Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
For The Screeners: Pictures Cropped Out Too Tight?  
User currently offlineEricBelgium From Belgium, joined Mar 2003, 77 posts, RR: 5
Posted (12 years 4 hours ago) and read 4286 times:

Hello everyone,

I'd like to raise a topic I haven't seen before.

There are many reasons to have a picture rejected, one of them being 'aircraft too far in the distance'.
I think we can all agree.

But shouldn't be there an opposite category as well, being

'picture cropped out too tight' ?

I'd like to illustrate this with two recent photos

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tibor Mester

First of all, no offence to any of the photographers, you both have great work on Anet guys.

But looking at pictures like these give me the following feeling:
1. It's looks like it's an aircraft 'in a box', kind of unnatural.
2. With photos that have a 'motion' like landings, take-off etc. The 'action value' completely dissapears, while I think that an aeroplane in motion needs some space to show that action.
3. If the aircraft is cropped out so tight behind an equally coloured background ( like a blue sky ) it sometimes just looks fake; like it was a copy/paste on a blue key.

Since most of the pictures are cropped out of a far bigger photo, I think there are very easy solutions.

This is another way of asking the question:

If all these awesome Kai Tak and St-Maarten pictures were cropped out so tight, would they still be so popular? I think no, because they lose there action&background value.

I hope I didn't offend anyone, but I'm very interested to have the opion of my fellow photographers, and some comment from the screeners.

greetz, Eric

9 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offline2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 7
Reply 1, posted (12 years 4 hours ago) and read 4245 times:

Eric...The photos you put up need to be cropped in tight (unless of course they were already full frame). They have no real back ground that you would want to see, so the a/c is and should be the total focus of the shot.

Certainly there are times when the background is an important part of the photo and more distance from the a/c is acceptable. But then you come into the question of "what is the focus point of the photo." Is it the airplane or is it the background? Since this is an airplane site the focus should be the airplane with the background being a compliment to it.

Sometimes we see shots that were rejected and the airplane is jsut far enough off that it becomes part of the background of stunning scenery. Might be a great photo, but again, this is an airplane site.

In my mind that becomes a gray area...(not withstanding about my lack of gray matter...)...It is up to individuals to decide where their focus will be, and the screeners are the ones that have to make that choice.


User currently offlinePhotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2876 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (12 years 4 hours ago) and read 4218 times:

My personal thoughts are that both these photos (and many others in the DB) are cropped too tight. I have no real objections to the tail or wingtips being cropped close, but I have always felt that the nose of the aircraft needs a little space in front of it to look natural. From a purely graphic design point of view, the aircraft needs room to "breathe" or travel into. When the nose is cropped absolutely to the edge of the frame this makes for a poorly balanced photo.
There are many good books on graphic design, photo composition etc., that will bear this out.
But as has already been pointed out, this is a sight for aircraft, and it seems that even photos with poor graphic design (from the strictly artistic view) are accepted as long as the aircraft is sharp and within the frame.

muy dos centavos


User currently offlineTimdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 63
Reply 3, posted (12 years 3 hours ago) and read 4173 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

From a slidecollectors point of view I can only congratulate these guys Smile
I love 'em like this (although yes, sometimes a little space adds to the photo)


Alderman Exit
User currently offline2912n From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 2013 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (12 years 3 hours ago) and read 4160 times:

Steve says, "From a purely graphic design point of view, the aircraft needs room to "breathe" or travel into." And that is that gray area that Anet falls into sometimes. Both of those photos are technically right on. Good color balance etc...But are they pleasing to the eye? To some they are, to others they are not.

I don't care to shoot the traditional side on shot that so many collectors want. I prefer the airplane in flight or better just at that moment of liftoff or touch down. But as many viewers of photos as there are on anet there are that many opinions of what they like and don't like.

There is no one answer to the question you asked...There are far too many variables.  Smile


User currently offlineJoge From Finland, joined Feb 2000, 1444 posts, RR: 38
Reply 5, posted (12 years 3 hours ago) and read 4163 times:

1. It's looks like it's an aircraft 'in a box', kind of unnatural.

I agree with you, Eric. The other unnatural I've seen there is the half-of-the-plane-visible-shots. Also, if the picture is not taken right from the side and cropped that tight, the plane is not centered anymore.

However, here's my favorite kind of composition:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jorgos Tsambikakis


 Big grin


User currently offlineCkw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 784 posts, RR: 15
Reply 6, posted (12 years 2 hours ago) and read 4120 times:

Speaking as a photographer I'm very much inclined to agree with Eric on this one - I do find some of these shots unattractive, however, they meet A.net acceptance criteria and so do belong here. We do not have a rejection category for "composition", and frankly, if we did, I think the screener's life would be unbearable. While some may disagree, rejection is really based on objective & quantifiable criteria - introducing a purely subjective element would result in endless arguement.

While this site is obviously about photographs, it is not, in my opinion primarily about "photography". I've said this before, but its worth repeating - we have 2 types of contributors: spotters who like to record their sightings on film and photographers who happen to use aircraft as a subject.

The former look down on the latter for their lack of knowledge about aircraft types, flight schedules etc. etc. and the latter wonder at the spotter's seeming lack of artistic insight. Different interests, different priorities. A.net does, I think, a pretty good job of bringing the two together - the spotters have learned that you have to do a little more than just catch a reg on film, and the photographers have learned that sometimes you have to reign in your wilder creative impulses.

Much good can come from this, each can learn from the other. The best answer to Eric's concerns is to upload well composed images and hope that
others will learn from this ... indeed, if you look at the recent first pic/latest pic thread, I think you'll find evidence that this does indeed happen.



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineZander From Sweden, joined Feb 2000, 610 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (12 years 2 hours ago) and read 4109 times:

I see what you mean Eric...I fully agree!


User currently offlineUSAFHummer From United States of America, joined May 2000, 10685 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (12 years 1 hour ago) and read 4100 times:

While I personally am not a fan of cropping extremely tight like the pictures shown in the original post (I prefer the Joge-style shot with a significant amount of background regardless of scenario), I do see that it is a very subjective issue and would probably be hard for the screeners to come up with standards for...


Chief A.net college football stadium self-pic guru
User currently offlineEricBelgium From Belgium, joined Mar 2003, 77 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (11 years 12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3983 times:

Thanks for all the replys,

Soon it's uploading time with lots of action and background  Innocent

greetz, Eric

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 For The Screeners - Screening Image posted Mon Dec 5 2005 23:34:42 by Vasanthd
A Question For The Screeners posted Sun Apr 14 2002 21:49:11 by Jer32382
Yet Another Question For The Screeners posted Mon Jan 21 2002 22:58:48 by Scooter
Camera Angle: For The Screeners posted Sun Dec 2 2001 00:31:02 by EGGD
Advice For The Screeners posted Wed Jul 25 2001 20:36:29 by Mirage
Too Much Work For Screeners To Help Out? posted Fri Jul 29 2005 16:49:45 by Spencer
Thanks For The Tips From The Screeners posted Thu Jun 9 2005 09:53:03 by QANTAS077
2X TC Too Much For The 70-200 F4 L? posted Thu May 27 2004 23:29:05 by MNeo
Keep An Eye Out For The Re-painted WN Shamu Jet :) posted Thu May 30 2002 21:38:13 by Ah414211
Is This A Picture For The Database? posted Thu Nov 30 2006 18:18:20 by JetCrazy