N178UA
Topic Author
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 9:56 pm

Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:02 am

Good morning screeners, while browsing Singapore Airlines 777-300/ER photos this morning, I thought I keep seeing double.....but seems my eyes is right....can anyone clearify what happened and is allowed now?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages



I am still struggling to get a different cockpit shot in DB (one in mid air, one approach as airport ovewview) but seems at the same time a screener can get 3 same reg touch down photos in db?

Sam
For more of myself and my flight reviews visit http://www.SamChui.com
 
Stealthz
Posts: 5546
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:43 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:29 am

Sam,
When was there ever an issue with shots of the same A/C taken on different occasions?
If that was the case most of us here in Oz would have very few shots on the DB.
Whilst I think some consideration should be given to multiple inflight shots if motiv is radically different eg Mid flight and approach the comparison you raised is not valid.

My personal opinion is that I would likely not submit similar shots of the same A/C but that doesn't make it wrong.

Cheers

Chris
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
 
N178UA
Topic Author
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 9:56 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Mon Feb 05, 2007 8:35 am

Chris

Read the baddouble rejection text before dismiss my claim being not valid.

This rule has been around not very long...like 6 -12 month...since this rule started you can check many Oz photos are rejected under this. (SYD have significantly less pics than previous years)


DOUBLE
You already have photos of this aircraft in the Airliners.net database that are the same as, or very similar to these photo(s).

In order to receive this rejection, the other (similar) photos in the database must also have been taken by you, at the same day and at the same airport. Please do not upload multiple sequential shots of an aircraft during landing, taxiing or take-off, taken only a few seconds apart. Even though these photos may appear to be from different angles, we consider them similar. Please select the best shot from the sequence and upload only that one. One shot taken during landing, and another during take-off will generally NOT be considered a DOUBLE error.


In certain cases you can also get this rejection if there are photos in the database that are nearly identical to the one(s) rejected here, but taken on another date by you.

Examples of this are photos of stored or preserved aircraft that have not moved since you took the other photos.


For window views we accept 2 shots per flight and side of aircraft when they show considerable different motives. So in other words the maximum number of accepted window views of the same registration on the same flight all taken by you would be 4.

We only accept multiple cockpit shots if:


They clearly show different parts of the cockpit.
When the outside view is showing a different airport.
When one is taken in daylight and one taken at night.

Note: This rejection might also occur if you have similar photos in the upload queue that are still awaiting final screening.



I myself have photos (same reg) look similar taken on different dates but rejected for baddouble so i am wonder how this screener get pass the double rule twice. ( 3 uploads)

[Edited 2007-02-05 00:36:44]
For more of myself and my flight reviews visit http://www.SamChui.com
 
TransIsland
Posts: 1826
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:22 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Mon Feb 05, 2007 9:59 am

Quoting N178UA (Reply 2):
Read the baddouble rejection text before dismiss my claim being not valid.



Quoting N178UA (Reply 2):
Examples of this are photos of stored or preserved aircraft that have not moved since you took the other photos.
I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
 
andyhunt
Crew
Posts: 1226
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2001 10:50 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:35 am

Good morning Sam,

As it is my pictures being used as an example, I think that it would be best if I replied.

Yes I uploaded three different pictures of the same aircraft on different days and they were accepted. I am also aware of the baddouble rule and as stated above, tried to follow the spirit of that rule. Nothing evil intended. They went through the screening process, were not given any favourable treatment and uploaded accordingly. As you have stated, you have suffered from the baddouble rule hitting you the other way, even though you followed the spirit of the rule. Why?

As I have always said, and I make no claim otherwise, there is inconsistency within the team. This happens when you put together a bunch of human beings, who cannot operate as machines when asked to "judge" pictures. It is just a fact of life. I am sure that whilst there are examples of baddoubles ending up in rejections, there are also instances of multi pics, like mine, same plane, different day, being added. And I understand that there may be anger when it is a screener involved. And you can only rely on my word to say that nothing is going on in the background in terms of conspiracy theories, but I know that I have to live by my words, and I am comfortable to state this.

So what is being done about this consistency factor. There are two avenues that I know are being explored by the team:

1) If you don't agree, there is always the appeal function. This will give you a 2nd op which should help (but maybe not totally solve) the inconsistencies within the team. I had a big screening session over the weekend, and of those I rejected, there must have been 5 or so pics accepted which I rejected. Fair play I say. Some balance is restored.

2) I know that the team is always working and discussing ways to improve the screening, from calibration tests to actively discussing rejections to strive for better consistency.

Will we ever get there? Perhaps not. But we are aware of the issue, and we are working on trying to improve it.

I hope that this answers some of the concerns.

Regards

Andrew
Full frame always beats post processing
 
N178UA
Topic Author
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 9:56 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:12 pm

Hi Andrew

Thanks for your reply. I appreciate your thoughts and thank you for your patience. I know the "inconsistencies" are always going to be there when you have a large amount of people in the team, with some new screeners and old screeners mixed as well.


As you have stated, you have suffered from the baddouble rule hitting you the other way, even though you followed the spirit of the rule. Why?

I upload them and think they are different enough NOT to qualify as a double. Obviously screeners think differently and hence I get a rejection even though I am aware of the rules very well and hence lead to this thread to question about......you got 3 similar photos all went in one after another......I have not seen this happening for a long time since the new rule was set.



My thought is that screeners' own photos must going thru extra screening to ensure fairness to all the photographers who uploads on this site (if this haven't started yet) I am not going against you but just using good 3 pics as samples and question about their validity, surely there are room to accept 3 or 30 more new SQ 777 pics but sometimes seeing photo repeatedly bypass rules makes me question about such practice. I remember myself being a screener in the old days and having gone through such scrutiny from public.

Have a nice day.

Sam

[Edited 2007-02-05 04:17:13]
For more of myself and my flight reviews visit http://www.SamChui.com
 
bubbles
Crew
Posts: 1124
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 11:54 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Mon Feb 05, 2007 2:00 pm

Quoting N178UA (Reply 2):
In certain cases you can also get this rejection if there are photos in the database that are nearly identical to the one(s) rejected here, but taken on another date by you.

Personally I think this rule should be amended.

I fully understand that it will be pointless to upload the photos for a same plane nearly identical (i.e., from same angle, or from same spotting place) even if taken on the separate dates.

But I also think if the interval between those two shots is considerably long, e.g., 1 year or even longer, the latter photo (I mean the recent one) should be allowed and accepted. The reason is very simply - everyone likes to view the recent shot of a plane.

To me, it definitely makes lots of sense to upload an image for a plane taken yesterday from a same angle where I ever took a similar shot to this plane and uploaded it to A.net in the year of 2005.

Don't know what other people would think about.

_Hongyin_
 
andyhunt
Crew
Posts: 1226
Joined: Sat Jan 06, 2001 10:50 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Mon Feb 05, 2007 2:32 pm

Sam,

I wasn't challenging you with the "why" statement. I was putting out the question and then trying to give the answer regarding inconsistency. Big grin

Regards

Andrew
Full frame always beats post processing
 
QANTAS077
Posts: 5176
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2004 5:08 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Mon Feb 05, 2007 5:12 pm

Quoting AndyHunt (Reply 7):
Sam,

I wasn't challenging you with the "why" statement. I was putting out the question and then trying to give the answer regarding inconsistency.

i'm still jetlagged and seeing badtriple!

 Silly

think i have malaria....  Wow!
 
User avatar
mx330
Posts: 793
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 8:21 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Tue Feb 06, 2007 4:12 am

Sam I do love your shots, but I believe you should think about this before complaining:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui




Same Day, Same Sequence, Same Registration

Other photographers even get banned for a double attempt.
Now here we are not speaking of doubles, but triples.

There is no secret, crew always gets the the breaks their way...
Personally I don't like to complain, at least not until I seat the hours they seat looking at all of our stuff.

Juan
All Canon! EOS 5D mk III, 8mm, 17-40, 24-105, 70-200 f2.8, 100-400L
 
xaapb
Posts: 374
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:08 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:23 am

OMG!
and I was banned beacuse a stupid mistake on the date!
Amazing... simply amazing!
Jorge Meneses
 
bmibaby737
Posts: 1459
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:07 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:39 am

Quoting Mx330 (Reply 9):
Same Day, Same Sequence, Same Registration

This comes up time and time again. Look at the dates!

Photo added: May 7, 2004

Three years ago, standards were alot lower!
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1645
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:42 am

Quoting Xaapb (Reply 10):
OMG!
and I was banned beacuse a stupid mistake on the date!
Amazing... simply amazing!

Jorge
Oh, a simple mistake on the date, is that all?
Remember I have already discussed this you having been the one to ban you. Your memory is being selective yet I can remember what else there was too.
Quite amazing as I had always thought that memory faded with age yet I am roughly three times your age !
Yes, amazing, simply amazing, but why let the truth get in the way of a good story eh ?

Mick Bajcar
 
xaapb
Posts: 374
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:08 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:50 am

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 12):
Your memory is being selective yet I can remember what else there was too.

No, don't worry I remember too, a screener thinking I didn't re-edit de picture, I saw the screener advise about cutting the picture a little more so it would be center and I did it.
Not may fault he didn't see the difference.
Jorge Meneses
 
User avatar
mx330
Posts: 793
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 8:21 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Tue Feb 06, 2007 5:54 am

Quoting BmiBaby737 (Reply 11):
This comes up time and time again. Look at the dates!

It's not anything personal at those shots, actually I love AA 777 shots, it just caught my attention.

Quoting BmiBaby737 (Reply 11):
Three years ago, standards were alot lower!

 checkmark 

Not Double, Double has been double since I can recall.

Anyways, my point to Sam would be just let it go.

Days ago I got this rejection:
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...jections/big/20070131_roberto6.jpg
First I thought of appealing, then I saw it was bounced for dirty and motiv, I couldn't complain of dirty. Though motiv we know "some" get those shots accepted...

Don't make a whole problem out of it, its a simple shot

 twocents 

Juan APM
All Canon! EOS 5D mk III, 8mm, 17-40, 24-105, 70-200 f2.8, 100-400L
 
codeshare
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2002 2:23 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Tue Feb 06, 2007 8:14 pm

Both Andy and Sam got caught  Wink many others probably too. The given examples although similar are different slightly.

One thing is to upload the same a/c, same airport, same day in a sequence. Another thing is to upload the same a/c, same airport, same/similar angle.

A maximum of two each should have gone in. Just have to watch out next time.

KS/codeshare
How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9042
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 am

Both Andy and Sam got caught

Did you bother to look at the photos and/or facts before typing this?

The two shots that Andy uploaded in December are clearly on different days, unless the sky changed from clear and blue to overcast and grey between shutter drops, and the third picture is from January, again, the sky is different and so is the lighitng.

Sam's shots are much older, thus the rules might have been different.

So, what exactly have Andy and/or Sam been 'caught' at?
 
jorge1812
Posts: 2911
Joined: Mon Apr 19, 2004 9:11 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:23 am

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 16):
So, what exactly have Andy and/or Sam been 'caught' at?

Getting pics accepted when others were rejected or in one word it's jealousy!

Georg
 
codeshare
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2002 2:23 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:15 am

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 16):
So, what exactly have Andy and/or Sam been 'caught' at?

Did you notice this in my post:  

My post has been misunderstood.

KS/codeshare

[Edited 2007-02-06 20:35:54]
How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9042
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:50 am

No, I did not see that text in your reply. Nor do I see it now. Maybe I am blind. It comes from too much, well you know the rest....
 
codeshare
Posts: 1689
Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2002 2:23 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:52 am

Let's just forget about it and get on with some aviation photos  Smile

KS/codeshare
How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Wed Feb 07, 2007 5:59 am

Quoting N178UA (Reply 2):
I myself have photos (same reg) look similar taken on different dates but rejected for baddouble so i am wonder how this screener get pass the double rule twice. ( 3 uploads)

Sam sometimes they get in sometimes they don't. It's just the way it is. No matter if you are s screener or not.
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Sam Chui


[Edited 2007-02-06 22:01:45]

[Edited 2007-02-06 22:02:19]
-
 
N178UA
Topic Author
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2001 9:56 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Wed Feb 07, 2007 6:47 pm

Juan, Bmibaby737 was right. Those uploads were done in 2004, there aren't straight set of rules and foolish me I was uploading like mad, uploading any photos I have.....  Smile That's how many big uploaders on this site build up their photos in total numbers. I am fully aware people may use mine photo to compare...so I thought long and hard before writing this thread...

I never try to upload 3 same seqence or even 3 landings these days knowing a bad double will come to my face.

Peter...agree with you. but why the plgging of my TG 777? One taxiing after landing and one on rotation takeoff..clearly allowed isn't ? In my original thread, I am only questioning 3 touch down (likewise) on different day is allowed or not with the current rules.

Thanks everyone I think I will let go this topic.

Sam
For more of myself and my flight reviews visit http://www.SamChui.com
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:14 pm

Q:

Quoting N178UA (Reply 22):
but why the plgging of my TG 777

A:

Quoting N178UA (Reply 22):
I am fully aware people may use mine photo to compare

Sam please accept my excuses for being so unsensible to use your pictures in a thread made by you, using someone elses pictures to ask why someones elses pictures are in the database.

And please note I dind't ask if it was allowed that both of yours are in the database as I wrote:

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 21):
Sam sometimes they get in sometimes they don't. It's just the way it is. No matter if you are s screener or not.
-
 
Jkw777
Posts: 4427
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2003 11:15 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:15 pm

Quoting Codeshare (Reply 20):
Let's just forget about it and get on with some aviation photos

KS/codeshare

 checkmark   checkmark   checkmark   checkmark 

Quoting N178UA (Reply 22):
Juan, Bmibaby737 was right. Those uploads were done in 2004, there aren't straight set of rules and foolish me I was uploading like mad, uploading any photos I have..... That's how many big uploaders on this site build up their photos in total numbers. I am fully aware people may use mine photo to compare...so I thought long and hard before writing this thread...

Either way I think that series of photos are still great. Look at the flex on those wings!!!! Big grin

- Justin  Smile
jkw6210@btopenworld.com or +447751242989
 
User avatar
mx330
Posts: 793
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2002 8:21 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Wed Feb 07, 2007 11:30 pm

Quoting Jkw777 (Reply 24):
Either way I think that series of photos are still great. Look at the flex on those wings!!!! Big grin

Indeed they are!

Quoting N178UA (Reply 22):
Juan, Bmibaby737 was right. Those uploads were done in 2004

My bad, sorry.

Quoting N178UA (Reply 22):
I never try to upload 3 same seqence or even 3 landings these days knowing a bad double will come to my face.

I know you won't, as I said.

Quoting Mx330 (Reply 14):
"some" get those shots accepted...

Its never been a secret to me.

Juan APM
All Canon! EOS 5D mk III, 8mm, 17-40, 24-105, 70-200 f2.8, 100-400L
 
baldursveins
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:43 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:49 am

Sorry I came to this discussion so late.

I have thought about this rule a lot, and in the early days of AN, I would have run afoul of it a number ot times. However looking at the recent thread, started by Sam Chui, and carefully looking at the wording of the rule, I feel that it is sometimes used a bit harshly. For example would these be ruled bad double or even triple.

http://www.verslo.is/home/baldur/an/TF-EIR_1275_1024.jpg

http://www.verslo.is/home/baldur/an/TF-EIR_1328_a_1024.jpg

http://www.verslo.is/home/baldur/an/TF-EIR_1350_1024.jpg

They are of course taken of the same aircraft on the same day from the same place. One is landing and two are from different sides and a completely different motive. Of course I am assuming(!) that they not be turned down for other reasons. Only two photos of TF-EIR in the database -(yet). Note that number one has already been uploaded to the queue.
I have a photo of TF-FIO landing (gear down on final) in the database. Another shot of the clean aircraft taken over a different town on the same flight was deemed bad double.
http://www.verslo.is/baldur/1024/TF-FIO_9787_(1)_1024.jpg
Is this really how the rule should work? Maybe the fact that there were 82 shots of TF-FIO in the database at that time, worked against this photo.
Still I would think that the spirit of this rule is to preclude cluttering up the database with views of the same aircraft in the same flight maybe 10 seconds and a couple of thousand feet apart as well as almost the same view taken a couple of days apart by the same photographer.
I know that many people might point to some of the old series that I uploaded in the earliest days of AN, but then there were no rules like that, and even not against names on the photos. Maybe one should remove such photos or try to reupload them with improvements, but then one would run afoul of the BD rule, right!
Hope for some more constructive discussion on this.

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

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Sat Feb 10, 2007 3:59 am

Using the above examples

1 and 2 would not be a double rejection

2 and 3 would be a double rejection, pick the one you like and upload

The 757 shot is pretty close to this one:

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1102402/L/

But, I have to say, it is a pretty cracking shot! Did you appeal? I am sure it was a borderline case at any rate...
 
baldursveins
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:43 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:31 am

Royal

I really don´t know if I appealed it, I seem to remember doing so. But anyways, this is where the similarity rule should in my view not work this way, It is not taken at the same place, it is not the same view (radically different) not like the different lateral angle of a takeoff or landing sequence. So my point is, the rule should not apply in these cases. Of course as I took about 200 shots on that mission, one should not be allowed to upload a good percentage of such, but two or even three if sufficentily different like this

http://www.verslo.is/home/baldur/an/TF-FIO_9813_1024.jpg

or even this

http://www.verslo.is/home/baldur/an/TF-FIO_9965_1024.jpg

It is the spirit and usage of the rule that I am interested in, not really if one or two of my own photos make it into the database.

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

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:57 am

Like all rules, this one is not set in stone, and allowances are made for 'unusual' sequences, one that comes to mind is the IL-86 Sam Chui captured at Phuket...

The rule is there to stop clowns from uploading sequence shots of a common subject in a common scenario...and like most rules here can be adjusted to fit a particular situation.

I don't know the particulars of your rejection...it could been rejected in error and not appealed, it could have been sent to Johan who then rejected it, or perhaps a head screener rejected it on appeal. Like I said, we don't know.

My opinion is that it is very close to a double, but has enough 'WOW' factor that I would let it in...I have gone on record as saying that pictures that generate a lot of views should be judged more loose than a common subject, but that is MY opinion, not everyone agrees, which is why we operate as a team.
 
ake0404ar
Posts: 2379
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 10:55 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Sat Feb 10, 2007 5:39 am

Quoting BaldurSveins (Reply 28):
or even this

http://www.verslo.is/home/baldur/an/...4.jpg

Holy sh$$ this one one hell of a shot. A stunner.......

Just curious how far away were you?

Vasco

p.s.
 
Stealthz
Posts: 5546
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:43 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Sat Feb 10, 2007 7:26 am

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 29):
one that comes to mind is the IL-86 Sam Chui captured at Phuket...

Whilst slightly off topic, I do not believe it has been mentioned that Sam was runner up at the Australian Aviation Journalist of the Year awards with a photo from that sequence.
Well done!!
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
 
baldursveins
Posts: 124
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:43 pm

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Sat Feb 10, 2007 7:46 am

Vasco

Which one were you talking about? The URL was incomplete

Baldur
 
ake0404ar
Posts: 2379
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 10:55 am

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Sat Feb 10, 2007 7:46 pm

Baldur,

this one......just blew my mind!

http://www.verslo.is/home/baldur/an/TF-FIO_9965_1024.jpg


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

RE: Screeners, This Is Allowed Now?

Sun Feb 11, 2007 2:05 am

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 29):
Like all rules, this one is not set in stone, and allowances are made for 'unusual' sequences, one that comes to mind is the IL-86 Sam Chui captured at Phuket...

The rule is there to stop clowns from uploading sequence shots of a common subject in a common scenario...and like most rules here can be adjusted to fit a particular situation.

Isn't the rule also not different for airshows (I seem to remember this, but I cannot recall in which thread)?


To Baldur:

I like your A2A shots! I hope more from that sequence get in!

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 - ...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests