KLAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (10 years 1 hour ago) and read 4189 times:
Well, I'm just gonna concentrate on uploading to one website now, its easier, and I've already chosen what website I'd like that to be. This website is turning into a buisness, and I'm in thise for the hobby and the fun.
I have a few pics here, but I wont be uploading anymore. It was fun though.
Thanks for all the help and support.
cheers, and, as we say here in the Alps, Have Foehn
Antoine, from CMF, who choosed to stay on A.net (156 photos in the database in less than one year, and I don't even have access to Airbus factory at TLS !!!)
Boieng747-400 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (10 years 1 hour ago) and read 4027 times:
Sad to see you go Clovis. Its really too bad your leaving here. I wish you good luck on the other site and hope to see you back here one day. Its sad to see soo many people leave these days
Bon Vent,
Tim (who continues to upload here and on pp.net)
UTA_flyinghigh From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 6495 posts, RR: 52 Reply 6, posted (10 years ago) and read 4014 times:
Too bad, one less frog on the site
I've been with a.net since 1998, and at the time it was a lot more good-natured and open to anyone with a 24*36 camera.
Nowadays, you need DLSR's in order to have any hope of having 98' style approval rates. This is supposed to be a site for aviation enthusiasts regardless of their views or budget, not a plaything for people with cameras that cost more than my car. I sincerely Johan will remember what it was like in the good old days.
Anyway Clovis, I'll be at LBG in June, maybe with a DSLR (if you can't beat 'em...)
Anyways, CMF spotters will still kick ass for a long time - 200+ pics of CMF and 462 pics for CMF spotters
Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
JayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 17 Reply 9, posted (9 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 3602 times:
I wonder how many photographers such as Clovis, Josh Rawlin and Mark Abbott have left A.net? Would be interesting to know. I still participate in the forums over here, but there is no way I would ever upload another photo in this database.
Too much of a hassle with the screeners. Not enough consistency in the screening process, in my opinion.
Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9444 posts, RR: 72 Reply 11, posted (9 years 12 months 14 hours ago) and read 3570 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Too much of a hassle with the screeners. Not enough consistency in the screening process, in my opinion.
Just had a look at some of your photos on jetphotos, and the quality just isn't there. I think it is pretty obnoxious of you to blame the screeners...
Posts like this are the equivalent of telling your date "I don't really like the service we get at Ruths Chris Steakhouse, so we'll go to the Sizzler instead"
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 53 Reply 12, posted (9 years 12 months 12 hours ago) and read 3541 times:
Royal,
I like Sizzler! Ate there twice on my last trip to Seattle...... But, your right...many leave blaming the screeners, when they should look harder at their own images......
JayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 17 Reply 14, posted (9 years 12 months 1 hour ago) and read 3446 times:
Look at some of my photos on this site. They are quality stuff. I don't see why all of a sudden my shots are "crap" and not worthy of A.net. I am not doing anything differently in terms of scanning, photoshopping, etc. in uploading to Jetphotos.net
As I have said earlier, I think this site is becoming way too concerned with digital images and I don't have those.
Also, who made you judge and jury of the photo quality of my shots?
EGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12426 posts, RR: 40 Reply 15, posted (9 years 12 months 1 hour ago) and read 3437 times:
Jay - you say your photos are quality stuff, but you also moan about how you need $1000's worth of equipment to get good photos.
Anyone can get photos into the database, I know people who are 12 or 13, have very cheap cameras and can still get photos in the database, I just think you are not willing to try new techniques or improve your photos especially when you get rejections.
Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9444 posts, RR: 72 Reply 16, posted (9 years 12 months 1 hour ago) and read 3442 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
I am sure your slides are top-notch Jay, but the scanning leaves a bit to be desired.
My point was you blame the screeners for your shots being rejected...but they aren't up to standard. How is it that Not enough consistency in the screening process be labeled the problem?
To my eye it looks to be that the standards of the site have matured. Perhaps the level of quality you upload was worthy in 2001, but 2 years on that isn't the case.
JayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 17 Reply 17, posted (9 years 12 months 1 hour ago) and read 3428 times:
I am "trying" new techniques and I already have $1000.00's of worth of equipment. Canon EOS 1VHS, Canon 70-200 f-2.8, Canon 28-70 f-2.8, and Canon 1.4x and Canon 2x converters.
I spoke with a friend of mine yesterday and asked him why some of my photos are not sharp. He said to try using a higher f-stop, so next time I hit the airport, I'll go try that out.
As for my scanner, not much else I can do, unless I want to shell out another $1500.00 or so for a Nikon Cool Scan...........
Just get tired of trying so hard to get one accepted these days and all I get are rejections.............it is just not fun anymore........
Joe pries From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1957 posts, RR: 55 Reply 18, posted (9 years 12 months 1 hour ago) and read 3414 times:
Jay, you have the best setup money can buy as far as Canon, theres no reason to get not sharp photos. for action shots just set to TV and about 500th of a second on sunny days (theres no need to shoot kodachrome on cloudy days unless you're into sadomasochism) and you should be ok. I can shoot with the 70-200 and 2x converter at full strength and still achieve great results.
Timdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 67 Reply 20, posted (9 years 12 months 1 hour ago) and read 3425 times:
Jay, equipment is not a problem. Maybe a new scanner will do, or work on your photoshop skills. Masking the sky, and other techniques can greatly improve your scans. I always try new things and try to get the best out of my slides.
As an example:On this photo I masked the sky and then used a little smartblur to eliminate most of the grain. Was shot with a Canon eos33, 28-105, and K64, and coolscan 4.
Timdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 67 Reply 22, posted (9 years 12 months ago) and read 3387 times:
Jay:
Use the "magic wand" tool to select the sky (works best with a blue sky without clouds, but can be done on a cloudy sky with some practice). You can then apply some smartblur to the selected area (I usually apply between 2.5 and 5.0). You can then also use "invert", so you select everything except the sky. You can apply unsharp mask to that area. This way the sky will be nice and smooth and the plane will be sharp. On all of my recent scans I have used this technique.
Timdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 67 Reply 24, posted (9 years 12 months ago) and read 3371 times:
Jay:
I snatched your famous Peter Max shot (hope you don't get angry ) and used smartblur (about 7.0) on the sky. You can see this can give quite a quality improvement.
25 Clickhappy: what I mean by "sweet spot" is finding harmony between your cameras output, the scan you create, and any post-process work in photoshop. One thing I h
26 Staffan: It's a good idea to mask away the sky before sharpening too, since it won't bring out noise in the sky. It also allows you to sharpen more without get
27 Ljungdahl: Jay, In this thread, reply #10 and #11, I've made my best to describe the technique I usually use when I'm scanning & editing images, maybe some of th
28 EGGD: Yes with what Staffan says, I think Colin, made a photoshop action that can use that does that.
29 Je89_w: I also have this photo I need help on : http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=jl743_52503.jpg I know the contrast level is a bit high
30 Ckw: Jerrold - first, you have to make an honest, objective analysis of the original. The main problem with this scan is that the shadows are completely bl
31 BO__einG: Interesting topic. Masking is basically highlighting an area to do work on. Whether it is the magic wand, lasso, or the box.. Je89.w what kind of scan
32 Shawn Patrick: The priorities of the site have definetly changed over time, that's expected. When airliners.net first opened up to submissions, there were few photos
33 Bruce: "new types, new locations"...... hmmmmmmm, I may try and get to the Columbus Air Show this weekend. There's only 1 pic on the database from there and
34 An-225: Hmm, this thread has deviated way off-topic. By the way, the question persists - where IS Skymonster??? Alex.
35 N907CL: Where is Skymonster? ! http://www.jetcollector.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3617[Edited 2003-05-29 05:37:54]
36 An-225: Hmm, great photographers gone from this site - Richard Silagi, Tom Hildreth, Clovis Bouhrier (I hope I spelled his last name right), Mark Abbott, and
37 Boeingholiday: yes it is, I really liked the posts of "skymonster"....
38 Timdegroot: Sorry for continuing OT, but: "bland sideshots" "I'm talking about the boring sideshot type pictures" Maybe you don't like sideshots Shawn, but there
39 Shawn Patrick: Tim, Read my post more carefully. What I said is the market for sideshots has already been cornered. Now, Johan can't refuse them, but he can refuse l
40 Cicadajet: Someone once wrote... "No individual photographer is larger than airliners.net itself, whether that photographer is a screener or a long standing pho
41 Mikephotos: If you want to go out and spend thousands of dollars just to take sideshots to upload to airliners.net, go ahead. To each his own. I have invested sev
42 LGW: I love viewing Michael's, Carlos', Joe's, Tim De Groot's side on approach and ground shots they are stunning to look at...I find although I love an ar
43 Shawn Patrick: Oh, it seems like I veered a little bit off topic by giving you my opinions, oh well. The main point I was trying to get across is "stop whining about
44 Wietse: lol, As some of you might have noticed, I have been doing some side on approach shots myself lately... I indeed find a great side on action shot with
45 Shawn Patrick: Weitse, I woudn't really consider those type of shots to be "bland sideshots", to use my own term. Those are more action shots, which are definetly ve
46 USAFHummer: Well this thread has gone amazingly off topic...so Ill just try to swing things a little more on topic by giving a belated goodbye to Clovis from the
47 Timdegroot: Yes Shawn quality standards are and should be high for sideshots on A.net , although like Mike said, they are nowhere near to what some collectors req
48 N178UA: Hey Michael I also love sideshots! I agree with all your views
49 Je89_w: I also love sideshots! I agree with all your views Me too! Jerrold
52 N178UA: WOW! Just got a blast What a great shot 50mm on the ramp! Another great Kodachrome example by the NYboyz! You guys rule! from Bad Boy Sam, time to sca
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 13975 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8356 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 246 posts, 
From France, joined Mar 2002, 4885 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 6495 posts, 
From Canada, joined Oct 2000, 676 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
