Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Photo Acceptance - Pre-Screening Double (wilco737)  
User currently offlineWILCO737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8899 posts, RR: 76
Posted (4 years 10 months 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2363 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Hi guys,

have a question about double. I have a picture of D-ALCP in the database:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Wilco737



Now I want to upload another shot of the MD11, this time the engine, but it is same airplane, same day. Is this double or is the motiv different enough?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...eady/h1245491548.548img_0542_u.jpg

Thanks.

wilco737
 camera 


It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJohnKrist From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1397 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (4 years 10 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2358 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Has it moved or is it in the same spot? If it has not moved it's double.
Love the shot though, and think that there should be exceptions to the double rule.



5D Mark III, 7D, 17-40 F4 L, 70-200 F2.8 L IS, EF 1.4x II, EF 2x III, Metz 58-AF1
User currently offlineWILCO737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8899 posts, RR: 76
Reply 2, posted (4 years 10 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2356 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR



Quoting JohnKrist (Reply 1):
Has it moved or is it in the same spot? If it has not moved it's double.

Same spot, same place, same everything, just a very different motiv. I know that pictures from one side and then the other side are allowed from the same day, so why not the nose and the engine? Is it really that double?

Quoting JohnKrist (Reply 1):
Love the shot though, and think that there should be exceptions to the double rule.

Thanks.

wilco737



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlineJohnKrist From Sweden, joined Jan 2005, 1397 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2352 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Mmm, reading that different sides might be OK, so maybe it would be OK. Try!  Smile


5D Mark III, 7D, 17-40 F4 L, 70-200 F2.8 L IS, EF 1.4x II, EF 2x III, Metz 58-AF1
User currently offlineJalap From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 355 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (4 years 10 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2344 times:



Quoting JohnKrist (Reply 3):
Mmm, reading that different sides might be OK, so maybe it would be OK. Try!

Well, this engine is on the other side of the plane than the nose shot so I would say that an exception to the double rule is not even needed here.


User currently offlineWILCO737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8899 posts, RR: 76
Reply 5, posted (4 years 10 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2343 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR



Quoting Jalap (Reply 4):
Well, this engine is on the other side of the plane than the nose shot so I would say that an exception to the double rule is not even needed here.

I haven't seen it from that point of view.  thumbsup 

Quoting JohnKrist (Reply 3):
o maybe it would be OK. Try!  

It is in the queue  Smile

wilco737



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlineDazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2816 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (4 years 10 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2331 times:

wilco737,

It's a totally different motive so double won't apply in my opinion. I would question the motive and lighting though, it's dark at the rear of the engine there's not much of the engine to look at. It's a great perspective and not often seen by us that don't have airside access and get this close to the moving parts, but maybe it would have been better taken from in front of the engine rather than the rear to get the fan blades and maybe the leading edge of the wing?

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineWILCO737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8899 posts, RR: 76
Reply 7, posted (4 years 10 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2330 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR



Quoting Dazbo5 (Reply 6):
It's a totally different motive so double won't apply in my opinion

Thank you for your opinion. I had a picture rejected which showed a different motive as well, so this time I wanted to make sure.

Quoting Dazbo5 (Reply 6):
I would question the motive and lighting though

I like the way looking at the engine. Usually it is from the front towards the rear where you can see the fanblades. I liked to show the whole engine with the exhaust instead of the fanblades.
So I did this intentionally Big grin

wilco737



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
User currently offlineAcontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1417 posts, RR: 31
Reply 8, posted (4 years 10 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2305 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi Phill,

That would not be a double, as long as those are the only two you upload! However, I feel the overexposed background kills the shot for me. In this case, probably you should have chosen exposure such as to have the background correctly exposed, and then use fill flash to attack the shadows.
I am sure you will get more opportunities to try this kind of shot again, so why not wait and get it right?



Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
User currently offlineWILCO737 From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8899 posts, RR: 76
Reply 9, posted (4 years 10 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2298 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR



Quoting Acontador (Reply 8):
That would not be a double, as long as those are the only two you upload!

Hi Andrés,

thanks for making this clear, I wasn't sure.

Quoting Acontador (Reply 8):
In this case, probably you should have chosen exposure such as to have the background correctly exposed, and then use fill flash to attack the shadows.

Thanks for the advice. It will not get too easy as I recently more and more be questioned by security why I am taking pictures at the airport being airside. That's why I uploaded several shots with "unknown location" already. Same with this shot.
But I will keep on trying.

I will pull it from the queue.

Thanks.

wilco737



It it's not Boeing, I am not going.
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...
Photo Acceptance - Pre-Screening (wilco737) posted Sat Mar 14 2009 12:17:49 by WILCO737
Photo Acceptance - Pre Screening (SAA738) posted Fri Jun 19 2009 14:22:29 by SAA738
Photo Acceptance - Pre Screening (chiefnwa) posted Fri Jun 19 2009 12:47:08 by Chiefnwa
Photo Acceptance - Pre-Screening (Luftfahrer) posted Wed Jun 17 2009 11:53:38 by Luftfahrer
Photo Acceptance - Pre Screening (conoramoia) posted Tue Jun 16 2009 10:55:08 by Conoramoia
Photo Acceptance - Pre-screening (ak1) posted Mon Jun 15 2009 10:54:32 by AirKas1
Photo Acceptance - Pre Screening (HGabor) posted Mon Jun 15 2009 04:43:34 by Ghajdufi
Photo Acceptance - Pre-screening (Phoenix9) posted Sun Jun 14 2009 20:42:12 by Phoenix9
Photo Acceptance - Pre Screening (zhutton) posted Sun Jun 14 2009 15:07:56 by Zhutton
Photo Acceptance - Pre Screening (Jetplaner) posted Sun Jun 14 2009 11:05:45 by Jetplaner