Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Question About Double  
User currently offlinecompussr From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 40 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 4786 times:

I have a shot of this cool looking plane taxiing and taking off on the same day, would this be considered a double rejection?

I didn't see anything about taxiing in the rejection guide. BTW these would be the first photos for this reg in the database.

Thanks.

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 4763 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting compussr (Thread starter):

I didn't see anything about taxiing in the rejection guide.

Actually, most of the examples in the rejection guide are of aircraft taxiing. Anyway, if the shots are of different sides you should be ok, but if they're of the same side or head-on and one side, it'll be a no-go. Wide-angle and close up of the same side are also a no-go.


User currently offlineunattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2326 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4709 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 1):
but if they're of the same side or head-on and one side, it'll be a no-go.
Quoting Airliners.net Rejections Guide ():
One shot taken during landing, and another during take-off will generally NOT be considered a DOUBLE error.

How does this not apply to one shot of taxi and one shot of landing? It doesn't say anything about sides when it comes to different stages of movement.

Quoting compussr (Thread starter):
plane taxiing and taking off on the same day,


[Edited 2010-05-04 10:08:58]


Slower traffic, keep right
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 months 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4668 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting unattendedbag (Reply 2):
How does this not apply to one shot of taxi and one shot of landing?

Yes, it is slightly ambiguous, and will be the screener's call. If the motive is different enough or the reason compelling to add two shots of the same side/reg./day it may be considered, but if they (one departure and one arrival) are both, say against blue sky, then the double rejection is much more likely. In my short time screening, almost all examples of double rejections I've seen are of shots from the same sequence, either different angles of an approach (3/4, side on, etc..) or close-ups and wide angles taken seconds apart while taxiing. The one that seems to draw the most ire is the head-on vs. side view regarded as double, but I have seen it enforced pretty consistently.


User currently offline757MDE From Colombia, joined Sep 2004, 1753 posts, RR: 6
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4625 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 3):
The one that seems to draw the most ire is the head-on vs. side view regarded as double, but I have seen it enforced pretty consistently.

I haven't had a double rejection in a long time, and can only think of two or three since I started uploading, but I have to say that in my opinion a full fuselage side-on and then a nose close-up shouldn't be considered doubles even if taken in the same taxi sequence.



I gladly accept donations to pay for flight hours! This thing draws man...
User currently offlineflight From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 334 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4619 times:

Yep, Dlowwa knows his stuff, guess you have to "know" before hand,
And the side, with the head on--They show different but are considered double, stay away form this,--- got in trouble for this, Wish this rule would change, but rules are rules.


User currently offlineSharktt From Portugal, joined Mar 2008, 35 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4587 times:

I didn't want to open a new topic, so I decided to write here (sorry compussr for this).

I would like to know how can a screener reject a picture saying that the picture is double, and there's already a similar picture in the DB?? This happened to a friend of mine (mine got in, and my friend's picture got rejected)!

So, now it's rejected for double even if the other picture isn't yours???

Thanks for your time!


User currently offlineptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4578 times:

Quoting Sharktt (Reply 6):
So, now it's rejected for double even if the other picture isn't yours???

No. Must be something else. Maybe he submitted two photos, one of which was rejected for double.

Peter 



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineSharktt From Portugal, joined Mar 2008, 35 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4574 times:

Quoting ptrjong (Reply 7):

Thanks for the fast reply! But that's a negative! This guy is very selective, and always sends everything correctly... The picture was rejected for double, and the screener left a note saying "There's already a similar picture on the DB".

Paulo  


User currently offlinedendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1668 posts, RR: 62
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4561 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting Sharktt (Reply 8):
The picture was rejected for double, and the screener left a note saying "There's already a similar picture on the DB".

Then that was a mistake.
No matter how similar, if they are by different photographers, then they are not double. We get a lot of very similar shots taken, for instance, at the big airshows and it would be unreasonable to only allow the first shot to be accepted

Mick Bajcar


User currently offlineaussie18 From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1746 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 months 1 day ago) and read 4460 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting compussr (Thread starter):

If your unsure regarding them being a possible double than maybe post examples of the shots.

Quoting 757MDE (Reply 4):
but I have to say that in my opinion a full fuselage side-on and then a nose close-up shouldn't be considered doubles even if taken in the same taxi sequence.

Why,Its still the same aircraft & similiar view,If you upload a full side on view of the aircraft than that is all you get accepted,If you upload a close up of the nose it will still mean you can upload a shot of the tail,as long as they dont overlap each other.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 3):
Yes, it is slightly ambiguous, and will be the screener's call. If the motive is different enough or the reason compelling to add two shots of the same side/reg./day it may be considered, but if they (one departure and one arrival) are both, say against blue sky, then the double rejection is much more likely.

Just to add more to what Dana has stated,arrival & departure shots of same side/day/reg would generally be acceptable long as we can clearly identify they are arriving & departing,If you spend a whole day at the airport & see the same aircraft twice from the same side & one was taken at dusk/dawn & other during the day that would also be generally acceptable long aswell.

Cheers Mark


User currently offline757MDE From Colombia, joined Sep 2004, 1753 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 4447 times:

Quoting aussie18 (Reply 10):
Why,Its still the same aircraft & similiar view,If you upload a full side on view of the aircraft than that is all you get accepted,If you upload a close up of the nose it will still mean you can upload a shot of the tail,as long as they dont overlap each other.

Sure, it could be done the way you say as well but in my very personal appreciation of the matter a full side on and then a close-up of the nose are not necessarily a similar view or motive.

For me this:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © K.Dennis


Is not the same as this:


Click here for bigger photo!

©




Even though by current rules one would be rejected as double if taken in the same sequence (yes, I know those two are different registrations in different Airports, just trying to illustrate my point).

This is my opinion on the matter, but it's not that I am ultra annoyed or something, I am fine with the rules as they are vis-a-vis doubles, sometimes I have a hard time choosing what to upload though (nose? full side on?).

[Edited 2010-05-06 00:20:16]


I gladly accept donations to pay for flight hours! This thing draws man...
User currently offlineptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4364 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter de Jong


This preserved aircraft unuusually and interestingly still has working hydraulics. I wonder if I could be allowed to upload another shot with landing gear and airbrakes extended.

Peter 



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4350 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ptrjong (Reply 12):
I wonder if I could be allowed to upload another shot with landing gear and airbrakes extended.

Same rules would apply. If it's basically the same angle then no, but if it's a different angle (i.e. other side) you should be ok. If it's the same angle and a drastically different motive (i.e. tighter crop, 3/4 from behind) then it MAY have a chance. If it's the same composition as the one you've posted and the only difference is the gear down, then no.


User currently offlineptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3944 posts, RR: 18
Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4291 times:

Different angle, same side   I don't suppose it will make it under the normal rules.

I think the screeners should feel free to make exceptions to the double rules, based on their own judgement of course.

Peter 



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlinecompussr From United States of America, joined Jan 2009, 40 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 4248 times:

What about shots of the same aircraft doing patterns in the same day? Would two shots (say one of the front, and one of the side) taken from two separate approaches considered as double?

User currently offlinewhisperjet From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 567 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 4245 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Unless the light is completely different (time of the day) it is a clear no for me. How could we know that the pictures were taken during two different approaches? And why would anyone like to have two very similar pictures online?

Stefan



Nobody is perfect - not even a perfect fool.
User currently offlinebottie From Belgium, joined May 2004, 281 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 4233 times:

I've had a 'double'-rejection a few hours ago:

This one was rejected:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...72889685.3018n934as-mhv-021209.jpg

Screeners comment:

" this is a double to image id # 1633255 double personal "


Image 1633255:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Botterman Bram





It's clearly another angle, a more detailed shot of the accepted one. Maybe next time I won't mention a day in the date, like some do, just month and year.

[Edited 2010-05-10 01:42:49]

User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 18, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 4223 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bottie (Reply 17):
t's clearly another angle, a more detailed shot of the accepted one. Maybe next time I won't mention a day in the date, like some do, just month and year.

I would advise against that. Missing or omitting dates raises even more suspicion when checking for doubles, and if found to be done intentionally, can lead to a ban. Unfortunately people try this quite often, so the screeners are well aware of it and take care to watch for it. In fact, had you omitted the date on the second shot, instead of just a double rejection, a warning would likely have been issued, as it would have been seen as intentional deception by the photographer. Basically, not a good idea.


User currently offlinebottie From Belgium, joined May 2004, 281 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4220 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 18):
I would advise against that. Missing or omitting dates raises even more suspicion when checking for doubles, and if found to be done intentionally, can lead to a ban. Unfortunately people try this quite often, so the screeners are well aware of it and take care to watch for it. In fact, had you omitted the date on the second shot, instead of just a double rejection, a warning would likely have been issued, as it would have been seen as intentional deception by the photographer. Basically, not a good idea.

I know, but maybe a   should have been placed at the end of that phrase. But take a look in the database and you'll see it's done quite often with shots that can been seen as double, even by screeners. But because I'm sure that's not done on purpose, I don't place examples here.

In fact, I always fill in the complete date, for me it's a matter of having the complete info available.


User currently offlineyowgangsta From Brazil, joined Feb 2005, 31 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4188 times:

My reject reason to you:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 18):

Screeners comment:

" this is a double to image id # 1633255 double personal "
Quoting dlowwa (Reply 18):
It's clearly another angle, a more detailed shot of the accepted one.

In the case of an airport overview, it's still showing the same spot of land; and hence the double.


These type of overviews attract a lot of attention from screeners to verify for double. It's a pain in the butt to look at a photographer's past to check for doubles, so when we do find a double it really isn't appreciated. It's usually mentioned internally and when we notice a repeat offense with a photographer warnings and more likely bans are enforced.

Leaving out dates would really piss off a screener!


 


User currently offlinebottie From Belgium, joined May 2004, 281 posts, RR: 8
Reply 21, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4177 times:

I understand your point, but explain this:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Botterman Bram



and


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Botterman Bram




with:



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Botterman Bram



and

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...72889685.3018n934as-mhv-021209.jpg



Unless I miss something here, the doube-rule isn't applied constantly in this case?


I also said:

Quoting bottie (Reply 19):
In fact, I always fill in the complete date, for me it's a matter of having the complete info available.

So I won't leave dates out  Wink

[Edited 2010-05-10 08:09:42]

User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 22, posted (4 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4132 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bottie (Reply 21):

Unless I miss something here, the doube-rule isn't applied constantly in this case?

Thank you for pointing this out. We will discuss this internally and hopefully come to a resolution. The communication team will contact you shortly to discuss this issue.


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...
Question About Common/Double posted Thu Feb 11 2010 12:43:59 by DL767captain
Question About The Double Rule posted Sun Oct 25 2009 19:19:42 by Plainplane
Question About Selling Photographs posted Thu Dec 3 2009 08:42:29 by Catalinasgrace
Let's Talk About Double posted Sun Nov 22 2009 22:54:58 by SFO2SVO
Pre-Screening - Question About Crop (Silver1SWA) posted Sun Oct 25 2009 12:09:12 by Silver1SWA
Questions About Double Rule? posted Thu Sep 3 2009 02:45:05 by WILCO737
Question About Obstructing Objects posted Thu Jul 23 2009 12:26:27 by Nozilla
Question About 'back Focusing' posted Thu Mar 12 2009 10:03:05 by Silver1SWA
Question About Spotting At TPA posted Sat Jul 12 2008 14:12:25 by MaidensGator
Question About One Shot... posted Thu Feb 21 2008 01:54:28 by GertLOWG