ExitRow From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 7, posted (11 years 2 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1785 times:
Just contact the photographer. Ask him/her first. It's a common courtesy and EXTREMELY easy to do. Questioning the authenticity of a photograph in a public forum without the input of the original photographer is akin to gossip.
I'm sorry. It's just plain rude and I really wish there was less of it here.
ExitRow From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1772 times:
So this is how you react on every questions and opinions and posts in this forum?
No. Very different. Do a search on the word "fake" in this forum and you'll see I am not in the minority on this issue.
Wondering about about "how" a photogaph is taken is very different than saying:
What do you think, guys? Could this photo be fake or what? At least the pic is blurry.
You are looking for consensus. And doing so without contacting the shooter FIRST is just plain wrong. What you are doing can only serve to DISCOURAGE good photographers from submitting work to this website.
LOL, just ridicilous...
Your condescension reveals that your motives are less honorable than just honest curiosity...
This is a touchy subject around here. You're lucky your thread starter was not deleted as flamebait.
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 12, posted (11 years 2 months 6 days ago) and read 1754 times:
I think you've been around this forum long enought to recognize that whenever the word "fake" is mentioned, things can rapidly get emotional. You can ask things like "how is this possible", and whatnot, but mention the word "fake", and it's like waving a red flag in front of the bull - you can expect to get run over.
Sabena 690 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (11 years 2 months 6 days ago) and read 1747 times:
It is just because Joge is already such a long time around on the forum, that I know that he just wanted to ask a normal question. He certainly did not want to offend someone. He would never do this, therefore he is already too long around on a.net, and has already taken enough pictures in his life to know this.
Joge From Finland, joined Feb 2000, 1442 posts, RR: 41 Reply 14, posted (11 years 2 months 6 days ago) and read 1736 times:
The point was to start a discussion of that photo. Now see for instance LGW's or Johan's reply. My point was to talk about the pic quality... Well, I won't start another debate, I think this topic and subject is over now.
2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 8 Reply 16, posted (11 years 2 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1683 times:
Joge, here are the comments that were on the comments section of the photo.:
"Anyone ever seen a Tristar with Four engines? This is the way Bwee transported their spare engines from overhaul at Rolls Royce, LHR via YYZ, the aircraft would overnight at Toronto, the engine would be attached, then on to Trinidad next day."
Joge From Finland, joined Feb 2000, 1442 posts, RR: 41 Reply 18, posted (11 years 2 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1675 times:
I KNOW why it carried that fourth engine. That's why I didn't ask it that way! This is photography forum, if I wanted to know why it carries that extra engine, I would have posted that message to other forum. I thought the same thing GKirk did, just why I doubt it.
IMHO, ExitRow is the one acting here inappropriately.
What you are doing can only serve to DISCOURAGE good photographers from submitting work to this website.
ExitRow From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 21, posted (11 years 2 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1628 times:
IMHO, ExitRow is the one acting here inappropriately.
Defending a photographer that has an image pass the screening process from someone who starts a thread questioning its validity in a public forum without ever contacting that photographer first... is inappropriate?
You think the photo is fake. If it were about engine ferrying, it should be in Tech/Ops. You think it's fake and you want to drag this guy over the coals in the court of public opinion.
Cricri From France, joined Oct 1999, 581 posts, RR: 7 Reply 24, posted (11 years 2 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 1497 times:
Sorry Joge, many persons seem to believe that you are stupid, but thank god, i know you I will close this topic window before i start asking myself who the stupid persons really are here...
25 Mirage: Funny cricri, how you use the word "stupid" when nobody here said that, so that's only your opinion. Clearly you don't have a clue on photography ethi
26 GKirk: LOL. Cricri, Joge enjoying being bashed? Just because Cricri doesnt take pics of planes, mean he doesnt have a clue on photography ethics? Uh huh...
27 ExitRow: No one seems to mind Gerard A. Mark (and his photo) being bashed... I stand up for a photographer being unfairly criticised (IMO) and this is the reac
28 Mirage: GKirk, are you being honest with yourself or just trying to seduce a chat operator. I know what I'm saying, you can think whatever you like. Luis
29 GKirk: I know the photo is real, trying to seduce a fellow chat operator huh....LMAO That was pretty funny actually, LOL What Joge was trying to say, I think
30 FACT: This thread is in violation of the rules of this particular forum. What do you think, guys? Could this photo be fake or what? "or what" is a throwaway