compussr
Topic Author
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:38 pm

Question About Double

Mon May 03, 2010 11:20 pm

I have a shot of this cool looking plane taxiing and taking off on the same day, would this be considered a double rejection?

I didn't see anything about taxiing in the rejection guide. BTW these would be the first photos for this reg in the database.

Thanks.
 
dlowwa
Posts: 7168
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:17 pm

RE: Question About Double

Tue May 04, 2010 12:26 am

Quoting compussr (Thread starter):

I didn't see anything about taxiing in the rejection guide.

Actually, most of the examples in the rejection guide are of aircraft taxiing. Anyway, if the shots are of different sides you should be ok, but if they're of the same side or head-on and one side, it'll be a no-go. Wide-angle and close up of the same side are also a no-go.
 
unattendedbag
Posts: 2154
Joined: Wed Oct 08, 2003 10:35 pm

RE: Question About Double

Tue May 04, 2010 5:06 pm

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 1):
but if they're of the same side or head-on and one side, it'll be a no-go.
Quoting Airliners.net Rejections Guide ():
One shot taken during landing, and another during take-off will generally NOT be considered a DOUBLE error.

How does this not apply to one shot of taxi and one shot of landing? It doesn't say anything about sides when it comes to different stages of movement.

Quoting compussr (Thread starter):
plane taxiing and taking off on the same day,


[Edited 2010-05-04 10:08:58]
Slower traffic, keep right
 
dlowwa
Posts: 7168
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:17 pm

RE: Question About Double

Tue May 04, 2010 7:48 pm

Quoting unattendedbag (Reply 2):
How does this not apply to one shot of taxi and one shot of landing?

Yes, it is slightly ambiguous, and will be the screener's call. If the motive is different enough or the reason compelling to add two shots of the same side/reg./day it may be considered, but if they (one departure and one arrival) are both, say against blue sky, then the double rejection is much more likely. In my short time screening, almost all examples of double rejections I've seen are of shots from the same sequence, either different angles of an approach (3/4, side on, etc..) or close-ups and wide angles taken seconds apart while taxiing. The one that seems to draw the most ire is the head-on vs. side view regarded as double, but I have seen it enforced pretty consistently.
 
757MDE
Posts: 1451
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 11:45 am

RE: Question About Double

Wed May 05, 2010 3:01 am

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 3):
The one that seems to draw the most ire is the head-on vs. side view regarded as double, but I have seen it enforced pretty consistently.

I haven't had a double rejection in a long time, and can only think of two or three since I started uploading, but I have to say that in my opinion a full fuselage side-on and then a nose close-up shouldn't be considered doubles even if taken in the same taxi sequence.
Quisiera volveraamartevolveraquerertevolveratenertecerrrrcaademígirl! Mis ojos lloran porrr ti...
 
flight
Posts: 357
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 6:41 am

RE: Question About Double

Wed May 05, 2010 3:08 am

Yep, Dlowwa knows his stuff, guess you have to "know" before hand,
And the side, with the head on--They show different but are considered double, stay away form this,--- got in trouble for this, Wish this rule would change, but rules are rules.
 
Sharktt
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:40 pm

RE: Question About Double

Wed May 05, 2010 9:33 am

I didn't want to open a new topic, so I decided to write here (sorry compussr for this).

I would like to know how can a screener reject a picture saying that the picture is double, and there's already a similar picture in the DB?? This happened to a friend of mine (mine got in, and my friend's picture got rejected)!

So, now it's rejected for double even if the other picture isn't yours???

Thanks for your time!
 
User avatar
ptrjong
Posts: 4088
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:38 am

RE: Question About Double

Wed May 05, 2010 9:57 am

Quoting Sharktt (Reply 6):
So, now it's rejected for double even if the other picture isn't yours???

No. Must be something else. Maybe he submitted two photos, one of which was rejected for double.

Peter 
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
 
Sharktt
Posts: 35
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:40 pm

RE: Question About Double

Wed May 05, 2010 10:10 am

Quoting ptrjong (Reply 7):

Thanks for the fast reply! But that's a negative! This guy is very selective, and always sends everything correctly... The picture was rejected for double, and the screener left a note saying "There's already a similar picture on the DB".

Paulo  
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1639
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Question About Double

Wed May 05, 2010 10:56 am

Quoting Sharktt (Reply 8):
The picture was rejected for double, and the screener left a note saying "There's already a similar picture on the DB".

Then that was a mistake.
No matter how similar, if they are by different photographers, then they are not double. We get a lot of very similar shots taken, for instance, at the big airshows and it would be unreasonable to only allow the first shot to be accepted

Mick Bajcar
 
aussie18
Crew
Posts: 1746
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:31 pm

RE: Question About Double

Thu May 06, 2010 6:18 am

Quoting compussr (Thread starter):

If your unsure regarding them being a possible double than maybe post examples of the shots.

Quoting 757MDE (Reply 4):
but I have to say that in my opinion a full fuselage side-on and then a nose close-up shouldn't be considered doubles even if taken in the same taxi sequence.

Why,Its still the same aircraft & similiar view,If you upload a full side on view of the aircraft than that is all you get accepted,If you upload a close up of the nose it will still mean you can upload a shot of the tail,as long as they dont overlap each other.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 3):
Yes, it is slightly ambiguous, and will be the screener's call. If the motive is different enough or the reason compelling to add two shots of the same side/reg./day it may be considered, but if they (one departure and one arrival) are both, say against blue sky, then the double rejection is much more likely.

Just to add more to what Dana has stated,arrival & departure shots of same side/day/reg would generally be acceptable long as we can clearly identify they are arriving & departing,If you spend a whole day at the airport & see the same aircraft twice from the same side & one was taken at dusk/dawn & other during the day that would also be generally acceptable long aswell.

Cheers Mark
 
757MDE
Posts: 1451
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 11:45 am

RE: Question About Double

Thu May 06, 2010 7:18 am

Quoting aussie18 (Reply 10):
Why,Its still the same aircraft & similiar view,If you upload a full side on view of the aircraft than that is all you get accepted,If you upload a close up of the nose it will still mean you can upload a shot of the tail,as long as they dont overlap each other.

Sure, it could be done the way you say as well but in my very personal appreciation of the matter a full side on and then a close-up of the nose are not necessarily a similar view or motive.

For me this:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © K.Dennis


Is not the same as this:


Click here for bigger photo!

©




Even though by current rules one would be rejected as double if taken in the same sequence (yes, I know those two are different registrations in different Airports, just trying to illustrate my point).

This is my opinion on the matter, but it's not that I am ultra annoyed or something, I am fine with the rules as they are vis-a-vis doubles, sometimes I have a hard time choosing what to upload though (nose? full side on?).

[Edited 2010-05-06 00:20:16]
Quisiera volveraamartevolveraquerertevolveratenertecerrrrcaademígirl! Mis ojos lloran porrr ti...
 
User avatar
ptrjong
Posts: 4088
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:38 am

RE: Question About Double

Sat May 08, 2010 10:42 pm


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Peter de Jong


This preserved aircraft unuusually and interestingly still has working hydraulics. I wonder if I could be allowed to upload another shot with landing gear and airbrakes extended.

Peter 
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
 
dlowwa
Posts: 7168
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:17 pm

RE: Question About Double

Sun May 09, 2010 12:39 am

Quoting ptrjong (Reply 12):
I wonder if I could be allowed to upload another shot with landing gear and airbrakes extended.

Same rules would apply. If it's basically the same angle then no, but if it's a different angle (i.e. other side) you should be ok. If it's the same angle and a drastically different motive (i.e. tighter crop, 3/4 from behind) then it MAY have a chance. If it's the same composition as the one you've posted and the only difference is the gear down, then no.
 
User avatar
ptrjong
Posts: 4088
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:38 am

RE: Question About Double

Sun May 09, 2010 9:55 am

Different angle, same side   I don't suppose it will make it under the normal rules.

I think the screeners should feel free to make exceptions to the double rules, based on their own judgement of course.

Peter 
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
 
compussr
Topic Author
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 4:38 pm

RE: Question About Double

Mon May 10, 2010 6:05 am

What about shots of the same aircraft doing patterns in the same day? Would two shots (say one of the front, and one of the side) taken from two separate approaches considered as double?
 
whisperjet
Crew
Posts: 503
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2007 6:27 pm

RE: Question About Double

Mon May 10, 2010 6:57 am

Unless the light is completely different (time of the day) it is a clear no for me. How could we know that the pictures were taken during two different approaches? And why would anyone like to have two very similar pictures online?

Stefan
Nobody is perfect - not even a perfect fool.
 
bottie
Posts: 244
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 12:53 am

RE: Question About Double

Mon May 10, 2010 8:38 am

I've had a 'double'-rejection a few hours ago:

This one was rejected:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...72889685.3018n934as-mhv-021209.jpg

Screeners comment:

" this is a double to image id # 1633255 double personal "


Image 1633255:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Botterman Bram





It's clearly another angle, a more detailed shot of the accepted one. Maybe next time I won't mention a day in the date, like some do, just month and year.

[Edited 2010-05-10 01:42:49]
 
dlowwa
Posts: 7168
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:17 pm

RE: Question About Double

Mon May 10, 2010 9:57 am

Quoting bottie (Reply 17):
t's clearly another angle, a more detailed shot of the accepted one. Maybe next time I won't mention a day in the date, like some do, just month and year.

I would advise against that. Missing or omitting dates raises even more suspicion when checking for doubles, and if found to be done intentionally, can lead to a ban. Unfortunately people try this quite often, so the screeners are well aware of it and take care to watch for it. In fact, had you omitted the date on the second shot, instead of just a double rejection, a warning would likely have been issued, as it would have been seen as intentional deception by the photographer. Basically, not a good idea.
 
bottie
Posts: 244
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 12:53 am

RE: Question About Double

Mon May 10, 2010 11:02 am

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 18):
I would advise against that. Missing or omitting dates raises even more suspicion when checking for doubles, and if found to be done intentionally, can lead to a ban. Unfortunately people try this quite often, so the screeners are well aware of it and take care to watch for it. In fact, had you omitted the date on the second shot, instead of just a double rejection, a warning would likely have been issued, as it would have been seen as intentional deception by the photographer. Basically, not a good idea.

I know, but maybe a   should have been placed at the end of that phrase. But take a look in the database and you'll see it's done quite often with shots that can been seen as double, even by screeners. But because I'm sure that's not done on purpose, I don't place examples here.

In fact, I always fill in the complete date, for me it's a matter of having the complete info available.
 
yowgangsta
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 3:16 am

RE: Question About Double

Mon May 10, 2010 1:24 pm

My reject reason to you:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 18):

Screeners comment:

" this is a double to image id # 1633255 double personal "
Quoting dlowwa (Reply 18):
It's clearly another angle, a more detailed shot of the accepted one.

In the case of an airport overview, it's still showing the same spot of land; and hence the double.


These type of overviews attract a lot of attention from screeners to verify for double. It's a pain in the butt to look at a photographer's past to check for doubles, so when we do find a double it really isn't appreciated. It's usually mentioned internally and when we notice a repeat offense with a photographer warnings and more likely bans are enforced.

Leaving out dates would really piss off a screener!


 
 
bottie
Posts: 244
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 12:53 am

RE: Question About Double

Mon May 10, 2010 3:08 pm

I understand your point, but explain this:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Botterman Bram



and


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Botterman Bram




with:



View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Botterman Bram



and

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...72889685.3018n934as-mhv-021209.jpg



Unless I miss something here, the doube-rule isn't applied constantly in this case?


I also said:

Quoting bottie (Reply 19):
In fact, I always fill in the complete date, for me it's a matter of having the complete info available.

So I won't leave dates out  Wink

[Edited 2010-05-10 08:09:42]
 
dlowwa
Posts: 7168
Joined: Tue Apr 12, 2005 4:17 pm

RE: Question About Double

Mon May 10, 2010 7:03 pm

Quoting bottie (Reply 21):

Unless I miss something here, the doube-rule isn't applied constantly in this case?

Thank you for pointing this out. We will discuss this internally and hopefully come to a resolution. The communication team will contact you shortly to discuss this issue.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 28 guests