Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
FYODOR
Posts: 713
Joined: Sat May 28, 2005 4:13 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Tue Dec 25, 2007 10:09 am

Hi mates,

It was rejected at screening and at appeal for motive:
https://www.airliners.net/uf/view.fil...d=536891494&filename=phpCIu1IG.jpg

Do you think it have any chance after the new rules were introduced?

Regards,

Fyodor
 
damien846
Topic Author
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 2:45 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Tue Dec 25, 2007 12:39 pm

I think we all should thank Tim for his help with this thread.
Would it be possible to see some examples of the new rule? ie some "creative" ones that have been added since the new rule?
Again a merry xmas to all!
 
ake0404ar
Posts: 2386
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 10:55 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Wed Dec 26, 2007 11:29 am

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...225_AN744_FRA_JA8096_a_Feb2005.jpg

Dirty: if I look real close I just spotted a few tiny ones.......will fix it!
Motiv: ????????????????????????

Thanks
Vasco
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Wed Dec 26, 2007 12:47 pm



Quoting AKE0404AR (Reply 52):
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...225_AN744_FRA_JA8096_a_Feb2005.jpg

Dirty: if I look real close I just spotted a few tiny ones.......will fix it!
Motiv: ????????????????????????

Looks more like blurry and unlevel to me

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
dazbo5
Posts: 2719
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:05 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Wed Dec 26, 2007 2:35 pm

Tim, thanks very much for your input in to this thread. I'm sure it's proving valuable to everone.

Can I ask about the following photo:



Would this fall under the new creative rules for an 'airport' or would this still be a motive reject? This is the Le Travellers Helipad to the south-west of Mauritius and used by the 3x Air Mauritius Jetranger III's to bring the rich and famous to the restaurant at the top of the hill for lunch. At £900 per hour to charter the helicopter, I went by road!!!

Thanks and merry christmas,

Darren

[Edited 2007-12-26 06:36:26]
Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
 
spoogle
Posts: 87
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:53 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Wed Dec 26, 2007 4:45 pm



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 49):

Didnt make it , got blurry , grainey and old faithful "common" thrown in.

never mind.

Ill live  Smile
Its not what you have ... its how you use it :@)
 
boeingfreak
Posts: 381
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 7:07 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 9:38 am



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 14):
rather have some nicer streaks in the background.

There you go!  Smile

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/D-AGEL_pushback_FLO_anet_1.jpg


Florian
 
INNflight
Posts: 3527
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2004 5:11 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:10 am



Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 56):
There you go!

Like it a lot Flo, looks better!
Jet Visuals
 
boeingfreak
Posts: 381
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 7:07 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:27 am



Quoting INNflight (Reply 57):
Like it a lot Flo, looks better!

Hey Flo,
Glad you like it, keep your fingers crossed!  Smile

PS: The A340 maingear shot has just been accepted!  thumbsup   thumbsup 

Florian
 
LIPH
Posts: 841
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:13 am

Hy all. Nice topic.
Florian I love you Air Berlin shot. I remember it was rejected few months ago for some reason. I have a bunch of shots apart, saved for upload waiting that motives rules would become less tight here...
There are wonderful shots rejected for being grainy or a bit blurry, but with outstanding motives. Persoinally I would let in an original shots which lacks (to certain limits) of quality. Photography is an art. The beauty of aviation photography brings with it some odd and unusual motives, but which can make the difference.
IMHO the lack of standardization (in the motive's rule), as for any other task, risks to become a real issue here and can create a lot of confusion among photogs. More clear rules should be set (Thierry gave us a nice example with his IGRR), and these rules must be set by the screeners themselves (who are the end the "go" or "no go" of this website), not simply learned by receiving rejections.

Ciao  wave 
Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
 
Psych
Posts: 3008
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:32 am



Quoting LIPH (Reply 59):
More clear rules should be set (Thierry gave us a nice example with his IGRR), and these rules must be set by the screeners themselves

I think this is a very difficult challenge to set the screeners.

I am sure I speak for many when I say that there is general approval for A.net's motive 'requirements' to be relaxed somewhat. In the old days, many of the big hitters appeared on the site when Johan cleared out his queue - i.e. shots were accepted that were somehow challenging the screeners to accept according to the application of the criteria as they understood them.

I have been a regular on this Forum for a long time now, and I know for a fact that it seems the majority do not like to feel criteria are imposed rigidly. Having said that, motive is - by definition - a subjective assessment and therefore it is never going to be possible to write the rules down easily. For me the best way of saying it is that a photo should 1. have a clear aviation subject and 2. be clearly trying to 'tell' the viewer something. This latter point is key when we discuss motive - either the image is conventional, according to the rules (the centring discussion earlier was a good example of this) or it is clear, when something more unconventional is going on, what the photographer is trying to convey with their image. This latter point is purely subjective.

There is a danger when trying to relax once apparently 'rigid' rules that this then opens the floodgates for all kinds of poor motives to be uploaded. Let's hope this does not happen.

That's why I feel the only way to progress this discussion is by discussing real examples - be they rejections for motive or accepted photos that pushed the boundaries somewhat - and exploring the reasons for the acceptance/rejection.

All the best.

Paul
 
Stealthz
Posts: 5558
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:43 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:33 am



Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 56):
There you go!

Maybe it is just me!
Whilst I accept the streaks at the rear may be fine, the ones in front still IMHO kill the shot!

Cheers

Chris
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!....well that might have changed!!!
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 12:06 pm



Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 56):
There you go!

But the ones in the foreground are still distracting IMO

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
Ander
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:14 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 2:51 pm



Quoting AKE0404AR (Reply 52):
Motiv: ????????????????????????

Don't know what scrreners will say but I just love it, Vasco.
Great shot!!!
Born to tri.
 
javibi
Posts: 1295
Joined: Sat Oct 02, 2004 5:55 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 3:58 pm



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 49):
What do you want to tell us by cropping it like that?

Tell? Purpose? I find those questions very difficult to answer; IMHO that crop just looks nice, but...

Thanks for taking the time to answer.

j
 
Halcyon
Posts: 1622
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 4:47 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 10:42 pm



Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 56):

The light streaks don't bother me at all, but it seems that no screeners like the shot. A shame, but the new rules are a great concession to the members of A.net.
 
ake0404ar
Posts: 2386
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 10:55 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:36 pm



Quoting Ander (Reply 63):
Don't know what scrreners will say but I just love it, Vasco.
Great shot!!!

thanks, good to know that I am not the only one who likes it....for me this shot is "aviation" and I would love to
have it in the database. Any help in improving the shot is appreciated!

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 53):
Looks more like blurry and unlevel to me

Tim

Ander, here is your answer, although I tend to disagree with Tim on this one.
1.) Level depends which part of the picture you take as a reference
2.) Blurry, don't think so.......it might be a bit misleading as this was shot with a total of 800mm

Vasco
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Dec 27, 2007 11:48 pm



Quoting AKE0404AR (Reply 66):
Ander, here is your answer, although I tend to disagree with Tim on this one.
1.) Level depends which part of the picture you take as a reference
2.) Blurry, don't think so.......it might be a bit misleading as this was shot with a total of 800mm

leane to right, think it needs ccw. And some parts are blurry at least, look at the titles they are fuzzy

Also I'd like to make clear (we are seeing this in some of the submissions) that only the motive rule (plus centered and people) has been relaxed (plus some quality related rejections for spectacular shots) not rules for color,contrast, level etc. They still apply.

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
Ander
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:14 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Fri Dec 28, 2007 8:48 am

Hi Tim and everyone,
I posted a few rejections in Paul Markaman's thread as I thought it was better focused on discussion about motives, but since nobody answered I'm posting here again.
As I said in the other thread this is no new motiv, as there are many similar shots in the db so I don't see why is motiv rejected.

https://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...ename=20071227_hcbrg1gye230107.jpg


This one is also a motiv rejection

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...s/big/20071227_md80panel1engb1.jpg

Also rejected for info but as I said, I don't want problems with the airline, therefore Ithought it was incovenient to provide
reg. no. information.

Cheers,

Ander
Born to tri.
 
Psych
Posts: 3008
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:06 am

In fact, Ander, we were both posting at the same time. I was writing a response to one of your photos here.

I had hopes to make a distinction between that thread and this - by us using the other thread to look in more depth at the reasons why unconventional shots either do or don't work. It seems there may not be the appetite I had hoped for to discuss such things in detail. Without such discussion I am not sure this issue will move forward and - worse - there will be increasing numbers of people submitting unconventional motives, thinking they now should get accepted, only for the rejections to still roll in.

In my view we are losing an opportunity here to understand what makes photos 'work' (or not, as the case may be) unless we look at some more examples and discuss them.

Cheers.

Paul
 
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:16 am



Quoting Ander (Reply 68):
As I said in the other thread this is no new motiv, as there are many similar shots in the db so I don't see why is motiv rejected.

https://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...ename=20071227_hcbrg1gye230107.jpg


This one is also a motiv rejection

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...s/big/20071227_md80panel1engb1.jpg

Second one I agree with, justa few dials. First one I like, we will discuss it.

Quoting AirKas1 (Reply 70):
I went looking for some shots I thought got a motive rejections in the past and found some. Was wondering which could make it with the new rules:

The engine shot should have made it before, and the ATP looks fine too. Cockpit shot looks ok although the crop is not that good IMO. The others will still have motive issues

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
User avatar
airkas1
Posts: 7904
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:01 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Fri Dec 28, 2007 10:40 am



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 71):
The engine shot should have made it before, and the ATP looks fine too. Cockpit shot looks ok although the crop is not that good IMO. The others will still have motive issues

Alrighty, thanks for the quick reply!
 
dimoko
Posts: 273
Joined: Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:44 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Fri Dec 28, 2007 3:01 pm

"I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be." -- Douglas Adams
 
dazbo5
Posts: 2719
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:05 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Fri Dec 28, 2007 9:38 pm

Just a quick thanks to the screening team and DM regarding the relaxed rules for 'people'. The following cabin shot has just been accepted. It was rejected for 'people' when I first uploaded it nearly 2 years ago due to the cabin crews faces being distinguishable. Under the new rules, this is now acceptable given that they add to the photo in my opinion.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Wilson



I think this is a great step forward for the site.

Happy New year for next week!!

Darren
Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
 
damien846
Topic Author
Posts: 629
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 2:45 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:12 am



Quoting Aviopic (Reply 4):
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 ?

I have asked for an example of the new "Creative" rules and here one is.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Willem Honders


Well done!
 
boeingfreak
Posts: 381
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 7:07 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Dec 29, 2007 10:04 am



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 62):
But the ones in the foreground are still distracting IMO

Yup, rejected for motive....
 
User avatar
acontador
Posts: 1397
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 11:54 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Dec 29, 2007 1:53 pm

Hi Ander,

Quoting Ander (Reply 68):
This one is also a motiv rejection

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...s/big/20071227_md80panel1engb1.jpg

Also rejected for info but as I said, I don't want problems with the airline, therefore I thought it was inconvenient to provide reg. no. information.

That one was me  duck  . Let me explain you a bit what I thought when screening it and why I chose not to accept it because of motive. Actually I spent some unusually long time screening this one...
If you look at the picture closely, the only part really fully shown and in focus in the one dial (right engine RPM I think), everything else is either cut or out of focus. In other words, you are showing one dial. Additionally, the plane is on the ground with engines off, thus dial is showing 0.
While I agree that there are other similar shots in the DB, they are similar just at a first glance, since they show more panel with more dials focused, and most of the times with some 'action' (=in flight, engines on, etc.). All in all, I felt that showing fully only one dial actually not working is just not enough.

If I remember correctly, I also put info and dark.
Info, because you didn't provide the registration in the requested format (if you don't know or don't want to put it in, than at least it should be something like EC-***), and I still cannot see why putting the correct aircraft info/type should be a problem...
Dark, because even if the lighting was dim, you can still improve the overall look of the picture considerably by adjusting levels, although I agree that then you're going to get a lot of grain visible.

In a few words, that is about the reasoning and thinking behind my screening of your picture. Hope it helps to better understand why it wasn't accepted. In any case, if you disagree with my assessment, you always have the option to appeal it and have the headscreeners have another look at it.
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
 
Farcry
Posts: 152
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 11:39 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Dec 29, 2007 3:24 pm

Just to go back in time. I fell in love with this photo as it (for me), sums up the power of aviation over the years. This paricular shot seems to define the 'creative' rule superbly. There is so much to enjoy. The aircraft taking off. The busy background. Yet, my eye is drawn to the four 'old' folks enjoying their day at the airport. But, the fact they are so prominent does not detract from the rest of the photo. Of course, this is just my opinion.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Serge Bailleul - AirTeamImages



Serge, hope you don't mind me using your photo as an example.
Exactly how long is a drastic measure?
 
User avatar
dvincent
Posts: 1591
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 9:53 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Dec 29, 2007 4:26 pm

Will this get a people rejection? It's nearly impossible to photograph these things on airshow days without getting people.

Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 681 File size: 544kb
From the Mind of Minolta
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Dec 29, 2007 4:28 pm



Quoting Dvincent (Reply 79):
Will this get a people rejection? It's nearly impossible to photograph these things on airshow days without getting people.

No but it will get motive. A few people are not that bad but the ones blocking the nose are nasty.

Under the new rules people will have have a function in the image. We're not simply accepting all pictures that happen to have some people in it.

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
User avatar
dvincent
Posts: 1591
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 9:53 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Dec 29, 2007 4:39 pm



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 80):

Under the new rules people will have have a function in the image. We're not simply accepting all pictures that happen to have some people in it.

OK then, just making sure I'm guessing it right.
From the Mind of Minolta
 
Ander
Posts: 349
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:14 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Dec 29, 2007 7:12 pm



Quoting Acontador (Reply 77):
That one was me . Let me explain you a bit what I thought when screening it and why I chose not to accept it because of motive. Actually I spent some unusually long time screening this one...
If you look at the picture closely, the only part really fully shown and in focus in the one dial (right engine RPM I think), everything else is either cut or out of focus. In other words, you are showing one dial. Additionally, the plane is on the ground with engines off, thus dial is showing 0.
While I agree that there are other similar shots in the DB, they are similar just at a first glance, since they show more panel with more dials focused, and most of the times with some 'action' (=in flight, engines on, etc.). All in all, I felt that showing fully only one dial actually not working is just not enough.

If I remember correctly, I also put info and dark.
Info, because you didn't provide the registration in the requested format (if you don't know or don't want to put it in, than at least it should be something like EC-***), and I still cannot see why putting the correct aircraft info/type should be a problem...
Dark, because even if the lighting was dim, you can still improve the overall look of the picture considerably by adjusting levels, although I agree that then you're going to get a lot of grain visible.

In a few words, that is about the reasoning and thinking behind my screening of your picture. Hope it helps to better understand why it wasn't accepted. In any case, if you disagree with my assessment, you always have the option to appeal it and have the headscreeners have another look at it.

Andres,
I really appreciate you taking the time to ellaborate an explanation for the rejection.
Hopefully we will discuss it in depth in afew days in person  box 
But let me say IMHO you screeners are a bit erratic when screening some photos, which I guess is only human.
Of course no complaint, just my view.
As Eduard says this shot does not require so much thought.

Quote:
In my opinion, a motive should not need a whole lot of explanation. If it does need explanations, to me that means the the motive does not make it a very appealing picture. In this case it makes a picture look 'weird' to the viewer, who doesn't see the motive. If you have to search for the motive (like Florians ATR, no offence Flo!), it loses its appeal for many people. Just my view on these things.

Ed



I believe it works, at least for me, and for many who have seen it and liked it. Of course this is always subjective and as A.net rules apply here, no more discussion is needed. Maybe my opinion is byassed by the fact of being flight crew and having flown countless hours at night, I must say this would be a very usual sight during a normal scan thru the flight instruments. But as said, this is only my opinion.

Hope the debate continues and photogs keep pushing the boundaries of creativity.

All the best for the new year.

Ander
Born to tri.
 
bmibaby737
Posts: 1644
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:07 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sun Dec 30, 2007 2:41 pm

https://www.airliners.net/uf/536892286/phpvzwgdp.jpg

Guys, would this sort of image be allowed?
 
McG1967
Posts: 556
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 2:36 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sun Dec 30, 2007 9:18 pm

I'm pushing the boat out a bit with this photo - I am aware it is an uncoventional crop for a tail shot.
Taken on Veterans Day ( Rememberance Sunday for those of us from the UK ) at Aviation Nation this year.

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/IMG_7324-1024.jpg
 
User avatar
walter2222
Posts: 1244
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:40 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:07 am

This one was rejected for motiv (long time ago):


http://myaviation.net/?pid=00660624

would this kind of shot be allowed today?

Happy New Year to you all  champagne   champagne   champagne 

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

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:26 am

@BMIBaby737: it's nice, and there is some stuff around it, I think it could receive motiv.

Quoting McG1967 (Reply 84):
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/IMG_7324-1024.jpg

Hmm, I don't think so. The crop is too tight IMHO.

Quoting Walter2222 (Reply 85):
http://myaviation.net/?pid=00660624

I'm a bit surprised it didn't get in....

KS/codeshare
How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
 
dazbo5
Posts: 2719
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:05 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Mon Dec 31, 2007 8:47 pm

A few recent additions that I've previously had rejected for motive but are now acceptable under the new rules:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Wilson
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Wilson




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Wilson



I'd like to take this opportinity to wish everyone all the best for the new year and especially the screeners, editors and moderators who make this site what it is  champagne   champagne 

Darren

PS I've posted these as examples of what is now being accepted. Don't click on them because I'm not after hits, unless you really want to!
Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
 
Scotland1979
Posts: 331
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 3:19 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:45 pm

Yeah, it is time to change for better... I have been waited for this.

I have other photo being rejected due to "bad motive" - I tried this for creative shot! And that photo I received many emails and ordered this photo http://myaviation.net/?pid=01036486 . Just wonder, after many emails that ordered my photo, how can you say it was "bad motive" ?

Thank you!

Hope your rule change will be better for ANet
Jesus said "I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me" - John 14:6
 
ake0404ar
Posts: 2386
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 10:55 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Tue Jan 01, 2008 12:13 am

1.) rejected for info and contrast

worked on the contrast a little bit and I guess overdid the sharpening.....

2.) now rejected for motiv  confused  and oversharpened

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...EK777_DXB_engine_new_13Nov2007.jpg

Is it worth to try it again??????????

Vasco
 
dazbo5
Posts: 2719
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:05 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Tue Jan 01, 2008 12:15 am



Quoting Scotland1979 (Reply 88):
how can you say it was "bad motive" ?

I think that shot would have stood a good chance was it not for the end of the winglet on the 744 being chopped off. If you can re-edit with the winglet in it's entiraty, you should be ok motive wise. It looks a little grainy on my laptop screen as well.

Happy new year!

Darren
Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
 
GimliGlider
Posts: 76
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:29 am

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Thu Jan 03, 2008 4:43 am



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 34):
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

Thanks Fred, I can only hope so. In the meantime, I'm patiently awaiting a crewmember's opinion...  Wink
"You could attach that to your house and still go 0-60 in 5 seconds..."
 
KLM772ER
Posts: 520
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 5:29 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:06 pm

Hello!

Browsed through some old files from 2006 and found this one:
Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 683 File size: 414kb

Would something like this be acceptable under the new rules? (Especially this one in particular?)

Cheers
Bjorn
 
timdegroot
Posts: 3258
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2002 10:37 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:11 pm



Quoting KLM772ER (Reply 92):
Would something like this be acceptable under the new rules? (Especially this one in particular?)

Not this one no, the sky is not that spectacular as to warrant this crop.

Tim
Alderman Exit
 
KLM772ER
Posts: 520
Joined: Mon May 01, 2006 5:29 pm

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:23 pm

Thanks Tim!

And what about this one? (It is the other one I really like from that day...)
Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 683 File size: 359kb

Regarding the centering, it is because at the bottom there were "only" grey clouds, and I wanted to include the whole great sky..

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

RE: 'new Creative Rules'

Sat Jan 05, 2008 12:47 pm



Quoting AKE0404AR (Reply 89):
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...EK777_DXB_engine_new_13Nov2007.jpg

Is it worth to try it again??????????

Well, hard to tell. It's a bit of an odd crop. IMHO would look better if only the engine and right gear were in the picture.

KS/codeshare
How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos