Philthy
Topic Author
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:13 am

Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:46 pm

I wonder if someone from the screeners could please explain why this shot was rejected for badmotive?


MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Phil Vabre



After all, it is one of the most important aviation-related buildings in Australia and there is no other shot of it on a.net.

I'm thinking of appealing, but would like to understand the reason for the badmotive before I make a decision.

Thanks,

Philthy
 
jumbojim747
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 8:05 pm

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 2:55 pm

Philthy
Although a nice shot and the building has every relevance to aviation to the average viewer he would not know this unless he was told so.
Im thinking the reason for the rejection is it lacks aviation material/
Just my opinion.
Good luck with it
Cheers
On a wing and a prayer
 
Philthy
Topic Author
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:13 am

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 3:27 pm

Thanks JumboJim,

The caption I wrote for it explains what it is and what it does. Apart from that, it is clearly located at the airport (the shot was taken from the Tower balcony by the way). I don't know what else I could have done to make it more relevant.

Cheers,

Philthy
 
QANTAS077
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:08 pm

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 5:26 pm

Quoting JumboJim747 (Reply 1):
Philthy
Although a nice shot and the building has every relevance to aviation to the average viewer he would not know this unless he was told so.
Im thinking the reason for the rejection is it lacks aviation material/
Just my opinion.
Good luck with it
Cheers

he actually explains perfectly what the building is, it's as relevant as a control tower, it's i think the center that covers more area than any other in the world.

great shot, appeal it because it's definately aviation related and relevant to this site!
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 7:52 pm

Badmotiv is justified here, we don't accept these kind of atc buildings.

Cheers
Tim
Alderman Exit
 
jumbojim747
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 8:05 pm

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 8:24 pm

Quoting QANTAS077 (Reply 3):
he actually explains perfectly what the building is, it's as relevant as a control tower, it's i think the center that covers more area than any other in the world

I respect that and i did state that to someone looking at the picture simply wont know the story behind it until he reads the remark.
On a wing and a prayer
 
Rotate
Posts: 1448
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 5:52 pm

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 8:58 pm

it is an Air Traffic Services Centre ..... , where does the line stop, if we start accepting those? then what about fire patrol on airports or trucks that do push a/cs or airport jails , etc, etc ....

Robin
ABC
 
Philthy
Topic Author
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:13 am

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 10:28 pm

So:

Control Tower = OK

Control Centre = not OK

Have I got it right?

What about Airport Fire Stations? Not OK? I ask because I have a shot of one in the wings.

Terminals are OK though? Inside and/or outside?

I'd appreciate an authoritative ruling so we all know where we stand. Just where exactly is the line?

Thanks,

Philthy
 
Rotate
Posts: 1448
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2003 5:52 pm

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 10:36 pm

Quoting Philthy (Reply 7):
Control Tower = OK

yes - OKAY

Quoting Philthy (Reply 7):
Control Centre = not OK

yes - NOT OKAY

Quoting Philthy (Reply 7):
What about Airport Fire Stations? Not OK?

yes - NOT OKAY

Quoting Philthy (Reply 7):
Terminals are OK though? Inside and/or outside?

yes - both okay

edit: there may be exceptions, depending on how much the NOs fill the frame. 1/5 of the picture shows an airport firestation, 4/5 of the picture shows an terminal, rwy, a/c, etc .... might be OKAY

[Edited 2005-08-12 15:38:59]
ABC
 
Philthy
Topic Author
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:13 am

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 11:10 pm

Thanks, I'm starting to wrap my head around the rules now! At least it explains why this shot was also rejected for badmotiv:


MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Phil Vabre



But if terminals are OK, could someone please explain why this was rejected for badmotiv?


MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Phil Vabre



Not just any old terminal shot, but something quite topical. It even has an aeroplane in it!

Still groping for understanding.

Philthy
 
QANTAS077
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:08 pm

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Fri Aug 12, 2005 11:42 pm

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 4):
Badmotiv is justified here, we don't accept these kind of atc buildings.

then this is just as equal a bad motive as is Suresh' shot of the NASA hangar, since when have hangar photos been admitted?!

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/898621/L/

the work site no longer resembles the old Kai Tak, to anyone who is looking at this for the first time and didn't have the benefit of the info provided it would just be another pile of dirt somewhere, which is what it clearly is now! how long can you keep uploading the same pile of dirt and call it Kai Tak when it resembles nothing of it's former self? atleast the building uploaded is currently relevant to aviation unlike the pile of dirt which was Kai Tak.

anybody wish to clarify?

[Edited 2005-08-12 16:46:09]
 
APFPilot1985
Posts: 1840
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2004 12:51 pm

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Sat Aug 13, 2005 12:14 am

how about shots of gym's? No more aviation related than this rejected shot. Come on guys don't just bury your heads in the ground and pretend like that shot doesn't exist.
Stand Up and Be Counted Visit Site Related to Voice your opinion
 
Philthy
Topic Author
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:13 am

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Sat Aug 13, 2005 10:05 pm

Firstly, I want to thank Tim and Robin for providing some answers to my posts above.

Secondly, I want to make it clear that I'm not interested in re-opening the debate about what should or shouldn't be badmotiv: I'm only interested in what is and isn't considered badmotiv today, especially when it comes to less 'conventional' subjects. This also shouldn't be interpreted as a poke at the screeners: that isn't my intention.

As you can probably tell, I have had a few shots rejected for badmotiv, many of which have left me scratching my head. All I want to do is understand the rules so that I can stop wasting my time and the screeners'.

I would therefore much appreciate some advice in relation to my terminal shot above, and after that I have a few more to ask about.

Thanks,

Philthy

PS: If someone thinks I should start a new thread for each question, please let me know. I did, however, think it better to keep it all in one thread.
 
andrewuber
Posts: 2142
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:45 am

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Sun Aug 14, 2005 1:58 am

Bad Motive? Let's not go there.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © TZ Aviation


This shot pretty much destroyed the credibility of the "BADMOTIVE" reject, and changed the opinion of every photographer on this site. None of us look at "BADMOTIVE" seriously anymore. It's rediculous.   

Drew

[Edited 2005-08-13 18:59:12]
I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
 
Philthy
Topic Author
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:13 am

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Sun Aug 14, 2005 11:15 am

Actually, I quite like the shot of the former Hatfield Tower and I think it does have relevance. Nevertheless, as I made clear above, I don't want to re-open that particular debate.

I would like to focus on what the rules are, not what they should or might be. I firmly believe that if we all had a better idea of what the screeners are working to, then there would be less angst among the photographers.

Would someone from the screeners care to provide some information?

Thanks,

Philthy
 
andrewuber
Posts: 2142
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:45 am

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Sun Aug 14, 2005 12:13 pm

Quoting Philthy (Reply 14):
Actually, I quite like the shot of the former Hatfield Tower and I think it does have relevance. Nevertheless, as I made clear above, I don't want to re-open that particular debate.

Not trying to re-kindle that debate, but let me just say why I posted my comment. I agree with you - the Hatfield Tower does have some relevance, but it's waaaay out in the gray area.

What is irritating to us photographers is NOT that the ex-Tower now Gym shot made it into the database, but that it made it in when some of our AIRCRAFT shots (which are perfectly composed, tack sharp, interesting, colorful and uploaded with all the correct info) get rejected because one pixel is too bright or too dark, or when a matter of opinion - not fact - goes into rejecting a shot that has more relevance than a building shot.

This is airliners.net, not buildings.net.

That being said, you're right - we should focus on the rules, and I believe that creating a more consistant screening system should be a priority.  bigthumbsup 

Drew
I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
 
QANTAS077
Posts: 5169
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:08 pm

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Sun Aug 14, 2005 12:23 pm

i think the gym shot is much more relevant than say the recent Kai Tak shot that i linked before, atleast the gym shows the original building and tower but Kai Tak has nothing in it that resembles a former airport, question is this...how long can a.net keep accepting photos of the former Kai Tak in it's current state and still call it relevant?
 
9v-svc
Posts: 1703
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2001 5:19 pm

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Sun Aug 14, 2005 12:29 pm

O come on , is it so that important for your beautiful shot of the atc building to be uploaded to airliners.net ? Just chill it and move on ...


Have a nice one.
Airliners is the wings of my life.
 
Philthy
Topic Author
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:13 am

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:43 pm

Thanks 9V-SVC, I guess that comment is aimed at me.

No, it's not at all important that I get my ATC Centre shot on a.net. In fact, if you read my posts above carefully you will see that now I understand what the rules are concerning such buildings I'm quite happy to go along with them.

The problem arises when people like me don't (or can't) understand the rules. Given recent comments in this forum, it seems that there are at least a few others like me who find some of the badmotive rules, in particular, baffling at times.

That's why I think it would be worthwhile for the screeners, who administer these rules, to give us all some further guidance. Especially, as I have said above, where less 'conventional' subjects are concerned.

That's all I'm after.

Philthy
 
andrewuber
Posts: 2142
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:45 am

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Sun Aug 14, 2005 2:51 pm

Quoting Philthy (Reply 18):
there are at least a few others like me who find some of the badmotive rules, in particular, baffling at times.

I agree with you Phil, it's just a matter of inconsistant screening. As Royal is quick to point out - it's done by humans. Some are more tolerant than others. Some are black and white while some exist in the gray area. It's becoming more like luck of the draw when it comes to getting great photos accepted.

I've completely abandoned my 1200 wide shots. After over a dozen rejections lately, including bad motive (because nose gear wasn't visible - and there are HUNDREDS of shots like it in the d/b), my acceptance rate has fallen to an insane level. I'll go 1024 from now on, no matter how tiny it looks on my 1600 wide screen. Maybe the rules will slack off a bit at that size.

I'm still glad to be here, and I hope that someday the screeners can clarify some of these rules, and band together to start screening a bit more consistantly.

Drew
I'd rather shoot BAD_MOTIVE
 
syncmaster
Posts: 1926
Joined: Mon Jul 15, 2002 9:55 am

RE: Badmotive Advice Please

Sun Aug 14, 2005 5:24 pm

Quoting AndrewUber (Reply 19):
I'm still glad to be here, and I hope that someday the screeners can clarify some of these rules, and band together to start screening a bit more consistantly.

I think that hit it right on the dot, the photographers for the most part have done their end of the work, now it's time for the screeners to do their work.

-Charlie

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest