Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Not Level!(?)  
User currently offlineSudden From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 4130 posts, RR: 6
Posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 2924 times:

To start with I want to write that this is nothing against the photographer. I like the shot, but it made me a little confused, to be honest.

I see topics now and then about shots not beeing level.
Therefore I wonder how this shot passed the screeners?
First I thought it might be an illusion, but it's not.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Antonio Carrasquilla



I'm not an expert on the subject so if I have overseen anything please explain it to me.

Aim for the sky.
Sudden


When in doubt, flat out!
21 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineThomasphoto60 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 3923 posts, RR: 23
Reply 1, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2854 times:

You've lost me Sudden. Whats wrong with this pic? It is obvious to me that this photo was taken from the perspectve of the pilot (or someone very close by) as the plane was turning onto it's final approach. If I am missing something please point it out as I am curious what you see that I can not.

Thomas



"Show me the Braniffs"
User currently offlineLugonza_2001 From Spain, joined Oct 2001, 315 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2836 times:

I also believe the picture intends to make us see what the pilot´s perspective is when turning.

User currently offlineSudden From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 4130 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 2807 times:

What I meen is that, chould not the hills and the forest be level?
As I wrote before, if I misstake myself about the rules I apologize!



When in doubt, flat out!
User currently offlineJwenting From Netherlands, joined Apr 2001, 10213 posts, RR: 18
Reply 4, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2707 times:

According to the rules, if kept to strictly, it might have to be rejected indeed.

I guess the screeners here used their discretion.
In a shot like this, it's all but impossible to determine whether the camera was level with the floor of the flightdeck (which in this case should IMO be the deciding factor and not the horizon). There is no line parallel with the flightdeck floor visible in the shot.



I wish I were flying
User currently offlineTimdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 5, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2679 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Although I like the shot I understand where this is coming from.
Both the horizon and the cockpit do not seem to be level here, should be tilted until one is level IMO.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineJT8D From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 170 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2659 times:

While I also think the shot gives an excellent sense of what the pilots sees and should certainly be in the database, I can't help but think back to the numerous pics I've had rejected because of less than 0.5 degree not level horizon.

I think most screeners do their best to be consistent, and in this case they rightly sided with the subject outweighing the minor annoyance some people might have with non level horizons.

GH



Graham Hitchen, KMIA
User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2718 posts, RR: 18
Reply 7, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2667 times:

Highly inconsiderate of the pilot for tilting the horizon. Perhaps he should have kept everything absolutely level by only using rudder and skidding the turn....no ailerons at all. That would have kept everybody here at A.net happy. Of course you risk a spin by skidding the turn, but that is only of small consequence. Must keep the complainers at A.net happy.

Steve


User currently offlineSudden From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 4130 posts, RR: 6
Reply 8, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2632 times:

I'm not complaining in any way, were just thinking about "photo not level" rejections that have been discussed before.
I have no photos in the database, so I am humble when it comes to the matter of correct or wrong.
I also stated in my starter that I like the photo.
So I would prefer to not have any smart a** replyes.

Best regards.

Aim for the sky.
Sudden



When in doubt, flat out!
User currently offlineApuneger From Belgium, joined Sep 2000, 3032 posts, RR: 12
Reply 9, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2630 times:

I also understand the complaint, since neither the horizon nor de flightdeck are level. But hey, just look at the shot as it is: I think it's a very nice shot. It certainly isn't bothering me that the picture isn't levelled for the horizon or the flightdeck, not at all.

The only complaint I'd like to give is that this aircraft seems to be quite high, even though I can't distinguish between red and white lights on the PAPI/VASI/whatever it is. Maybe it's just due to the fact that the photographer used a long telezoom lens, I don't know. Still looks like quite high for me...



Ivan Coninx - Brussels Aviation Photography
User currently offlineJofa From Sweden, joined Apr 2002, 320 posts, RR: 15
Reply 10, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2593 times:

I agree with Sudden here. I tried straightening it up in Photoshop and it looked much better imo. Im not saying this because of the rules here at Anet, but i think the image benefits from being straightened up.

User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 35
Reply 11, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2571 times:

If the cockpit was level it would be ok.

I've had shots even when they are level from my perspective, which I thought was the rule but some screeners reject it if the horizon is not level and some don't....


User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2562 times:

You know, I can find nothing in the upload FAQ about being level to the horizon, can someone point it out to me?





ADG


User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 13, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days ago) and read 2530 times:

It can be found under the question: How important is the motive of the photo? In the upload FAQ's.

Spend time finding the right light and angle, never shoot from behind a window, the shadow side of an aircraft, always hold the camera straight (in a straight (90 degree) angle to the ground) etc.

I think that is what they refer to as "level".

v/r
Jeff


User currently offlineCicadajet From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 6 months 3 days ago) and read 2537 times:

All things being more or less equal, the image is supposed to be level if the aircraft is on the ground - and most other times as well. Thats the main rule as I understand it. The admin referenced it in a thread some time back.

There's some text in the corresponding rejection message.

Beyond that the screeners use their discretion.

Nice shot, Antonio.

Tom


User currently offlineSudden From Sweden, joined Jul 2001, 4130 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (11 years 6 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2433 times:

Ok,

thanks for your explanations guys.
Again I want to point out that the photo is great, so nothing against the photographer.

That the screeners use their discretion is all ok as I see it. As long as they keep within serten margines.

Have a nice day.

Aim for the sky.
Sudden



When in doubt, flat out!
User currently offlineNonRevKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (11 years 6 months 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2360 times:

God, I was thinking the same thing the other day. It's a great shot, but there needs to be clarification on this. IMHO, either the panel needs to be level (to show the bank angle thru the window) or the horizon needs to be level (to show the bank angle of the aircraft).

Brian - SPOT THIS!


User currently offlineNonRevKing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 6 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2346 times:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Robert Jones



or


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Brian Stevenson - SPOT THIS!



Wouldn't anything else be "not level"?


User currently offlineADG From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 6 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2327 times:

Spend time finding the right light and angle, never shoot from behind a window, the shadow side of an aircraft, always hold the camera straight (in a straight (90 degree) angle to the ground) etc.

Thanks Jeff. But how exactly does that apply when you are not on the ground? The FAQ doesn't cover that.




ADG


User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 19, posted (11 years 6 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2312 times:

ADG,

Your welcome, but you do raise a good question about how to apply that guidance to your photo when not on the ground.

I've seen examples of both keeping the horizon level, and or the glare shield being level in the frame. I guess it depends on the picture.

Jeff


User currently offlineSkymaster From Denmark, joined Apr 2001, 228 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (11 years 6 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2303 times:

I do not dare thinking if could not admire the following photo for the "not level" reason! The photographer also broke the "not-behind-rule".

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mariusz Adamski



PLEASE NOTE THIS PICTURE IS A EDITORS CHOICE!!!!


User currently offlineSkymaster From Denmark, joined Apr 2001, 228 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (11 years 6 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2292 times:

Sorry, I did not check my letter. I mean the photographer broke the "not-behind-glass-rule".

One hell of a picture, I think. Why was it not me behind that camera?


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...
Not Level - But How To Rotate? posted Thu Aug 3 2006 10:39:09 by Frippe
When Is Level Not Level? posted Mon Mar 27 2006 01:39:39 by DC10Tim
Help With "picture Not Level" Rejection posted Sun Mar 12 2006 04:20:40 by SNATH
Horizon Not Level? posted Sat Nov 27 2004 12:36:20 by GF-A330
Should Have Been Rejected Due To Not Level? posted Wed Sep 15 2004 05:46:15 by Cboyes
Photos Not Level? posted Tue Dec 2 2003 19:04:18 by Flyingbronco05
Runway Not Level posted Sat Nov 29 2003 06:52:34 by Paulinbna
Not Level!(?) posted Wed Jan 29 2003 13:25:31 by Sudden
Stalling DC9 Or Not Level? posted Fri Aug 2 2002 03:38:17 by Setjet
Level Or Not posted Sun Jul 9 2006 15:59:46 by QANTAS077