unattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2240 posts, RR: 1 Posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3017 times:
Can a remark really catapult you to the top of 24 hours?
The shot is clean and was taken by one of the best on the site. But the comment is a bit over the top, unless you believe everything in the movie "Air Force One" was real.
dvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1719 posts, RR: 12 Reply 1, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3010 times:
What, we're not allowed to have cheeky comments anymore?
unattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2240 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2986 times:
Quoting dvincent (Reply 1): What, we're not allowed to have cheeky comments anymore?
haha!
We have a running joke here in Nashville. One of our photographers got a shot of Air Force One departing BNA with the Air National Guard hangar in the background. In the comment box, the photographer stated "check out the sniper" that was standing on the roof of the hangar, and the photo garnered a crap-load of views. So every time we photograph AF1, we joke about adding the comment "check out the sniper!" in hopes of attaining thousands of extra views! (not that he didn't deserve every single one of those views)
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 2964 times:
I knew the cycle was coming around for another "Photogs getting on the homepage conspiracy" threads. Come on this is getting old. You know full well any AF1 shot gets a ton of hits. I doubt it would be any different if this shot was uploaded without a comment.
unattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2240 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2943 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3): Come on this is getting old. You know full well any AF1 shot gets a ton of hits. I doubt it would be any different if this shot was uploaded without a comment.
You're right. Comments do not contribute to the number of views one gets. Every shot of Air Force One for the past 3 years has skyrocketed to the top. Every shot of Air Force One has over 10k views.
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2929 times:
Quoting unattendedbag (Reply 4): You're right. Comments do not contribute to the number of views one gets. Every shot of Air Force One for the past 3 years has skyrocketed to the top. Every shot of Air Force One has over 10k views.
Looking over the uploads of AF1 I see shots that got no hits with a long comment and a lot of hits with no comment. I mean if your trying to infer that a comment automatically means hits I think your reaching. I think the fact that it's AF1 at BFI and Royal as the photog had more to do than to the comment.
cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 44 Reply 6, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2907 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 3): I doubt it would be any different if this shot was uploaded without a comment.
Well it would, because the comments do give you more hits/views - since you give people more information to search on. You make your image more visible to those people who are searching for anything related to that.
I put 777 panning D700 in google search, and one of my images was returned as top result:
unattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2240 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2872 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 5): Looking over the uploads of AF1 I see shots that got no hits with a long comment and a lot of hits with no comment. I mean if your trying to infer that a comment automatically means hits I think your reaching.
I have no problem with comments, even comments that may increase views. But I'm not in favor of fallacious comments that require the viewer to open the large image. I think this comment has lead to increased views.
just my opinion, does anyone else share it, maybe, maybe not? who knows.
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2860 times:
Quoting unattendedbag (Reply 7): I have no problem with comments, even comments that may increase views. But I'm not in favor of fallacious comments that require the viewer to open the large image. I think this comment has lead to increased views.
You may be right seeing the escapde pod thing is a myth and doesn't really exist. I can't see Royal doing things like this to get views since he gets them rather easily otherwise but if you insist on confronting photogs haven't you been told that it is the proper course to email the head screeners and not slag them in the open forum here?
unattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2240 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2852 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 8): I can't see Royal doing things like this to get views since he gets them rather easily otherwise
I can't either, his work stands alone.
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 8): but if you insist on confronting photogs haven't you been told that it is the proper course to email the head screeners and not slag them in the open forum here?
I'm not downing a photographers skills. I'm not questioning a photo that is obviously flawed that got past the screeners. I am questioning a remark that he made. A simple comment. If a photographer or viewer can accept my opinion on a comment that he/she left on a photo, then I don't know what to say.
Regarding my opinion posting in the forum: when I feel that something may benefit the community, I post it. If it is an isolated type event that has no bearing on the community, then I send an email.
I feel what should be acceptable as a remark is open for debate among the photographers and the screeners.
The remark has sparked some comments from viewers as to its legitimacy. That's great! But I know many people refer to this site as a factual, no-nonsense aviation database. Does that comment fit in? Some people get it, some don't.
clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9444 posts, RR: 72 Reply 10, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2837 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
The comment was tongue in cheek. While spotting AF1 that day we overheard some people discussing the merits of the built-in escape pod, which of course we laughed about after. I haven't seen this movie, but a quick check of Wikipedia brought me up to speed. Must be a good movie if President Clinton watched it twice Wonder if there are any cigar scenes?
Anyways - the comment wasn't about hits. It was about having fun, just like all of the stuff I upload. If I was worried about hits I would upload the 787 backlog I have, or the 777 and 787 production facility shots I am sitting on, or the two hotties french kissing at Maho with Air France overhead.
unattendedbag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2240 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2831 times:
clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9444 posts, RR: 72 Reply 12, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2830 times:
NIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 14, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2804 times:
Quoting clickhappy (Reply 10): Anyways - the comment wasn't about hits. It was about having fun, just like all of the stuff I upload. If I was worried about hits I would upload the 787 backlog I have, or the 777 and 787 production facility shots I am sitting on, or the two hotties french kissing at Maho with Air France overhead.
Kewl, we need the thread "People camping out at BFI to shoot the 787"
spencer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1623 posts, RR: 19 Reply 22, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 2619 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 8): I can't see Royal doing things like this to get views since he gets them rather easily here?
A screener shooting new ac and new liveries is always gonna draw views, don't be mistaken thinking otherwise. That's taking nothing away from Royal however, just fact.
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
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4536 posts, RR: 26 Reply 24, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 2494 times:
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
25 sulman: Oh THANKS BUDDY. I'm going to watch Pearl Harbour. I suppose you can tell me what happens in that one too?
26 viv: Perhaps you mean "Pearl Harbor"? If so, don't bother - it's another awfully bad movie. Watch "Tora Tora Tora!" instead.
27 ThierryD: If you guys want to see a real good aircraft movie, go watch "Sky Fighters"; it's a French movie ( "Les Chevaliers du ciel") from 2005 and features so
31 JohnKrist: +1 hit from me due to the comment! I'm ignorant OK...I really wanted to see those escape pod doors Wondered why I didn't notice them and went to my ow
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2240 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, 
That is truly shocking! 
From UK - England, joined Dec 2006, 657 posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3106 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2028 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
or it never happened 
... 
From Sweden, joined Aug 2005, 18 posts, 
From Argentina, joined Sep 2005, 583 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
