Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Rejection Question.  
User currently offlineN737MC From Canada, joined Oct 2000, 678 posts, RR: 16
Posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1809 times:

Guys,

So I tried the composition photo I was looking to get, much like Bo's photos. It got rejected for bad distance, as I understand that the aircraft is in the distance a bit. But my point of the shot is clearly shown! I mean common, i see photos like this everyday in the DB with aircraft in the distance, that should be bad distance.

What is the reason behind mine? I mean, look at it. Can you understand the reasoning behind it? Im sure you can, as its another form of a shot trying to depict the aircraft and surroundings. Someone explain why some photos can be excepted that are distant aircraft shots and some can't. Is there somewhere that says certain ones can or can't?

Help please.

Here is the photo

http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=cfdsn.jpg

Thanks

Aaron Mandolesi
Denver, Colorado


9 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineN737MC From Canada, joined Oct 2000, 678 posts, RR: 16
Reply 1, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1794 times:

As an example of a photo in the db that should be bad distance. Not knocking his photo or anything, because it is great, it is just he is focusing on whats around the aircraft and so am I, but I get rejected for it? Doesn't make sense to me. Im sure I can find more.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tim Samples





Thanks

Aaron Mandolesi
Denver, Colorado


User currently offlineVafi88 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 3116 posts, RR: 17
Reply 2, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1780 times:

Aaron, You showed me the photo a few hours ago, and I understood the artistic environment you were trying to pursue in your photo, and you did it, but I was sure (and I told you) that some screeners would NOT. If I was a screener, I'd see that besides only the aircraft, I also get a background, that's not only blue skies.


Fantastic shot, but I guess many can't understand that there is more to a great photo than the object itself.



I'd like to elect a president that has a Higher IQ than a retarted ant.
User currently offlineAn-225 From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 3950 posts, RR: 40
Reply 3, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1789 times:

I think that it should have been accepted. The cloud picture is stunning, it emphasizes the aircraft surroundings, it is in the database and it is popular. The rejected shot should have been accepted too. The plane is closer, and downtown adds nicely to the picture. I also remember other pictures in the database from that location.

Awaiting the screeners' response.

Alex.



Money does not bring you happiness. But it's better to cry in your own private limo than on a cold bus stop.
User currently offlineFlyf15 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1794 times:

Aaron, thats a great pic. I'd love to see it (and others like it) in the database...good luck man.

User currently offlineCicadajet From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1770 times:

Thats a nice shot Aaron; I can understand you giving it a try on getting accepted. But I wouldn't see it as a sure thing....its on the borderline of what gets accepted.

I wouldn't take the BadDistance rejection literally; its a screener judgement call. Though, I bet a 747 or A340 might be just enough to work from where you took that shot.

Well, take all that for what its worth. I'm not a screener, and I get plenty of rejections of my own.  Smile

Tom


User currently offlineKereru From New Zealand, joined Jun 2003, 873 posts, RR: 45
Reply 6, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1766 times:

Aaron,

The aircraft looks like its stuck away to the right corner and its a little too light although the exposure looks okay. If some of the right hand side was cropped out to bring the aircraft nearer the center but not dead center I would like it better. Thats just my personal opinion.

Had the aircraft been lower in the frame I think it would have been accepted or at least by me anyway.

Colin



Good things take Time.
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 7, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1739 times:

Aaron,
That is a nice shot! I do kind of agree with Colin about it not being the center of attention though. In Tim's shot there is no doubt. That is about the only difference from my point of view.

Appeal that sucker.

Jeff


User currently offlineFallingeese From Canada, joined Apr 2001, 2097 posts, RR: 17
Reply 8, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1739 times:

It should be accepted in my opinion. Looks great to me, just like it did in person.

Mind you I could be biased since I was standing next to you when it was taken....but it's one hell of a photo.

If anything it should have been rejected for badhaze....damn smog, and smoke.



Mark McWhirter...Contrails Photography
User currently offlineBO__einG From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2771 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (11 years 4 months 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1734 times:

Its a real nice shot Aaron.
But from my experience,these kinds of shots won't be added.
I have tried numerous times to get my own pictures added and the planes I captured were not mere A320s. They were PRESIDENTIAL AIRCRAFT (747 and IL96). Much larger and more SIGNIFICANT due to the fact that it carried a president for petes sake, but it was CONTINUOUSLY rejected by screeners for baddistance just like yours.

I really do not understand the logic behind this. Not all but SOME screeners add pictures such as the example you provided with more simpler backdrops while other more dynamic/appealing ones get rejected. Quite irrational if you ask me. Its like trying to show something different gives me nothing but the shaft. From the replies I have read I am more than convinced that the general populous agrees that such a photo is infact worthy of a add.

Its also funny to note how for other sites when I uploaded, these photos get added and the screener who added it even puts in a nice comment in the remark field of the email. Not to mention decent amounts of hits came along with it. So why won't the largest and most prestigious aviation site recognize what I have done?

So what if some technical rules are not met. There are whats called exceptions where guidelines can be broken for some special shots under certain circumstances.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=52286
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=52285
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=16596

Those are 3 examples. By the way, thanks for making such a post Aaron. I'll put you on my respected list since you love this type of shot from Calgary Smile
and your fighting for rationality.
Perhaps with some screeners gone and a whackload of new screeners, maybe this time these guys will have a different viewpoint and that may increase my chances of addition when I upload for the 1000th time.

My advice, keep trying! If there are some minor glitches which you can easily improve (perhaps reduce the effect of the haze in photoshop by adjusting a wee bit the curves or contrasts), do take the chance to make it that much a bit better. Then the shot should be unstoppable!



Chance favors the prepared mind.
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...
Rejection Question posted Fri May 19 2006 06:28:21 by 777MechSys
Short Rejection Question posted Sun Jan 15 2006 14:54:37 by Maartenw
Quick Rejection Question... posted Sat Jan 14 2006 04:39:27 by Mattbna
Rejection Question posted Fri Dec 9 2005 11:00:09 by Scbriml
A Rejection Question. posted Mon Nov 28 2005 14:57:45 by Chris78cpr
Rejection Question And Complaint posted Sun Jun 19 2005 20:29:26 by APFPilot1985
Another Rejection Question posted Fri May 13 2005 22:31:43 by BRAVO7E7
Rejection Question posted Mon Apr 11 2005 05:33:07 by APFPilot1985
Rejection Question posted Mon Mar 14 2005 20:11:55 by APFPilot1985
Badmotiv Rejection Question posted Wed Dec 8 2004 08:00:22 by QantasA332