes 

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineSAA738 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2009, 261 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4403 times:

In a shot like this ( http://www.airliners.net/photo/Briti...rways/Boeing-767-336-ER/1523386/L/ ) what's so interesting about the wing/engine, it shows such a tiny part of it.


''To fly as fast as thought you must begin by knowing that you have already arrived'' - Richard Bach
User currently offlineAirKas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 4028 posts, RR: 55
Reply 7, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 4397 times:



Quoting SAA738 (Reply 6):
what's so interesting about the wing/engine

Nothing. What's on the round is interesting.


User currently offlineSAA738 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2009, 261 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4370 times:



Quoting AirKas1 (Reply 7):
Quoting SAA738 (Reply 6):
what's so interesting about the wing/engine

Nothing. What's on the round is interesting.

Did you mean ground ?

Exactly, what's on the ground is interesting, just like my image taken at Cape Town.

Windows might all be the same but it is included in the shot and obviouslty it is taken in flight which is aviation related !



''To fly as fast as thought you must begin by knowing that you have already arrived'' - Richard Bach
User currently offlineAirKas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 4028 posts, RR: 55
Reply 9, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4358 times:



Quoting SAA738 (Reply 8):
Exactly, what's on the ground is interesting, just like my image taken at Cape Town.

Windows might all be the same but it is included in the shot and obviouslty it is taken in flight which is aviation related !

Yes, I meant the ground (typo). Your shot is interesting too, but the windowframe (the way it is pictured now) kind of ruins it A.net standards. That said It's not a bad shot, but it's hard to take a windowshot for a.net when you don't sit close to the wing and/or engine.


User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 41
Reply 10, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4350 times:



Quoting AirKas1 (Reply 9):
but the windowframe (the way it is pictured now) kind of ruins it A.net standards.

and if that window frame happens to have curtains.........

Big version: Width: 800 Height: 534 File size: 139kb



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
User currently offlineUnattendedBag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2342 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4347 times:



Quoting SAA738 (Thread starter):
Do You Agree This Should Get A Motive Rejection?

I completely agree with this rejection. The haphazard use of the window frame to outline only the left and right side as well as the bottom looks amateurish and lazy. The centering of the window is off as well as the level, both left side and right side. There is no visual benefit of having more dead space in the bottom left as opposed to the bottom right or the fact that the window frame extends to the top right of the photo as opposed to the top left where it disappears before completing the outline. There is nothing appealing about the use of this window frame.

the scene out the window is nice though.  Smile

just my  twocents 



Slower traffic, keep right
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 12, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 4344 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting SAA738 (Reply 6):
what's so interesting about the wing/engine, it shows such a tiny part of it.

A small section of visible engine cowl, nacelle, and leading edge may not be riveting, but it's a heck of a lot more interesting than a dark window border.

Not that it's my decision to make, but I've never been a fan of window views that do not depict either an airport or another aircraft. If it's scenery one is after, one should open up Google Earth. This site is dedicated to aircraft and airports.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineRonS From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 762 posts, RR: 22
Reply 13, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 4307 times:

Yes, good rejection. That photo would make an excellent addition to a Flckr site or Picasa.


All opinions expressed by me are my own opinions & do not represent the opinions in any way of my employers.
User currently offlineF4wso From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 974 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 4270 times:

Perhaps a positive spin on this thread would have been to ask what could I do to make the motive of this type of image acceptable to Anet standards?


Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
User currently offlineKoryo From Vatican City, joined Feb 2009, 285 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 4 days ago) and read 4240 times:



Quoting F4wso (Reply 14):
motive of this type of image

The motive is the same thing as the type of image. Thus you need a different motive.



This forum is as good as you make it. Never post a message in anger. Take the high road and others will follow.
User currently offlineSpiderguy252 From India, joined Feb 2009, 295 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4219 times:

Definitely a motive rejection. Window frame ruins it all. You might have had better luck if you showed the wing instead.


Figure .09
User currently offlineAirKas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 4028 posts, RR: 55
Reply 17, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4212 times:



Quoting Aviopic (Reply 10):
and if that window frame happens to have curtains.........

Dammit Willem! Big grin
I don't know really, but I'll hazard a guess that your photo will get motive aswell  Wink
Nice shot though, where was that?


User currently offlineSAA738 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2009, 261 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4192 times:



Quoting UnattendedBag (Reply 11):
I completely agree with this rejection. The haphazard use of the window frame to outline only the left and right side as well as the bottom looks amateurish and lazy. The centering of the window is off as well as the level, both left side and right side. There is no visual benefit of having more dead space in the bottom left as opposed to the bottom right or the fact that the window frame extends to the top right of the photo as opposed to the top left where it disappears before completing the outline. There is nothing appealing about the use of this window frame.

the scene out the window is nice though. Smile

just my twocents

This was taken early last year when I was still a beginner. I had my first picture accepted on a.net only a few months ago !

I don't think you can really call it lazy, what else could I do given the circumstances. And Spiderguy252 how can you get the wing in the shot when your not sitting over it or near it !?



''To fly as fast as thought you must begin by knowing that you have already arrived'' - Richard Bach
User currently offlineSpiderguy252 From India, joined Feb 2009, 295 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4177 times:



Quoting SAA738 (Reply 18):
I don't think you can really call it lazy, what else could I do given the circumstances. And Spiderguy252 how can you get the wing in the shot when your not sitting over it or near it !?

I was just referring to another possible situation, not yours specifically.  Wink



Figure .09
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 4171 times:



Quoting SAA738 (Reply 18):
I don't think you can really call it lazy, what else could I do given the circumstances. And Spiderguy252 how can you get the wing in the shot when your not sitting over it or near it !?

Just enjoy the view. Being on a plane doesn't mean you have to try and force a shot just to upload here.


User currently offlineF4wso From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 974 posts, RR: 11
Reply 21, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4160 times:



Quoting Koryo (Reply 15):
The motive is the same thing as the type of image. Thus you need a different motive.

I could have better phrased it to "...how can I make my photography fit Anet standards instead of making Anet standards fit my photography?"



Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 22, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4151 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting F4wso (Reply 21):

I could have better phrased it to "...how can I make my photography fit Anet standards instead of making Anet standards fit my photography?"

Truth be told I would not focus on either. Just shoot what you think is nice and then upload it here and see if it gets accepted.

We do accept these windowviews where only the frame is visible, but only in very rare cases where it'd done very well. Mostly though we prefer a (significant portion of) wing or engine to be visible. That image by george is a rea bordercase where not a lot of aircraft is visible. had the scenery not been so nice it would probably have been rejected.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 23, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4141 times:



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 22):
Mostly though we prefer a (significant portion of) wing or engine to be visible.

Not that I have a picture like that, but worth asking for future reference: do you think it'd be OK if instead of the wing you'd got an overview of an airport, framed by the window?

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 24, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4139 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting SNATH (Reply 23):
Not that I have a picture like that, but worth asking for future reference: do you think it'd be OK if instead of the wing you'd got an overview of an airport, framed by the window?

Yes airport overviews are always acceptable, no need to show aircraft bits. If you're going for the window frame I'd suggest getting the whole windowframe in view and not just a part like in the first image in this thread



Alderman Exit
25 SNATH : Absolutely. Tony
26 Stulli : Hi Well, this is easy to answer: Just get out of your seat, walk along the aisle to where you could get a better view and politely ask the person sit
27 Aviopic : It was meant as a joke not for uploading although I still think the motive works. Swiss
28 NIKV69 : Not at all surprised. It's a common practice here. Not sure if people think it will change anything or more of trying to get the standards changed. T
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...
Do You Think This Is Good Enough To Get Added? posted Thu Apr 6 2006 04:45:54 by Pavvyben
Do You Like This Motive? posted Thu Sep 29 2005 01:42:10 by Adamwright
Do You Think This One Will Get Accepted? posted Sun Apr 18 2004 05:10:39 by AirplanePeanut
Would This Shot Get Motiv Rejection? posted Sat Sep 8 2007 15:01:36 by KLM772ER
Airstairs On LCF Going To Get A Motive Rejection? posted Sat Jul 28 2007 20:41:49 by SEAchaz
Will This One Get A Quality Rejection? posted Sat Apr 7 2007 09:37:37 by KLM772ER
How Do You Center This? posted Wed Dec 20 2006 23:52:38 by SFO2SVO
Do You Think This Would Be Accepted? posted Thu Sep 28 2006 15:42:07 by Raptors
Do You Think This Is A Copyright Violation? posted Thu Jun 1 2006 17:18:12 by Mygind66
Do You Think This One Can Be Rescued? posted Tue May 23 2006 16:12:22 by Psych