I've had quite a long break from uploading, but added 5 to the queue to see if I'd lost the knack!
I was puzzled to get 'Double' rejections, (along with others), using the criteria that used to be acceptable.
First one, same aircraft, same day, one shot of left side, other of right side, both in flight.
Second, three shots, one left side, one right and under side in flight, one landing.
They were rejected for other reasons....quite correctly too...the light at Miramar is a nightmare.
But just interested if the rules have changed since early last year?
John
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
John,
as far as I know the double rule has remained unchanged but showing your examples would make it easier to tell what the issue was.
Cheers,
Thierry
as far as I know the double rule has remained unchanged but showing your examples would make it easier to tell what the issue was.
Cheers,
Thierry
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Johndm1957 (Thread starter): First one, same aircraft, same day, one shot of left side, other of right side, both in flight. |
Normally an appeal is doing the job in that situation.
georg
-
- johndm1957
- Posts: 138
- Joined:
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
No appeal needed here georg.
They were correctly rejected for 'contrast' & 'quality', its the 'double' I don't quite understand.
They were correctly rejected for 'contrast' & 'quality', its the 'double' I don't quite understand.
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Johndm1957 (Reply 2): John |
Hi John
I want to make it clear that they are not double. Other quality-wise rejection reasons are still valid. But double rejection was wrongly given. Sorry about that.
It is definitely allowed to upload both sides of the airplane taken on the same day.
_Hongyin_
-
- Silver1SWA
- Posts: 4860
- Joined:
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
I have a problem with the double rejection when it is strictly applied to airshows. I can understand the rejection reason when dealing with standard side-on shots of a 737 or A320 depicting a routine action. But when you catch a 20 minute demonstration of an aircraft performing some of its top maneuvers, you are bound to get a few spectacular shots.
At the Miramar Airshow last October, a 747SP made a surprise visit with some spectacular passes. It performed two especially eye-opening passes, one at high speed no more than 30 feet off the deck and another in formation with The Patriots jet team. Because I got a shot of the low pass accepted, I cannot get the other shot accepted because the screeners feel it's a double. It sucks that both passes showed the same side of the aircraft. I even tried uploading it under a registration from another aircraft in the formation but no foolin those screeners. It's not like there are hundreds of photos of this rare event flooding in...none other than mine have been accepted up to this point. So it bothers me that I cannot share that sight with the viewers here. I know for a fact some would enjoy seeing it in the database.
You are right about the light at Miramar John...not a photography friendly airshow, that's for sure.
At the Miramar Airshow last October, a 747SP made a surprise visit with some spectacular passes. It performed two especially eye-opening passes, one at high speed no more than 30 feet off the deck and another in formation with The Patriots jet team. Because I got a shot of the low pass accepted, I cannot get the other shot accepted because the screeners feel it's a double. It sucks that both passes showed the same side of the aircraft. I even tried uploading it under a registration from another aircraft in the formation but no foolin those screeners. It's not like there are hundreds of photos of this rare event flooding in...none other than mine have been accepted up to this point. So it bothers me that I cannot share that sight with the viewers here. I know for a fact some would enjoy seeing it in the database.
You are right about the light at Miramar John...not a photography friendly airshow, that's for sure.
-
- johndm1957
- Posts: 138
- Joined:
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Bubbles (Reply 6): Hi John I want to make it clear that they are not double. Other quality-wise rejection reasons are still valid. But double rejection was wrongly given. Sorry about that. It is definitely allowed to upload both sides of the airplane taken on the same day. _Hongyin_ |
Hiya
You must have posted as I was writing my last reply!
Question answered, many thanks for clearing that up for me.
You'll be pleased to know that I've some better ones from Miramar still to come.
Cheers,
John
[Edited 2009-01-19 13:37:05]
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Johndm1957 (Reply 9): You'll be pleased to know that I've some better ones from Miramar still to come. |
Good. Keep'em coming.
_Hongyin_
-
- johndm1957
- Posts: 138
- Joined:
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 7): You are right about the light at Miramar John...not a photography friendly airshow, that's for sure. |
We plan to attend the 2009 show, so hoping for cloud rather than the glare of the sun in front all day.
| Quoting Bubbles (Reply 8): Good. Keep'em coming. |
Soon...
-
- Silver1SWA
- Posts: 4860
- Joined:
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Johndm1957 (Reply 9): We plan to attend the 2009 show, so hoping for cloud rather than the glare of the sun in front all day. |
As much as I bitch about that airshow and the usual weather that shows up, I will say the cloud cover probably saved that one photo I got accepted. A little ironic... haha
-
- carloscane
- Posts: 25
- Joined:
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
So just to get this clear, if I upload a photo of a plane showing it's side and then the plane showing the nose, would that be accepted?
Thanks!
Thanks!
-
- Brasila684
- Posts: 77
- Joined:
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Carloscane (Reply 11): So just to get this clear, if I upload a photo of a plane showing it's side and then the plane showing the nose, would that be accepted? Thanks! |
I would probably think that both both the photo's would make it in. I would try to both the photo's motives and angles as different as possible.
Brasila684
SkyWest Baby!!!!
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
Without naming names, I have seen people upload photos and write just the year or the month and the year(for example 2008 or July, 2008). I've seen this used as a loophole against double rejections in the past. One can upload 2 photos from a certain date and then upload more and use the month/year format. This works especially well for airshow events that go on for several days. I think given today's camera equipment there is no need to put this ambiguity in the photo information since every camera records the date a photo is taken(hell even hours, minutes and seconds!)
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
Yes that is a valid point when it comes to sick days 
. On the other hand, how many employers browse a.net to catch their employees lying
. On the other hand, how many employers browse a.net to catch their employees lying 
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Carloscane (Reply 11): So just to get this clear, if I upload a photo of a plane showing it's side and then the plane showing the nose, would that be accepted? |
| Quoting Brasila684 (Reply 12): I would probably think that both both the photo's would make it in. . |
Not so, one will usually be rejected if it's the same side of the aircraft
Peter
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 17): Not so, one will usually be rejected if it's the same side of the aircraft |
So no chance for this
Photo © Georg Noack
and this one?!?!
georg
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Jorge1812 (Reply 18): So no chance for this |
| Quoting Jorge1812 (Reply 18): and this one?!?! |
Well, your motive has moved, so in my eyes it seems to be a different shot.
Much like these two:
Photo © Brad Campbell
Photo © Dave Budd - Las Vegas Spotters
where the same plane (motive) has been captured at almost the same moment by two different photographers, or that the photographers have been standing a small distance away from each other.
Scooter01 (Screener in training
)RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
How about these:
 Photo © Zak Economides |  Photo © Jorgos Tsambikakis |
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
They are more double than the 747s in the previous post, these guys were standing side by side and snapped the same plane as it taxied by. One photo doesn't add any more value to the database than the other.
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 19): where the same plane (motive) has been captured at almost the same moment by two different photographers, or that the photographers have been standing a small distance away from each other. |
| Quoting Andz (Reply 22): They are more double than the 747s in the previous post, these guys were standing side by side and snapped the same plane as it taxied by. One photo doesn't add any more value to the database than the other. |
What are you guys on about???? The double rule does not apply to two different photographers shooting at the same location on the same day, it applies to an individual uploading multiple similar images.
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting Sovietjet (Reply 15): Yes that is a valid point when it comes to sick days . On the other hand, how many employers browse a.net to catch their employees lying |
We do receive requests from employees of companies who wish exact dates to be removed from their photos and this we honour. Likewise, some will not upload the exact date even when they know it for the same reason. Some employers can be funny about employees taking pictures while on company time or using their access privileges (as is an employers right). We have even had to remove images from the database because employers have made life difficult for the uploader. Fortunately these instances are not common, but they do happen.
We don't want to see anyone suffer as a result of sharing the images with everyone here, so requests for date or photo removal in such circumstances are honoured. However, anyone found trying to use this approach to deliberately sneak doubles into the database would be in breach of the site rules and subject to appropriate action.
But you are all good honest uploaders, so I am sure there will not be any problems!
Best regards,
Jim
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
| Quoting UA935 (Reply 23): What are you guys on about???? The double rule does not apply to two different photographers shooting at the same location on the same day, it applies to an individual uploading multiple similar images. |
Exactly, it simply doesn't apply to different photographers. Try to consider this from a photographer's point of view. You've photographed something special, the kind of thing that makes you want to contribute to this site, and then supposedly you can't upload it just because the guy who happened to stand next to you beat you to it... That would be too frustrating. That said, I do try to avoid uploading photos that look very similar to shots by other photographers.
| Quoting Jorge1812 (Reply 18): So no chance for this and this one?!?! |
| Quoting Scooter01 (Reply 19): Well, your motive has moved, so in my eyes it seems to be a different shot. |
I'd certainly expect it to be rejected for double...
Georg, also, the second shot isn't half as nice as the taxiing shot in my opinion, so should you even want to get it in the DB?
Peter
-
- timdegroot
- Posts: 3258
- Joined:
RE: Have 'Double' Rules Changed?
Hi All
The double rule will never include images taken by other photogs. Uploading would then become a nasty process whereby people would try to outdo eachother as to who'll be first.
Tim
The double rule will never include images taken by other photogs. Uploading would then become a nasty process whereby people would try to outdo eachother as to who'll be first.
Tim
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests