User avatar
walter2222
Posts: 1237
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:40 am

Another "motiv" Rejection...

Mon Sep 11, 2006 7:56 am

Hi there,

I just got another rejection for motiv:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...060630_CRW_5202_RT8_WVB_1200px.jpg

I know from another thread that "waving hands" from pilots is not preferred:
How About This F-16 Photo? (by Thetford569 Sep 7 2006 in Aviation Photography)

...but I thought that a shot from an F-16 (with almost 2000 shots in the database) could need another angle... so, wrong bet? or is there another reason for the motiv?

PS: It is difficult to shoot operational F-16's without the pilot(s) on board...  Smile

Best regards,

Walter
Canon 347d mkII ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l IS USM - ...
 
eadster
Posts: 2125
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:31 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Mon Sep 11, 2006 9:19 am

I can see why this was rejected.

One's eyes are drawn straight to the pilot. This is what I think Anet have the issue with.

I had a shot accepted not that long ago with a waving pilot, but eyes were not drawn to him as there were other things happening in the pic for people to focus on.

Then again, maybe I'm wrong...
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9042
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Mon Sep 11, 2006 10:19 am

The rejection has nothing to do with the pilot. You have cut off all sorts of bits, no landing gear, half a drop tank, and basically just a "badcrop."
 
User avatar
walter2222
Posts: 1237
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:40 am

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:40 am

Hi guys,

Thanks for the feedback! But I am still puzzled, since the possible answers are a bit contradicting. I know and I accept that "motiv" will always remain subjective and I would like to bend my acceptance ratio again in the correct direction...  Smile ...but it is difficult if one tries to do something different!

Quoting Eadster (Reply 1):
but eyes were not drawn to him as there were other things happening in the pic for people to focus on.

I thought that the special visor protection the pilot had on his helmet (31 Tiger Squadron) was worth showing, but being afraid for a rejection on "motiv" for showing the pilot alone, I decided to crop somewhat wider (to show also some detail of the nose (and sensors) of the aircraft.

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 2):
You have cut off all sorts of bits, no landing gear, half a drop tank, and basically just a "badcrop."

I accept your opinion for not liking the crop, I did it for the reasons also explained above and I have chosen for cropping the nose landing gear out (being better than showing only partially showing it, as I read in other threads) and hence only showing the upper half of the drop tank.

Since I got a mail for an acceptance and an extra message stating that this shot was being screened and that it had passed first screening, I had the idea that it had a chance...and that at least one other person liked this angle and crop.

I will keep it, however, for my personal collection.

Best regards,

Walter
Canon 347d mkII ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l IS USM - ...
 
Guido
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2001 6:18 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Wed Sep 13, 2006 12:14 am

I like your shot and i would love to see more of these.
Unfortunately, every site has the right to decide on the rules and we have to live with that.
Maybe one day those shots will have a chance if a "creative" or "closer" category will be made.
 
User avatar
walter2222
Posts: 1237
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:40 am

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Wed Sep 13, 2006 8:03 am

Quoting Guido (Reply 4):
I like your shot and i would love to see more of these.

Thanks Guido! I would like to (try to) upload more of these, but recently these "motiv" (and other) rejections have about halved my acceptance ratio

 ashamed 

It is so difficult - partly because it is subjective - to understand the exact reason why (sometimes you see "similar", but slightly different shots being accepted) and that why I started this thread.

Quoting Guido (Reply 4):
Unfortunately, every site has the right to decide on the rules and we have to live with that.

Sure, I have no problem with that. The only problem is to understand all the rules. But I assume that with every rejection, I come a bit closer in the understanding process...  Smile

Best regards,

Walter
Canon 347d mkII ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l IS USM - ...
 
Avsfan
Posts: 246
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2006 12:37 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Wed Sep 13, 2006 2:43 pm

Personally I love the shot. I agree with you and that there should be more upclose shots of pilots...especially in fighters. To me it does not matter if parts of certain places of the aircraft were cropped out.

In my opinion, all of the screeners dont look at the photos the same way. I have had photos rejected for one reason, and another screener will accept the photo, but reject it for another aspect that the first screener did not comment on.
"Oh I have slipped the surly bonds of Earth...Put out my hand and touched the face of God"
 
javibi
Posts: 1295
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 5:55 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Wed Sep 13, 2006 6:15 pm

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 2):
You have cut off all sorts of bits, no landing gear, half a drop tank, and basically just a "badcrop."

Surely that is not the only reason for the rejection


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tim de Groot - AirTeamImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Staffan Hardie



Though I guess this beauties were in Johan's queue.

Cheers.

j
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Wed Sep 13, 2006 7:09 pm

Very nice shot Walter.
Just one of those inconsistency things I guess.
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
 
IngemarE
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:46 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Wed Sep 13, 2006 9:08 pm

Walter2222,
Luv your pic and I think it should be in the DB.

Javibi,
My thoughts were immediatly drawn yo Tim's Kenya777-shot, which almost made it into my UserAlbum......but since the engine had had its bottom cut-off,...well....  Wink

Tim,
No offence, but appart from that, your pic was a stunner, regarding detail and lighting/colour!!  thumbsup  Didn't mind at all the nose-gear not being in the pic!
In thrust I trust.
 
javibi
Posts: 1295
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 5:55 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Wed Sep 13, 2006 10:03 pm

Quoting IngemarE (Reply 9):
apart from that, your pic was a stunner

Actually it is "because of", not "apart from"  Wink

j
 
IngemarE
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:46 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:03 am

Quoting Javibi (Reply 10):
Actually it is "because of", not "apart from"

...sort of depends on what one is getting at, wouldn't you say!?  Yeah sure
What are you anyway? My old english teachers ghost, back from the departed to haunt me!? Big grin

Seriously though, I think I get your drift.........  Wink
In thrust I trust.
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Thu Sep 14, 2006 3:26 am

I knew my shot was going to create a fuss. For me the key difference is though that my shot doesn't have the pilots as primary focus. irregardless of other problems people may have with the shot I think it sets it apart from the cockpit closeups.

I don't see the difference though between Walters and Staffan's shot...

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
User avatar
ptrjong
Posts: 4088
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:38 am

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Thu Sep 14, 2006 4:23 am

Perhaps it's fair to point out that not only screeners can sometimes get a photo accepted with an engine cover cut off.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter de Jong


(Thanks.)

With a little experience here, you know pretty well which of your uploads are safe motive-wise, and which ones risk a motive rejection. By all means do upload those if they're interesting, but accept the risk and consider yourself lucky if they're accepted.

Of course, it's disappointing when your greatest photos get shot down, but what we better try to refrain from as much as possible is making comparisons with other, accepted pictures. Yes, there's bound to be some inconsistency, because photos are screened by a team of humans, because not everything can be covered in rules, and because two photos are hardly ever equal, as there are so many factors deciding their acceptability.

Peter Smile
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
 
aviopic
Posts: 2423
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 7:52 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Thu Sep 14, 2006 5:01 am

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 12):
I knew my shot was going to create a fuss.

Not to me Tim, I like to see the different motive's.
For sure when it is a good one.

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 12):
I don't see the difference though between Walters and Staffan's shot...

Well there is one clear difference, look at the pilots face  Wink

Your openness is highly appreciated Tim, by me anyway.
An open discussion is the best way to avoid inconsistency as much as possible although it will never fully accomplished.

Willem
The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
 
javibi
Posts: 1295
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 5:55 pm

RE: Another "motiv" Rejection...

Thu Sep 14, 2006 6:23 pm

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 12):
I knew my shot was going to create a fuss.

LOL. In a positive way, you mean, right? Because AFAIK you have received nothing but (deserved) praise about it  Smile

Quoting IngemarE (Reply 11):
What are you anyway? My old english teachers ghost, back from the departed to haunt me!?

Me? English teacher? That's a good one!! Big grin
I think you know what I meant, but just in case: I think Tim's crop (cutting off part of the engine) ADDS more value to the photo, instead of the opposite  Smile

Cheers

j

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Catalin81, Majestic-12 [Bot] and 4 guests