Hi all,

I am pleased to announce a few new things to the Airliners.net community. The Head Screeners will make further announcements following my own with more details, they really have the important info  

1. All photographers now have access to post/start a new topic/reply (full access) in the Aviation Photography Forum. All new photographers will have the same access. This will allow all photographers to interact with the community freely.

2. People are now allowed in photos... BUT... the focus must still be on aviation.

3. More creative photos - I'm not going to even try to explain this... please let the Head Screeners elaborate!

4. Space and Balloon Photos - We currently allow space shuttle shots and ballooning photos but never have defined or highlighted the fact that we accept them. We now have a definition so anyone wanting to upload, has a better idea of what we accept.

5. On the re-upload page, we have included a "reason for re-upload" section. This will allow the user to explain the reason for re-upload versus having to send a separate email to the screeners. Hopefully this will be a small change that will allow an easier process for both the photographer and screener.

Again - please wait for the screeners to respond, this is their area completely. I'm just helping spread the news.

I hope this is a more positive note and proof that the Airliners.net will continue to go in a positive direction. There are more changes to come in the next month, this is just a small start.

Thank you,

Monique

Monique,

Thanks for putting the Space category on the fastrack and making it "official"! Good job! Now, i am not a "freak".  

Suresh

Quoting Flyheligirl (Thread starter): 2. People are now allowed in photos... BUT... the focus must still be on aviation.

So the incidental person who walked into a frame but isn't blocking the aircraft and whose face isn't visible won't be a motive reject anymore?

If so, hu-freaking-zah. About time. Thanks!

[Edited 2007-12-20 18:43:54]

Quoting Dvincent (Reply 2): So the incidental person who walked into a frame but isn't blocking the aircraft and whose face isn't visible won't be a motive reject anymore? If so, hu-freaking-zah. About time. Thanks!

I agree 100% with this. I think having people in the shot sometimes helps to "make" the shot.

Quoting Flyheligirl (Thread starter): 3. More creative photos - I'm not going to even try to explain this... please let the Head Screeners elaborate!

That's the third rail around here. I would love to hear more!  

Quoting Flyheligirl (Thread starter): 1. All photographers now have access to post/start a new topic/reply (full access) in the Aviation Photography Forum. All new photographers will have the same access. This will allow all photographers to interact with the community freely.

Thats nice!      

Quoting Flyheligirl (Thread starter): 2. People are now allowed in photos... BUT... the focus must still be on aviation. 3. More creative photos - I'm not going to even try to explain this... please let the Head Screeners elaborate!

That's perfect good to hear! Can't wait to see some of the pictures  

Cheers
Bjorn

Very welcome changes, thank you!

Monique, I am in favor of the changes but why should I keep on paying for my First Class Membership if everybody gets almost equal rights.
In other words, what are you going to offer to the paying members ?

t.i.a. and regards,
Willem

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 8): Monique, I am in favor of the changes but why should I keep on paying for my First Class Membership if everybody gets almost equal rights.

I guess if you only ever post in this forum, then you'd probably no longer need First Class. If you post in the others, then you'll still need it.

Quoting Flyheligirl (Thread starter): People are now allowed in photos...

Just be sensitive with shooting them, as - especially when taken on the ramp - some airports have rules not to photograph crew / passengers...! ! ! ! !

Quoting Flyheligirl (Thread starter): 2. People are now allowed in photos... BUT... the focus must still be on aviation.

I know this probably can't be answered here, but does this mean recognisable faces are now allowed in cabin shots? It's always hard work choosing the right moment to press the shutter to ensure people are looking the other way!

Darren

Ok let me eleborate a bit more on what Monique has said

People in Photos
Visible faces will no longer lead to an immediate PEOPLE rejection. This applies to airshow public, rampworkers etc. We will not allow posed pictures, e.g. someone's girlfriend posing in front of the plane. The people have to be accidental or motivational. Pilot's faces can now also be visible but of course you need permission from them to upload the shot. Always get permission! Tied in to this is people blocking a portion of the aircraft. This is part of the creative standards too. People blocking an aircraft will not lead to a motive rejection as long as it adds to the shot.

Creative Photos
I'm sure everyone will be happy to hear this and we are cerainly glad to implement our new rules. You may have seen some different images being accepted lately. There are some points I need to clarify here though. Creative needs to be writted 'creative' though because a shot does not have to be creative to look good. In short we will accept more 'different' pictures.

-Subjectivity (of the screening team as a whole) will remain a deciding factor in what we accept. Everyone has different standards when it comes to calling a shot creative, so we wil apply our own in deciding what we accept. So when someone tilts their camera on a sideshot and deems it creative we will not feel the same way.

-There must be a purpose to breaking our traditional rules. The shot has to 'work'. Leaving some dead space on teh right side of the aircraft on a blue sky sideshot is not the same as leaving some dead space on a shot where there's something nice to see.

-Creative composition is allowed, creative editing is not. Speaks for itsself, the standard manipulation rules will not change.

-Some photos may be put in the Headscreener Queue which will have an impact on
screening time for those photos. As time passes this will happen less and less.

If you have more questions feel free to ask

Now start uploading those shots!

Tim

This is the category definition for the spac category. As you can see we are open to more stuff than before

All images in this category should be vehicles designed to leave the
earth's atmosphere and travel into space (nominally 100km above the
earth's surface). The vehicle's primary role should be to travel
through space/atmosphere without contact to the ground (eg the Space
Shuttle is allowed but the Mars Rover tracked vehicle is not allowed).

Primarily the category is intended for vehicles which are piloted by,
or transport, a life-form (eg a Space Shuttle carries a crew of
people, early Russian experimental rockets carried dogs).

Images of non-living-payload vehicles are permitted (such as

Arianne/Saturn rockets), however it is preferred that such vehicles are depicted in their entirety.

Images solely depicting ancillary objects such as dispensed rocket-tanks, rocket engine components, payload, astronauts, etc are generally not permitted. Missiles are specifically not allowed, and any rockets should be nominally 25m or greater in height.


Re-entry capsules, habitation vehicles ("space station"),
atmosphere-contained space research vehicles (eg early Buran
prototypes), etc are all allowed.

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 8): Monique, I am in favor of the changes but why should I keep on paying for my First Class Membership if everybody gets almost equal rights. In other words, what are you going to offer to the paying members ?

Surfing without ads is a big plus. Also you would not be able to post in the other forums. Probably more benefits coming in the future...

Cheers
Tim

It's excellent and exciting news. In reference to the creative stuff, I think what Tim may be getting at is that some of the more esoteric (being polite) rules (which did not originate from the screening team anyway) may be relaxed a little.

It is also a tough call for the screeners, because their job just got harder. The clear rejects will still be clear rejects, but I think it will mean more deliberation over borderline images, as people will have to undo what may be years of judging images by very particular standards.

Rgds


James

Great News that we can use this forum. I was not sure about renewing my First Class Membership after DM took over.
I was going to post a photo to try out the new "Creative" rule, but I can't add it to my profile as I still need to be a First Class member!
So here's a link.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tupperware_pilot/2126826624/
Ignore the quality level etc, is it the sort of thing that maybe good for here?
Cheers
Damien

Quoting Damien846 (Reply 16): Ignore the quality level etc, is it the sort of thing that maybe good for here?

I'm happy to discuss images but let's do that in a different thread. Maybe call it 'new creative rules' or whatever and everyone can post images if they want.

Tim

Hi everybody,

Thanks for the updates. It certainly is another nice improvement. So we'll be seeing more 'space-related' photos probably in the future. Now all I need is Eksath's KSC clearance pass and I should be fine for some great shots  

Best regards,

I am happy with the change of rules Tim, great.

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 14): Probably more benefits coming in the future...

Those "extra" benefits have been promised since the days Johan still ruled but I haven't seen anything yet.
Of course the a.net(gmail) address is nice but can be obtained for free anyway, viewing without watermark is nice but I don't like the watermark option in the first place, posting in all forums is nice but my posts are in the photoforum for 98%, surfing without the adds is nice too but I do wonder whether this is worth the yearly 60 bucks.

Wonderful news   

Quoting Lexy (Reply 3): I agree 100% with this. I think having people in the shot sometimes helps to "make" the shot.

You want a person stood nex to an A380 or GE90, it helps people comprehend the size.

Fred

Hope you photographers/screeners don't mind me chipping in here. I can see from the responses so far that the 'changes' are a positive step forward. I don't contribute photo wise to the site but if I remember correctly, there was a problem with showing aircrew waving from the cockpit. Would this rule be relaxed as well? Personally, I find photos of aircraft taxying with the crew acknowledging the photographer, very pleasing. It (to me) is all part of the the aviation scene that we enjoy so much.

Hope this makes sense.

Farcry

Ignoring the quality aspects for a moment (it does need to be done with less sharpening), does this mean that this is OK now?

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 19): Those "extra" benefits have been promised since the days Johan still ruled but I haven't seen anything yet. Of course the a.net(gmail) address is nice but can be obtained for free anyway, viewing without watermark is nice but I don't like the watermark option in the first place, posting in all forums is nice but my posts are in the photoforum for 98%, surfing without the adds is nice too but I do wonder whether this is worth the yearly 60 bucks.

Then don't pay. If you feel you're not getting your money's worth with the current benefits, then you need to make a choice whether or not to pay. The features you listed are some of the features other people like, and why they choose to pay.

Quoting Aviopic (Reply 19): Those "extra" benefits have been promised since the days Johan still ruled but I haven't seen anything yet. Of course the a.net(gmail) address is nice but can be obtained for free anyway, viewing without watermark is nice but I don't like the watermark option in the first place, posting in all forums is nice but my posts are in the photoforum for 98%, surfing without the adds is nice too but I do wonder whether this is worth the yearly 60 bucks.

Hi Aviopic and all other FC members... there are many benefits to first class membership but one of the main ones is surfing ad free, the ads are what keep this site going for the most part so if you choose to surf without ads (which is nice) then it's only logical to recoup some of money so the site can continue to function and grow. Some other benefits are posting in all forums, access to news, daily newsletter, vip email and more listed here (https://www.airliners.net/login/signup.main).

The FC membership is definitely a personal thing, I think it's plenty worth it and I actually bought a FC membership while I was researching the site back in the day (before I worked here). There are more FC benefits coming but as you said, it takes time to develop such things, the main thing will always be surfing without ads.

Hope that helps.

Thanks,

Monique

So if you need permission from a Captain to have him in the shot, then why would you not need permission from a ramp worker or someone from the public who is in the shot? Tim, it sounds like this is what you are implying.

bruce

Quoting Farcry (Reply 22):

Excellent question. It always puzzled me why they banned such a popular motive. Those type of shots generally received a decent number of views, so they were obviously liked. Why ban them?

Quoting Dvincent (Reply 23): Ignoring the quality aspects for a moment (it does need to be done with less sharpening), does this mean that this is OK now?

Yes

Tim

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 28): Yes

Thanks, Tim!

Quoting Flyheligirl (Reply 25): There are more FC benefits coming but as you said, it takes time to develop such things

Thank you and I am looking forward to see something in the reasonable near future.  

Quoting Flipdewaf (Reply 21): You want a person stood nex to an A380 or GE90, it helps people comprehend the size

Look around, there are photos like this that already exist:


View Large View Medium

Photo © Craig Murray

Very good news for the site, I will now be able to upload more shots, hopefully screeners find a motiv with pics of some co-workers!

Quoting Flyheligirl (Thread starter): 1. All photographers now have access to post/start a new topic/reply (full access) in the Aviation Photography Forum. All new photographers will have the same access. This will allow all photographers to interact with the community freely.

Personally I find this a major step forward and something that had been discussed (promised?) for a long time.
With all due respect to the Photo Forum contributors,and I have met some fine folks and learnt much, they represent such a small % of the Anet photographer community.

Looking forward to some new faces here!!

Cheers

How about Glamour girl with aviation? a good boost for the site? 

Quoting Flyheligirl (Thread starter): People are now allowed in photos... BUT... the focus must still be on aviation.

OK, what about military personnel visible in photos taken at airshows? I raised this issue a while back having posted a photo of a KC-135A at the International Air Tattoo at RAF Fairford taken back in 1985 and the photo was rejected because one of the military personnel who was guarding the tanker was clearly visible yet did not, in my opinion, detract from the photo and the tanker would have been a new addition to the database. Nevertheless, it was rejected. When I pointed out here that the photo was taken over 20 years ago and the soldier or airman would most likely have long left the military and also gone grey (like I have!) the answer was that it was still unacceptable (but no logic as to why!). Surely this would qualify as 'focus on aviation'; talking to a pilot or crew member of a military plane at an air show is the closest most of us get to military aviation and I still remember being inspired by such people back in the 60's and 70's - and more recently!

  

Wow! Really nice changes going on! I think this will permit people to upload different kind of photos. I can't wait to see the future changes!

Can I ask a question following Tim's email if there is a pilot waving in the photo will this still be rejected or not?
Thanks
Malc

Quoting AirMalta (Reply 37): if there is a pilot waving in the photo will this still be rejected or not?

Hello Malc.

My understanding is that, following that original rule change, it was still always okay if the photo had a waving pilot, so long as this was not the sole motive for the photograph. Before that rule change a waving pilot as the sole subject could be accepted. My guess is that this rule change will not affect this situation.

To illustrate my understanding, this photo is not one that I would try now, even under the proposed changes - the motive here is clearly the interaction between the pilot and me (I was the only one he could have been waving at):

View Large View Medium

Photo © Paul Markman

Whereas the shot below was added not too long ago, without the need for any relaxation of the rules, because the waving pilot is incidental to the motive:

View Large View Medium

Photo © Paul Markman


I am very interested to see how the new stance on more creative motives goes - I think it is a good move. Clearly we will need some more time to fully understand where the boundaries will lie - all the more reason for many real examples to be shown here and for screeners' input to discussions about them, so that learning process can be facilitated.

Happy Christmas to all.

Paul

Personally I happy to keep 'waving pilots' out of the equation as they are a bit cheesey. I suppose it depends how you see your photography; are you a happy snapper or see yourself being slightly more professional. At a guess, I presume the rule change is aimed allowing people as one would see them in their 'live' working environment (often pilots in flightdeck shots). Staged photos as Craig's above may not necessarily count. For that matter, I don't wish to see a return to the famous (or rhsould that be infamous?) Hooters Air flight attendant photos.

Apologises for any lack of reasoning but please make allowances due to the latenss of the hour (00.39 GMT)!

Happy Holidays.

G-CIVP

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 12): Creative needs to be writted 'creative'

Could you tell me what you mean by this exactly, Tim?

Thanks
Carson

How are you guys going to know if a photog got permission from the people in the photo? Are you providing a link to download a release, and is the photog going to be responsible for providing a release to the site?

Not that I upload anymore...  

Quoting Chrisair (Reply 41): How are you guys going to know if a photog got permission from the people in the photo? Are you providing a link to download a release, and is the photog going to be responsible for providing a release to the site?

Yes it would be on a basis of good faith. We are not responsible for people taking the mick. Photos will be deleted if we would find out the people did not give permission.

Tim

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 42): Yes it would be on a basis of good faith. We are not responsible for people taking the mick. Photos will be deleted if we would find out the people did not give permission.

Interesting. I suppose based on the emails with complaints? If else, how ?

KS/codeshare

Quoting Codeshare (Reply 43): Interesting. I suppose based on the emails with complaints?

Yes, it's happened in the past. We'll verify the complaints of course.

Tim

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 12): Pilot's faces can now also be visible but of course you need permission from them to upload the shot.

A couple of others here have commented on the "waving pilot" syndrome. Would it not be accepted that if the pilot is waving at the photographer / assembled spectators then that infers permission for the photo to be taken ? Obviously this assumes that the waving pilot is not the sole point of the picture.

Gaining the personal permission of the pilot to upload the picture is virtually impossible in most circumstances.