ryangooner
Posts: 956
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 4:56 am

Baddark, Why?

Sat Jul 16, 2005 11:55 am

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/a40agnchh24.jpg

This is a dawn shot, taken at LHR, Ive had similar shots added before, with the same brightness level. I really feel this shot shouldnt be brightened any more or else it will lose its early morning feeling.

Here is a similar early morning shot:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Christopher Hammarborg




What do you all reckon?
ooh to ooh to be ooh to be a gooner!
 
QANTAS077
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:08 pm

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sat Jul 16, 2005 12:14 pm

lovely shot! not dark from where i'm sitting...
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sat Jul 16, 2005 12:18 pm

Quoting Ryangooner (Thread starter):
What do you all reckon?

It's dark, and the sky is flat grey. Just bad timing, as it certainly would look much better 30-40 minutes later.
 
LGW
Posts: 4281
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2000 6:07 pm

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sat Jul 16, 2005 4:18 pm

Ryan,

To my eyes it is a little dark, almost too contrasty. The engines and belly are no very well illuminated.

This is the thing with sunrise/sunset some you just have to keep bin because the lights was not quite right.

Cheers

Ben Pritchard
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sat Jul 16, 2005 4:55 pm

Quoting Ryangooner (Thread starter):
What do you all reckon?

1.) Theres a name mismatch between the name in the profile of the thread starter and the name on the photographs.?!?!?!
2.) Any other reasons given on the rejected shot linked here?

[Edited 2005-07-16 10:08:06]

[Edited 2005-07-16 10:09:03]
-
 
fergulmcc
Posts: 1877
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 8:36 pm

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sat Jul 16, 2005 5:33 pm

Ryan

Don't take this the wrong way but you can't compare the accepted shot to yours as the paint is not the same. The SA 747 is white which can look bright in almost any condition and worse in sunny weather. The Gulf, I think thats the airline, is a dark and cream paint and would therefore need better light conditions so yes I would say bad dark. Also note the engines on your shot, very dark, while not on the SA 747.

Just my take on that.

Hope that helps.

Fergul Big grin  sun 
Zambian Airways, Where the Eagles fly free!!
 
ryangooner
Posts: 956
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 4:56 am

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:30 pm

Peter

Your quite correct, Chris Hammorborg is over at my gaff as we speak and we had a few beers last night and posted this thread, so full marks on the discrepancy!

Its Chris's thread and he's asking the questions not me!

sorry for the confusion!

but Chris's question still stands!

Ryan
ooh to ooh to be ooh to be a gooner!
 
Jan Mogren
Posts: 2014
Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2000 2:47 am

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:36 pm

The shot needs rotation too.

/JM
AeroPresentation - Airline DVD's filmed in High Definition
 
ChrisH
Posts: 1120
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 4:25 am

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sat Jul 16, 2005 6:44 pm

Quoting Jan Mogren (Reply 7):
The shot needs rotation too.

Its leveled to the radar tower.

Ah well, I just liked the subject matter a lot, with the morning lineup of planes at the terminals etc. No biggie.
what seems to be the officer, problem?
 
Granite
Posts: 5026
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:55 pm

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sat Jul 16, 2005 7:04 pm

Hi all

Flat colours and jagged.

Regards

Gary
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sun Jul 17, 2005 3:16 am

Quoting Ryangooner (Reply 6):
Chris's question still stands!

Mine also because it was NOT rejected for baddark
-
 
san747
Posts: 4344
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 10:03 am

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sun Jul 17, 2005 4:28 am

Quoting Ryangooner (Thread starter):

I think your rejected pic is better than the SA pic...
Scotty doesn't know...
 
ChrisH
Posts: 1120
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2004 4:25 am

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sun Jul 17, 2005 7:53 am

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 10):
Mine also because it was NOT rejected for baddark

It was appealed and rejected for baddark. Got badangle first but it's actually levelled. No matter though, had a similar shot added today which went through without warnings.
what seems to be the officer, problem?
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Baddark, Why?

Sun Jul 17, 2005 5:26 pm

Quoting ChrisH (Reply 12):
It was appealed and rejected for baddark

If it was submitted with the e-mail adress attached to the photo plugged above then it was not appealed because in the rejected list of this e-mail adress it still shows up as rejected badangle, badpersonal and not as appealed and rejected.
-

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexa [Bot] and 39 guests