aagold
Posts: 542
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 6:32 am

Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:08 am

If I have any complaint at all about Airliners.Net this is definitely it as you might have guessed by the number of posts I've started and added to on the topic. I thought we'd made measurable progress back in January when Johan responded positively to the thread I started then. But, now, not quite six months later, I see we're back where we started.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dietmar Schreiber
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andy Martin - AirTeamImages



These were the two existing shots in the data base before I uploaded my recent shots from AUA. When I returned from AUA I uploaded three shots ...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Art Brett - AirTeamImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Art Brett - AirTeamImages



The two above were accepted. And the below rejected (resized for display here without additional editing).



Now, the last time I went through this back in January (see the original thread at: http://www.airliners.net/discussions/aviation_photography/read.main/116550/6/ ) Johan added the following response:

Baddouble can only be used when the photographer has similar photos of the same aircraft already in the database (or upload queue). "Similar" is not an exact word but photo screening is not an exact science. Let's all agree upon that before I go on.

Screeners can use Badcommon if you upload photos of aircraft that we already have a large number of similar shots of.

If you upload more than one shot of the same aircraft/date/location you run a high risk of getting just one of them accepted and the rest rejected with baddouble. I do encourage you to upload more than one shot if the additional photos are of very high additional "value" (another vague word). If you upload a full side view do not expect to get a close-up of the nose or tail accepted. If you upload one take-off shot, other similar take-off shots are likely to be rejected etc. Such are the rules we've decided to adopt after years of experience here at Airliners.net. Still, if the aircraft is very rare or the shots are amazing you can get a hundred photos accepted of the same aircraft. "Rare" and "amazing" are, as always, defined by the screeners. If you disagree with them (which all of you will do at one time or another), use the appeal function and I'll have a look at them (although I've understood the appeal is working rather poorly right now, I am about to fix that).

As for the baddouble rejection pointed out by Art, I am siding with the photographer on this one. It seems this can be a case of "high additional value" as the shot is clearly very good (although I haven't seen a high-res version). It is very different from the first shot and would in my view be a valuable addition to the database. I suggest the photo is appealed (or better, re-uploaded as the appeal script is working so-so at the moment).

I will discuss the issue with the screeners.

Regards,
Johan


Comparing the three shots that I uploaded for this aircraft to what Johan wrote I find the following:

  1. Definitely not bad common with only two shots in the database beforehand.

  2. Didn't upload multiple side-on shots or a nose tail shot.

  3. Did upload a rotation shot on takeoff and Johan wrote: If you upload one take-off shot, other similar take-off shots are likely to be rejected etc. Personally I wouldn't call the rejected shot "similar" in any way to the rotation shot.

  4. I'd say a 727-24C is pretty rare these days and I only tried to get three accepted not 100.


I can't believe the above while at the same time I find these three pictures taken on the same day, by the same photographer, of the same plane and, to top it all off, two were accepted sequentially obviously by the same screener. (No offense intended to you Alexander.)


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alexander Sohre
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alexander Sohre



and


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alexander Sohre



And, just for the record: there are 95 other pictures of that aircraft in the database ... I would say the three above are sufficiently the same ... and it's definitely not a rare aircraft by any means. Am I missing something about those shots that I should know to believe three of them deserve being in the database. If I am, please tell me what it is as I haven't a clue.

Can we fix this thing once and for all so we can eliminate posts like this. Please Smile

Art
 
futterman
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 11:04 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:52 am

Well, the majority of us here are not crew members, so there's not much we (or, at least I) can say about it other than that you present an extremely valid case.

Unfortunately, this post and your last post (baddouble posts. How ironic  Big grin), are nothing more than futile attempts at correcting what seems to be a combination of human error and misconceptions. I tend to give folks the benefit of the doubt--and a lot of it--so I think that it's entirely possible that in the case of the three nearly identical LTU A330 shots, they may have been screened by three different screeners simultaneously, hence the inadvertent acceptance of all three shots. Why it hasn't been rectified is beyond me, though.

I can't see how Johan could really fix this problem...but it IS frustrating and is definitely a sign that something has to change. Be it an amendment to the screening process, or something else.

Baddouble can only be used when the photographer has similar photos of the same aircraft already in the database (or upload queue). "Similar" is not an exact word but photo screening is not an exact science. Let's all agree upon that before I go on.

...

If you upload more than one shot of the same aircraft/date/location you run a high risk of getting just one of them accepted and the rest rejected with baddouble. I do encourage you to upload more than one shot if the additional photos are of very high additional "value" (another vague word). If you upload a full side view do not expect to get a close-up of the nose or tail accepted. If you upload one take-off shot, other similar take-off shots are likely to be rejected etc. Such are the rules we've decided to adopt after years of experience here at Airliners.net. Still, if the aircraft is very rare or the shots are amazing you can get a hundred photos accepted of the same aircraft. "Rare" and "amazing" are, as always, defined by the screeners. If you disagree with them (which all of you will do at one time or another), use the appeal function and I'll have a look at them (although I've understood the appeal is working rather poorly right now, I am about to fix that).


What's bold, and especially underlined is what I believe to be the screening process's tragic flaw. There shouldn't be this many 'vague' ideas and processes involved in screening. Leaving acceptance to the screener's discretion is making this anything but Airliners.net. Now it's more like 'www.AndyMartin.net' or 'www.CarlosBorda.net.' (Sorry to have to use your names, guys. Trust me, there's no underlying connotation.) I had a shot that I privately showed to one screener who thoroughly enjoyed it and saw it as an acceptance, but it was rejected. Why? Because the screening process is an opinionated, biased procedure, and not a pre-defined process as it is essentially claimed to be.

As I said...this is the tragic flaw. Sorry for your rejection, Art...I do believe that Johan or the screeners will recognize this mishap and accept it, but it shouldn't have to be done like that.


Brian
What the FUTT?
 
FlyingColors
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 3:15 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Aga

Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:12 am

Looks like the "double standard " of screening to me  Smile

That 727 is HOT!

Mike
Moon chaser!
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:18 am

I think that the LTU A330 must have been an oversight / error, IF (repeat IF) they were all taken on the same date - I'm not going to open them and give them a hit each just to verify that they were taken as a sequence.

As to your LAS 727 pictures... Well, some variations in interpretation of Johan's guidance is possible, maybe even likely, as even he himself admits!  Nuts

A
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:20 am

FlyingColors said: Looks like the "double standard " of screening to me

There are no double standards in screening, just variations in the interpretation of the same rules - see above. Such is human nature.

Andy

PS: Art, have you appealed if you disagree with the decision, as Johan suggested you should do in such cases?
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
Dehowie
Posts: 1067
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 8:41 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:18 am

G'day Andy
Don't you think this one is pretty easy to define and fix.
IE If uploading more than one photo of the same aircraft on the same date/location a maximum of 3 photo's is permitted peiod end of story sorry no exceptions.IE pick your best shots.
All three photo's must be different perspectives by an angle of at least 45 degree's regardless of phase of flight.
Easy to define,easy to understand and easy to implement.
What do you think?
Darren
2EOS1DX,EF14.2.8LII,17TS,85/1.2,16-35L,24-70LII,24L,70-200F2.8LII,100-400,300/400/500/800L
 
Dazed767
Posts: 4967
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 11:55 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 12:11 pm

Regarding the LTU - Shot on the same day, 2 were accepted May 30, the other May 31. Mistakes happen, but 2 should be removed from the DB then.
 
scottysair
Posts: 6442
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:07 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:11 pm

Is that something going on with those photos and what is wrong with them of those photos?
 
sulman
Posts: 1963
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:09 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:52 pm

Art,

It has been tightened a little bit in my recent experience. A while back I uploaded two shots of the BBMF Lancaster. One was side on and the other was three quarters (I thought both were appealing enough to upload) but the three-quarter shot was rejected as baddouble. I didn't agree with it but I respected the screener's decision and just swallowed it - and uploaded the rejected one elsewhere.

It's possible that the screeners have an eye on the burgeoning size of the database; I don't know, I can't read their minds. Andy is quite correct in reinforcing that there will inevitably be variations in interpretation, and certainly there will be occasions where images creep through when perhaps they shouldn't - understandable given the huge amount submissions.

Either way, you've got many, many great images here Art. Sure it's dissappointing that the rejected shot (it is pleasing) didn't get in but don't sweat it, other opportunities will come your way.
It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
 
Joge
Posts: 1386
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2000 3:26 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 6:28 pm

Sorry, I can't help myself stop laughing!  Laugh out loud

So again, baddouble is the same a/c from the same photographer, badcommon same aircraft from different photographers. Now if you ask me, I wouldn't care less seeing the same aircraft from different angles from the same photographer. Instead, having 10 pictures of the same aircraft from the same angle... Well, some pictures even taken 15 minutes after each other.

This is what I mean:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Janne Laukkonen / FAP - Finnish Aviation Photography
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Janne Laukkonen / FAP - Finnish Aviation Photography




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Harri Koskinen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Arttu Laaksonen




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jussi Kettunen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Lauri Huima




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mikko Pietarinen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mikko Pietarinen




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Juuso Silfsten
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jussi Kettunen




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Juuso Silfsten
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Janne Laukkonen / FAP - Finnish Aviation Photography




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jussi Kettunen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Harri Koskinen




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Harri Koskinen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Lauri Huima




Sorry I'm using these photos again as an example, but this phenomenon happens really often in Helsinki.

And those who are interested to see even more of those, can do a Cross Data Search.

And I think Art's rejected picture is better than those two earlier ones. I thought that a "similar" picture can be accepted if the quality is better.

Show must go on...

-Joge
Bula!
 
LGW
Posts: 4281
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 6:07 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:10 pm

Hi all,

This is no dig at Art himself but in my view you should be allowed a couple of shots of the same aircraft from the same shoot if from different angles but its self screening thats the key.

Imagine if all of us uploaded 3 shots from every aircraft we saw takeoff! The database would send us all asleep!

As I say I think a couple of a set is fine but I just feel its down to the photographer to select 1 or 2 from a set which they like the most. If I uploaded 3 shots or more from aircraft I shoot taking off or landing I would have thousands of shots in the db.

Out of your 3 727 shots I like the rejected one the most, if it where me I would have uploaded that one first to make sure it didnt get baddouble but of course out of the 3 you may have another favourite.

Cheers

Ben Pritchard
 
Joge
Posts: 1386
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2000 3:26 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:25 pm

Imagine if all of us uploaded 3 shots from every aircraft we saw takeoff! The database would send us all asleep!

That's right, Ben. Therefore, it should be implemented with the rarity of the aircraft/airline and photo quality. Say, 3 shots of the already legendary BA A319 compared to 3 shots of Air Koryo Tu-134. Anyway, there's only 1 picture of the latter...


View Large View Medium

Photo © James Fuhrman



EDIT:

Whoops, sorry, that was only one picture of that aircraft from North Korea, there are more from outside Korea. More pics wouldn't hurt, though.  Big grin

-Joge

[Edited 2004-07-08 12:30:42]
Bula!
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:46 pm

That Air Koryo picture...  Wow!

That BASTARD (and I use that term advisedly) stole my picture...  Pissed

Mine on the left (photoid 191941) and the thief's on the right (photoid 559953)

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andy Martin - AirTeamImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © James Fuhrman


His isn't even taken in Pyong Yang, as he claims - its taken in Shenyang, because I took the bloody picture!  Angry

I think 559953 as illustrated above isn't much longer for the database, and I don't think James Fuhrman has much of a future on this site! Big grin

Andy

PS: Thanks for that Joge
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:51 pm

Talk about a coincidence Big grin

Wietse
Wietse de Graaf
 
Joge
Posts: 1386
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2000 3:26 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 7:59 pm

Np, Andy.

Seems like the picture has been removed already.

-Joge
Bula!
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:10 pm

Yup... Gone - thanks to whoever did that for me.

Adds new meaning to the word baddouble though, doesn't it! Big grin

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
Granite
Posts: 5026
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:55 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 8:20 pm

Andy

What a twat.......not you but the James guy.

Good to know that we can now use the Ban function with ease. No pissing about with the screeners any longer.

Cheers

Gary
 
Zege
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:03 pm

Joge on reply 9

Sorry I'm using these photos again as an example, but this phenomenon happens really often in Helsinki.

Indeed Joge, indeed. Sometimes two or three photographers can upload picture which is taken same time, because they do not know each other and therefore there is no communication between them. That is not so bad, if plane is rare. You don't know what is uploaded before you and if it get accepted. That is not of course case on those pictures you put on your message.

So far only thing which has been a bit annoying for me is that here is a few guys who don't even bother to look from db if they already have upload picture of that plane. They can upload almost once a week, almost same kind of picture of some extremely rare plane in here like OH-LPD. And that because each time they are on EFHK they basically upload every picture on a.net. And yes, even this summer is not a good one (lot of rain and otherwise bad weather) they are here now pretty often...

But hey, I don't say that even photographers know each other there can not be "communication failure" Big grin


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Janne Laukkonen / FAP - Finnish Aviation Photography


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © E.S. / FAP - Finnish Aviation Photography



But we try to avoid that...
 
Jormy
Posts: 220
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2000 4:36 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:37 pm

Yeah, but that particular plane is rare enough to have at least two "baddoubles"  Big thumbs up

-Janne
 
Joge
Posts: 1386
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2000 3:26 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Fri Jul 09, 2004 12:39 am

Indeed Joge, indeed. Sometimes two or three photographers can upload picture which is taken same time, because they do not know each other and therefore there is no communication between them.

So that's why we should take those guys first for a beer which after they know us and can start asking for every picture if they can upload them here or not.  Big thumbs up

Yeah, but that particular plane is rare enough to have at least two "baddoubles"

That is true, but even then I would like to see different angles, let's say, one of you had upload a picture of the plane from a bit front angle and the other like it is now.

Oh sorry, the other IS a bit more from the front!  Wink/being sarcastic

Another point is, that people upload pictures too quickly to this site. For instance, 10 guys all take pictures of the same plane, upload the same day the pictures were taken... Checking for existing pictures won't help in this case, the responsibility is now on the screeners, will they spot the badcommons or not.

Zege, is this what you mean?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Harri Koskinen
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Harri Koskinen



Well, the angle is different again...  Big grin

-Joge
Bula!
 
Jormy
Posts: 220
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2000 4:36 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Fri Jul 09, 2004 12:51 am

So that's why we should take those guys first for a beer...

What if these guys are something like 15 years old? Big grin Anyway, I'm affraid this "tactic" won't work in long run but just for some occasional uploads...

That is true, but even then I would like to see different angles

That's true and that's what we're trying to do within FAP if we upload pics of same planes. Anyway, as Zege pointed out, those HS-SEB pics were a "communication error"  Big grin

-Janne
 
Joge
Posts: 1386
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2000 3:26 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Fri Jul 09, 2004 7:32 pm

Anyway, back to the original topic:

Art, please let us know if your appeal/re-upload will be accepted. Really like the last picture!

That's true and that's what we're trying to do within FAP
But I'm not in FAP...  Wink/being sarcastic

-Joge
Bula!
 
Zege
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Fri Jul 09, 2004 8:27 pm

Well, Joge I don't want start any naming here. Maybe he has that kind of attitude or maybe I was talking about someone else.  Insane But sometimes it get a little bit annoying if photographer's pictures are also uploaded to the Other Site as well. And I mean exactly same pictures and over and over again.

Anyway that kind of thing I meant. But hey, who am I to decide who and what can be upload here. That screeners and admins business.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy And we critically look Mr Koskinen's pictures shown on your message, both of those got more hits than for instance this one of mine
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © E.S. / FAP - Finnish Aviation Photography

.

So rare or not, it doesn't always tell is that something people want to see.

And what comes to the original subject, I like that picture which got rejected. Even (sorry to say) I personally like more to see whole plane and not just a part of it Big grin

Zege from HEL
 
EGGD
Posts: 11880
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:01 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 3:58 am

I think 3 shots of the same aircraft is too much. However, saying that why was the most interesting angle of the aircraft rejected? Thats what really gets me, it happens so often that maybe you have 2 or 3 shots where 1 is a bit special and 2 are good quality but boring and the 2 boring shots get accepted, whilst the special one is rejected for one reason or another.
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 4:02 am

it happens so often that maybe you have 2 or 3 shots where 1 is a bit special and 2 are good quality but boring and the 2 boring shots get accepted, whilst the special one is rejected for one reason or another.

Maybe the blame should be on the photographer. Why not upload the special one by itself?
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Aga

Sat Jul 10, 2004 4:53 am

Maybe the blame should be on the photographer. Why not upload the special one by itself?

I agree Chad. Blame the photographer:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas



 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:09 am

Thanks, that was a series of shots.. HAHA. Thanks for plugging my shots, taint!

And you plugged them backwards, its supposed to go 1-3 not 3-1... Nice try though.



[Edited 2004-07-09 22:12:41]
 
rotor1
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:57 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:12 am

I totally agree. Photographers really should pick the technically and asthetically best shot (or two) and upload them rather than dumping the entire memory card onto the que.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chad Thomas



-Mike
The best aviation photo I've ever taken was rejected by Airliners.net
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:17 am

Mike,

Should I explain my signature to you in person?

Maybe bad double should also mean getting kicked out of the same area near an airport more than a couple times.
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:27 am

Chad,
I'll interpret the above response as you having trouble finding any argument
giving validity to your previous statement.
/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:32 am

Say what?

I had some shots rejected from that upload for baddouble.


Lots of haters here, I must go. Thanks for plugging my shots folks.

[Edited 2004-07-09 22:50:18]
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:36 am

Only it's been said here over and over that is not the way to do it.
/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
rotor1
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:57 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:39 am



-Mike
The best aviation photo I've ever taken was rejected by Airliners.net
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Aga

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:42 am

I uploaded them and left it in the hands of a highly acclaimed, talented screener to choose which ones he thought should be uploaded.

Wow. An admission of a lack of self-editing ability and screener suck-up all in one sentence. Nice work!

Maybe bad double should also mean getting kicked out of the same area near an airport more than a couple times.

I know it's tough for those with weak arguments, but try to stay on-topic please.

 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:46 am

Well, maybe Ill remember that on my next flight, or two, or three.
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Aga

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:54 am

Chad...

The boom operator could have taken those same shots. All your talent is in your camera's processor.

Boast away about your access if it's all you can do.

Back on-topic, your C-130 shots are the classic example of baddouble IMO. The three images say EXACTLY the same thing. One of those would have sufficed. There is nothing that transpired from the first frame to the last that is different.



 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:56 am

>Lots of haters here<

I see no signs of hatred Chad. I just see a guy claiming something and then when it's revealed he doesn't go by that stuff himself, well people get a little bit wondering perhaps?

Great Phantom shots, but why 10?

/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 5:59 am

All your talent is in your camera's processor.

Wow, that was harsh! I guess I should stop shooting then... But, since that is what you want, I must keep on pressing.






[Edited 2004-07-09 23:01:02]
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Aga

Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:00 am

Quit editing your posts Chad. It's an admission of wrongdoing.

 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9042
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:03 am

lol Chad, the emotional tampon of the Airliners.net Aviation Photography Forum.

What a dick.
 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Aga

Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:19 am

This little tantrum by Chad illustrates two problems with this site.

1.) While Art is getting his very good and interesting shots rejected for baddouble, Chad's dumping his card, clogging the queue and wasting screeners' time by making THEM edit FOR him. And somehow, shotgun theory I presume, some baddoubles get in the DB.

And in the insult to injury dept...

2.) Armchair screening in the forums mixed in with a whole buttload of hypocracy. He bitches about another photographer's ability to self-edit, and yet he's one of the worst offenders.

And to top it off, after getting schooled, he backtracks and edits his posts to paint himself the martyr.

Name and shame. You got named Chad Thomas.

As for the "hating" going on, if I were you I'd quit calling the kettle black.



 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:37 am

He bitches about another photographer's ability to self-edit, and yet he's one of the worst offenders.

I should have better explained my statement. My bad.


it happens so often that maybe you have 2 or 3 shots where 1 is a bit special and 2 are good quality but boring and the 2 boring shots get accepted, whilst the special one is rejected for one reason or another.

If there are 3 shots of the same aircraft, with one shot being the "special one", I would upload the special one. Why chance that "special one" not getting uploaded by uploading all 3, when obviously there are different interpretations to the "baddouble" theory. In that case, it is the photographers fault that the special one didnt get accepted.

Now,as far as my air refueling shots go, I tried to pick the ones that looked different (Clouds, different poses etc..)



I hope that clears things up.



 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:41 am

Mike,
I shot many more photos that day.

It was far from card dumping.
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:46 am

All I can say is I don't think there are enough Phantom shots in the database period. I would like to ask everyone to go out and shoot at least one.  Smile


If you don't want to upload them, just send them to me.  Big grin

-Jeff
(ex-USN Phantom Phixer)
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 6:57 am

Exitrow, Jan Mogren,

Your arguments go right along with the idea that airliners.net should not focus on the photographer's abilities or the artistic characteristics of the photos, but focus on having a database that has 1 of each aircraft, so a person can find any aircraft they are looking for...

I am sorry, but,in my opinion, that would be boring.

 
ExitRow
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2001 7:13 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Aga

Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:02 am

Your arguments go right along with the idea that airliners.net should not focus on the photographer's abilities or the artistic characteristics of the photos, but focus on having a database that has 1 of each aircraft, so a person can find any aircraft they are looking for...

Hahahahahahahaha... You obviously have NO CLUE as to what you're talking about.

Troll.
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:21 am

I was meaning to stay out of this, but with this remark:

Your arguments go right along with the idea that airliners.net should not focus on the photographer's abilities or the artistic characteristics of the photos, but focus on having a database that has 1 of each aircraft, so a person can find any aircraft they are looking for...

 Laugh out loud

Claiming the earth to be flat would be closer to the truth than this ... If there are 2 people on this site that are in absolute favor of the artistic image instead of a side on database, it would be William and Jan!
Wietse de Graaf
 
maiznblu_757
Posts: 4952
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 12:05 pm

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:29 am

If there are 2 people on this site that are in absolute favor of the artistic image instead of a side on database, it would be William and Jan!

Well, Weitse,

If that were the case, then why does Bill say this?


All your talent is in your camera's processor.

I have not once hyped up my photos or my abilities, but, now I must say, if he had an eye for style, artistic shots, he wouldnt have said that about my aerial shots.
 
wietse
Posts: 3630
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 12:49 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:38 am

It was a reaction to your "Dont hate; Appreciate" line. Surely the shots are artistic, but they are that way more by you simply being there than by anything else. Not really your artistic nature or skill. A lot of people could have taken those shots.

I am not saying your shots are not artistic or you are a bad photographer, just pointing out that your a2a shots are not that difficult to take. The difficult part is getting up there.
Wietse de Graaf
 
futterman
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2003 11:04 am

RE: Bad Double - Do We Have To Go Through This Again?

Sat Jul 10, 2004 7:47 am

Oy veh.

I have not once hyped up my photos or my abilities, but, now I must say, if he had an eye for style, artistic shots, he wouldnt have said that about my aerial shots.

So you're saying, sure enough, that your air to air photos are style and art personified? Hardly. They're just nice angles from a photographer that has some connections. Big whoop.

Just because you can get a seat behind the boom operator doesn't excuse the fact that they're standard, mediocre photos (however, it's not like you had much to work with). Bill is one of the few people in a position to challenge your artistic abilities, and he has. Just drop it. A debate over who has an eye for a good photo has nothing to do with Art's BadDouble rant, anyway.
What the FUTT?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests