'new Creative Rules'

damien846 · Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:15 am

OK Tim,
Here we go then.
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

timdegroot · Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:26 am

Hi Damien

Thanks for setting up the thread. This is actually a good example.

By our old rules this image would have been instantly rejected for not being centered. With our new rules in mind we must look for a purpose as to why you framed it like that. I think in this shot that purpose is not apparent enough to warrant the framing. Had it been a gorgeous sunset sky or a sky with spectacular clouds we might have allowed it. The current sky does not add that much to the shot.

Hope this answers your question

Tim

Stealthz · Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:27 am

Can't answer for the screening team but it is a little close cropped on the nose for my tastes

Cheers

damien846 · Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:35 am

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 1):
Thanks for setting up the thread. This is actually a good example.

No problem, lets hope more people use this thread.
Ref the sky, this is a perfect sky for gliding! Nice fluffy cumulus, and as I went flying in the glider in this shot just after I took it I can say it was a perfect gliding sky. I guess a shot for glider pilots only.
Thanks for the comments
Damien

aviopic · Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:46 am

Tim, I had this rejected some time ago for motive people.

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...05_Dak_Dragmout_N473DC_MG_4664.jpg

Remark: This a/c took part on many actions during ww2 and the bullet holes are still present in the fuselage and Captain seat. Now loaded with paratroopers to remember Market Garden, a yearly event in The Netherlands.

In my view the para's need to be there(see remark)
Worth re-uploading under the new rules ?

timdegroot · Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:51 am

Hi Willem

I think this a good example of a well motivated shot. Although I'd like to see a wider view to see them entering the aircraft (if you have one).

Btw, let's be clear on this now. I'm just posting my first thoughts here on these shots in light of the new rules. Many of these shots may have to be discussed within the crew first before they will be accepted.

Tim

INNflight · Fri Dec 21, 2007 11:57 am

Great thread to get a YAY or NAY from the crew! Smile

Had this one rejected a few weeks ago: Centered and personal

Personal was very nice, said to recrop it a bit higher (thx btw!), but it just didn't look right for me, so I didn't give it a 2nd shot.

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r.../big/20071121_0R8G8494_f900smv.jpg

Motivation would be the snow falling off the gear, the background and the sparkling fuselage Wink

timdegroot · Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:27 pm

I'd crop a bit more off the bottom Flo so you're right on the edge of the streamers.

That was my personal the first time too Wink

Tim

KLM772ER · Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:35 pm

So what would be with a shot like this:

Big version: Width: 1200 Height: 800 File size: 756kb

Motivation is to show the shadow "landing" parallel to us Wink

Would this be ok?

Cheers

Bjorn

timdegroot · Fri Dec 21, 2007 12:44 pm

Bjorn that motive would have probably been ok before the new rules even

Tim

McG1967 · Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:13 pm

Under the old rules, this shot would have got a Motive rejection for the runway hiding the bottom of the wheels and engines. Would this still be the case under the new rules?

http://www.pbase.com/mcgaeroimaging/image/90498239

Regards

Mark

boeingfreak · Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:52 pm

Hello Tim,
thanks for taking the time and answering our questions!

Would something like this still be considered as "bad-motive"?

I reuploaded this picture 2 months ago or so, unfortunately I accidently uploaded an old version (have edited this picture numerous times) and it got rejected with a warning (Do this again and you'll be banned...). I'm very sorry for this!

So would it be acceptable now?

Cheers,
Florian

[Edited 2007-12-21 05:53:28]

walter2222 · Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:34 pm

Would something like this (a satellite - in the test area) be allowed now (motive wise - I know the quality is not there)?

Big version: Width: 512 Height: 768 File size: 301kb

In case the thumb is not showing, it is also in my profile...

Thanks and regards,

Walter

TransIsland · Fri Dec 21, 2007 3:42 pm

While we're on the topic... below are two pics; one rejected for center/motive, and one where I had the good sense never to submit it to this site.

MyAviation.net photo:

Photo © Stephen B. Aranha

The tail of our ride that day plus the airport terminal in North Eleuthera.

MyAviation.net photo:

Photo © Stephen B. Aranha

The intention was to show the airport's proximity to the hotel it mainly serves as well as a bit of the ramp that allows seaplanes to get in and out of the water.

timdegroot · Fri Dec 21, 2007 4:21 pm

Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 11):
Would something like this still be considered as "bad-motive"?

Personally I'm not a big fan of this, rather have some nicer streaks in the background.

Quoting Walter2222 (Reply 12):
Would something like this (a satellite - in the test area) be allowed now (motive wise - I know the quality is not there)?

No satellites are not allowed on their own.

Quoting TransIsland (Reply 13):
While we're on the topic... below are two pics; one rejected for center/motive, and one where I had the good sense never to submit it to this site.

I would go with a maybe on the first (in that we cna discuss it) and a no on the second one, simply not enough aviation in it.

Tim

airkas1 · Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:51 pm

Hi Tim,

I posted a thread a few days ago about night shots. With these new rules, would such a thing be acceptable?
Night Shots (by AirKas1 Dec 19 2007 in Aviation Photography)

timdegroot · Fri Dec 21, 2007 5:52 pm

Kas, those were always acceptable (if they show a bit of airport/runway)

Cheers
Tim

ake0404ar · Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:06 pm

A question into a different direction. We are now talking about creative stuff:

An artistic / creative shot can be slightly out of focus, a bit grainy etc. but still a stunning picture and the majority of the visitors won't notice it anyway!

Any chances ?????

Vasco

GimliGlider · Fri Dec 21, 2007 6:10 pm

Maybe I haven't read the new rules closely enough yet, but do they mean this might have the slightest chance of getting accepted?

MyAviation.net:

Photographer Ã‚Â© Ben Remy

Many thanks for taking the time to look at these shots Tim! Smile

timdegroot · Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:19 pm

Quoting AKE0404AR (Reply 17):
An artistic / creative shot can be slightly out of focus, a bit grainy etc. but still a stunning picture and the majority of the visitors won't notice it anyway!

Any chances ?????

It all depends on the shot Vasco. We cannot say 'we'll reject anything that's grainy' or 'we'll accept anything that has a bit of grain'. If the shot is unique and difficult we will be lenient, maybe a bit more then we have been in the past.

However, I mus stress that our quality standards will stay the same: only the best for A.net

Tim

2H4 · Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:34 pm

Quoting INNflight (Reply 6):
Motivation would be the snow falling off the gear, the background and the sparkling fuselage

Wow, I really like that shot. Particularly the snow trails.

2H4

boeingfreak · Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:37 pm

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 14):
Personally I'm not a big fan of this, rather have some nicer streaks in the background.

So it is still a motive rejection?

Thanks,
Florian

Stealthz · Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:47 am

Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 21):
Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 14):
Personally I'm not a big fan of this, rather have some nicer streaks in the background.

So it is still a motive rejection?

From my non screener perspective I would agree with Tim, I would much prefer the shot without the streaks or to the rear.
IMHO the shot is a victim of unfortunate timing rather than "creative"

Cheers

Chris

Silver1SWA · Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:12 am

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 19):
Quoting AKE0404AR (Reply 17):
An artistic / creative shot can be slightly out of focus, a bit grainy etc. but still a stunning picture and the majority of the visitors won't notice it anyway!

Any chances ?????

It all depends on the shot Vasco. We cannot say 'we'll reject anything that's grainy' or 'we'll accept anything that has a bit of grain'. If the shot is unique and difficult we will be lenient, maybe a bit more then we have been in the past.

Hmm, this sounds promising. Perhaps I should give a couple of my shots another try. scratchchin

photopilot · Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:21 am

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 1):
By our old rules this image would have been instantly rejected for not being centered. With our new rules in mind we must look for a purpose as to why you framed it like that. I think in this shot that purpose is not apparent enough to warrant the framing. Had it been a gorgeous sunset sky or a sky with spectacular clouds we might have allowed it. The current sky does not add that much to the shot.

Which clearly shows that you don't understand or know about the sport of soaring, or how absolutely intrinsic those Cu's are to a glider pilot.

Quoting Damien846 (Reply 3):
Ref the sky, this is a perfect sky for gliding! Nice fluffy cumulus, and as I went flying in the glider in this shot just after I took it I can say it was a perfect gliding sky. I guess a shot for glider pilots only.

Man, that sky and Cu's are the perfect wet-dream to a soaring pilot. Yes, the nose of the Duo is cropped a bit tight for my liking, but a view of those clouds makes me dream to be airborne again. Looks like a nice 4-5000' base and +10 kts..... whoopeee!!!!

Silver1SWA · Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:37 am

Tim,

If I wanted to give a rejected shot another try, should I try appealing first before resubmitting? I mean, would an appeal be screened with these new standards in mind?

TomTurner · Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:17 am

Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 11):
So would it be acceptable now?

I guess the consensus is a "no" Florian. Have to say, I think its quite good though.

Tom

boeingfreak · Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:16 am

Tom, Chris, thanks for your opinions!
I'll keep it for my personal collection. Smile

Cheers and merry christmas,
Florian wave

timdegroot · Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:10 pm

Quoting Photopilot (Reply 24):

Which clearly shows that you don't understand or know about the sport of soaring, or how absolutely intrinsic those Cu's are to a glider pilot.

Ouch hitting me where it hurts my soaring knowledge Wink

Totally agree (althoguh I did take a full week of glider lessons) but then again 99,9% of our viewers probably do not know either...not good enoguh reason for the croppping, my argument still stands. We won't allow putting an aircraft low in frame in front of a blue sky because it's such good weather for flying a jet...

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 25):
If I wanted to give a rejected shot another try, should I try appealing first before resubmitting? I mean, would an appeal be screened with these new standards in mind?

Yes please appeal first.

Florian, yes in my view it would still be motive, as others have said it really doesn't add that much to the shot (although you probably think otherwise Wink

)

Tim

metroliner · Sat Dec 22, 2007 6:29 pm

I'm sorry, what on earth is the 'Creative' rule?!

You leave for a day and then something like this happens...

Toni

KaiGywer · Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:56 pm

Quoting Metroliner (Reply 29):
I'm sorry, what on earth is the 'Creative' rule?!

New Photography Announcements (by Flyheligirl Dec 20 2007 in Aviation Photography)

photopilot · Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:28 pm

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 28):
Quoting Photopilot (Reply 24):

Which clearly shows that you don't understand or know about the sport of soaring, or how absolutely intrinsic those Cu's are to a glider pilot.

Ouch hitting me where it hurts my soaring knowledge Totally agree (althoguh I did take a full week of glider lessons) but then again 99,9% of our viewers probably do not know either...not good enoguh reason for the croppping, my argument still stands. We won't allow putting an aircraft low in frame in front of a blue sky because it's such good weather for flying a jet...

Sorry Tim, but I strongly must disagree with you. Take a look at the following photo (great shot BTW and no critisizm of the photo or photographer)

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages

Only a VERY SMALL percentage of the frame actually encompasses and aircraft (or parts thereof) while the rest of the frame is solely dedicated to cloud formations. Heck, even the comments state....."What a wonderful sunset enroute SIN-LAX "

So my question rhetorically speaking in regards to the OP's soaring glider photo. Why can't we soaring pilots simply say "What a wonderful Soaring Sky" and the photo have as much validity towards acceptance. I'm hoping you do see my point and the inconsistency if the soaring photo was to be rejected stated on what you said above.

Thanks for the chance for creative input into recognizing great photos.

Steve

ake0404ar · Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:31 pm

Once we are at it:

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...1222_WOA_DC10_N304WL_17Dec2007.jpg

Got this one rejected for motiv colour, (which I agree at least the colour part) motiv??????
Worth a fix?

Vasco

flipdewaf · Sat Dec 22, 2007 11:07 pm

Quoting GimliGlider (Reply 18):
Maybe I haven't read the new rules closely enough yet, but do they mean this might have the slightest chance of getting accepted?

Many thanks for taking the time to look at these shots Tim! Smile

I really really hope that one is allowed in, it is such a creative shot! More of this type of thing can only make A.net a better place to see pictures.

Fred

timdegroot · Sun Dec 23, 2007 11:37 am

Yes Vasco, improve it and it should not get motive I think

Tim

eadster · Sun Dec 23, 2007 12:34 pm

Quoting McG1967 (Reply 10):
Under the old rules, this shot would have got a Motive rejection for the runway hiding the bottom of the wheels and engines. Would this still be the case under the new rules?

http://www.pbase.com/mcgaeroimaging/...98239

I like that one. I'd look at the centering of it though. Looks a little off to me.

Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 11):
So would it be acceptable now?

Cheers,
Florian

It shouldn't have been rejected to begin with in my opinion. I remember when you posted it a while back. Still a great shot. Hopefully it gets in sooner or later!

boeingfreak · Sun Dec 23, 2007 1:07 pm

Quoting Eadster (Reply 35):
It shouldn't have been rejected to begin with in my opinion. I remember when you posted it a while back. Still a great shot. Hopefully it gets in sooner or later!

Hello Martin, thanks for your nice words!

Yes, I also hope it gets its chance sooner or later, there are shots with light-streaks infront of the aircraft online at a.net and the following shot is, since the day it was added, one of my alltime favourites:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Luis Tena Orozco - AeroImagenes de Mexico

Tim, I just saw you managed to get a main gear closeup of a 777 online. I had a similar picture rejected in August, are maingear closeups acceptable again?

Cheers and merry christmas to all of you,
Florian

[Edited 2007-12-23 05:08:24]

dazbo5 · Sun Dec 23, 2007 1:55 pm

The new creative rules bring up new possibilities. A great step forward! Just out of interest, would this type of thing now be acceptable:

Cabin crew doing there thing inflight?

Thanks and wishing everyone a merry christmas champagne

Darren

mictheslik · Sun Dec 23, 2007 1:57 pm

Great new rules.....would something like this be allowed now...?

.mic

jamesbuk · Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:00 pm

How about this?

Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 683 File size: 66kb

Rgds --James--

timdegroot · Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:38 pm

Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 36):

Tim, I just saw you managed to get a main gear closeup of a 777 online. I had a similar picture rejected in August, are maingear closeups acceptable again?

They have always been acceptable, as long as the image had some 'pop'' to it, action or nice light etc

Quoting Mictheslik (Reply 38):
Great new rules.....would something like this be allowed now...?

No. Aside from the quality the composition is not all that great. It's unlevel and the image you're trying to create doesn't work that well because the sign is cut and dark.

Quoting Jamesbuk (Reply 39):
How about this?

The motive would have been acceptable before but this image is IMO not a great silhouette, the background is too light. Also a bit blurry.

Hope this helps.

Tim

Stealthz · Sun Dec 23, 2007 2:47 pm

Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 36):
Tim, I just saw you managed to get a main gear closeup of a 777 online. I had a similar picture rejected in August, are maingear closeups acceptable again?

Once again, my opinion not an official stance.
Tim's recent B777 gear shot has a degree of movement that adds to the image whereas yours is "frozen in time"
Tim's is also 1024 wide V 1600, I understand higher res/larger screens are becoming more common, the need to "pan & scan" to see the whole picture does detract somewhat.

Cheers

Chris

boeingfreak · Sun Dec 23, 2007 3:20 pm

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 41):
Tim's is also 1024 wide V 1600, I understand higher res/larger screens are becoming more common, the need to "pan & scan" to see the whole picture does detract somewhat

The only reason why I resized to 1600 is, that there are a lot more details visible, I like it when I see every screw and every hose. Smile

Yes, the 777 main-gear shot we're talking about shows spinning wheels, but whether you like them frozen or spinning and whether this adds to or detracts from the picture, is of course always a matter of personal taste.

Anyway, I uploaded my 1600pix A340 main-gear, let's see what happens.

Florian

QantasA332 · Mon Dec 24, 2007 2:32 am

Here's a recent rejection I'd like some feedback on, in light of the new rules...

link

I suppose it's a combination of motive/people. I feel that the motive is justified, and given the new attitude towards people... Is there any chance for this one?

calfo · Mon Dec 24, 2007 2:48 am

Quoting Damien846 (Thread starter):
OK Tim,
Here we go then.
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

I like it because the clouds add, what I mean is thats the type of cloud that makes a glider stay up in the air. Just my 2 cents

javibi · Mon Dec 24, 2007 8:02 am

Quoting QantasA332 (Reply 43):
Here's a recent rejection I'd like some feedback on, in light of the new rules...

Ditto:

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...71223_20071206MAD0003ECEXGanet.jpg

Quality I understand, but why motiv and contrast?

Thanks.

j

spoogle · Mon Dec 24, 2007 8:47 am

Quoting Javibi (Reply 45):

I just love that shot !!

However i think i can see where the screeners were coming from ...
The orange strip over the top looks a little iffy .

Still.... maybe an appeal or re-upload , under the new rules it should have a chance.

Well i would hope so as im sure it will do VERY well .

while we are on the subject ... how about : https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/an22582060.jpg
what are its chances ?

good luck

regards

[Edited 2007-12-24 00:49:00]

jamesbuk · Mon Dec 24, 2007 12:54 pm

Hey guys

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0071223_LutonEGGW2810propplane.jpg

Got Quality, motiv and info on that - whats wrong with the quality and motiv?

Rgds --James--

metroliner · Mon Dec 24, 2007 1:25 pm

Quoting Jamesbuk (Reply 47):
the quality and motiv?

It's blurry, underexposed, oversharpened and not centred... Sad

Apart from that, it's a fairly nice image, but one for the personal collection...

Quoting Javibi (Reply 45):
Ditto:

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...71223_20071206MAD0003ECEXGanet.jpg

Quality I understand, but why motiv and contrast?

Nice - but why clip the bottoms of those gorgeous engines off? Even so - it's hot...

Toni

timdegroot · Mon Dec 24, 2007 1:32 pm

Quoting QantasA332 (Reply 43):

I suppose it's a combination of motive/people. I feel that the motive is justified, and given the new attitude towards people... Is there any chance for this one?

Might stand a chance, it has a nice vibe to it.

Quoting Javibi (Reply 45):
Ditto:

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...71223_20071206MAD0003ECEXGanet.jpg

Quality I understand, but why motiv and contrast?

Thanks.

j

What do you want to tell us by cropping it like that? It's different but not sure if there's purpose to it. Purpose is the keyword in this thread.

Quoting Spoogle (Reply 46):
while we are on the subject ... how about : https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/an22582060.jpg
what are its chances ?

Nice motive, should be fine

Tim

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net