To the airliners.net photographer community:

Over the last few weeks the screening team has been discussing the centering rule, After some discussion using some recent rejected and accepted photos we have decided to give some more lee-way in relation to centering.
There is no hard and fast rule on how to properly center an image, Each photographer invariably has a different perspective of what is centered and what exceeds the acceptable limit. Furthermore, the appearance of what is "centered" dramatically changes with aircraft type, angle of which the photo was taken, and any intentional off-centering with the foreground/background.

If anyone has some examples which they feel they may need some clarification in regards to center than feel free to post them here or contact the quality team via email at [email protected]

Finally we would like to announce that the quality team is now contactable via email as listed above so if you have any questions regarding a rule or a recent accepted photo that you feel there may be issue(s) with than please contact them and one of the screeners on that team will respond to your email, Please note this team will not be pre-screening images and if you require pre-screening of images than please post here: https://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/photography_feedback/

The Airliners.net Screening Team

A very welcome change.

I often falter when centering aircraft that fill the frame. Would be nice to get an opinion on this one:



It "feels" right, but I'm afraid it might get done for "low in frame"

Cheers
Angad

Quoting angad84 (Reply 1): It "feels" right, but I'm afraid it might get done for "low in frame"

I'd centre vertically using the radome above the cockpit and the wheels - i.e. show a bit more tarmac and a bit less sky & tail. You're already cropping the tail, so cropping a bit more off won't make any difference and will lead to a more balanced shot, IMHO.

I appreciate why you've cropped where you have horizontally, but given you don't have a complete prop disk, I'd even be tempted to crop more tightly, just to the outside of the engines - you'll still have a good bit of prop blur, but would be able to crop much more closely to the landing gear and radome. Something like this (quickly cropped, aspect ratio may not be correct):

Il-18 tighter

Again, just my personal view, but I think this looks more dramatic and somewhat 'meaner'.

Quoting angad84 (Reply 1): Would be nice to get an opinion on this one:

thought this was what the feedback forum was for?

Personally, I thought there was enough leeway in the centering rules, except maybe on the issue of 'breathing space' in front of an aircraft's nose.

Quoting angad84 (Reply 1): 'm afraid it might get done for "low in frame"

Not really, the following has always been acceptable. But then, in my opinion, don't cut the tailfin.

View Large View Medium

Photo © Peter de Jong

Quoting unattendedbag (Reply 3): thought this was what the feedback forum was for?

I think that's what killed this forum...

Quoting angad84 (Reply 1): I often falter when centering aircraft that fill the frame. Would be nice to get an opinion on this one:

I would probably follow what Steve suggested - raise the aircraft a bit in frame, since the tail's already cut off anyway. Horizontal crop is fine as it is.

What about this rejection I had earlier today?

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...5.953n885bf900exeasyriat190713.jpg

If I had included the stabiliser the aircraft would not look centred in the frame?

Cheers,
Simon

Quoting Airplanepics (Reply 6): What about this rejection I had earlier today? https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...5.953n885bf900exeasyriat190713.jpg If I had included the stabiliser the aircraft would not look centred in the frame?

Clipping stabs is a judgment call - sometimes including the stab can look awkward, sometimes it can look fine. Either way, we won't reject an image for including the whole stab.

Personally I think this looks fine:

View Large View Medium Photo © Kurt Greul

View Large View Medium Photo © Gerry Stegmeier

I think it would be better to include the whole stab on your shot. It's not really that much that's cropped out.

Hi Simon,

Cutting off parts of the plane in a side-on just doesn't look good, and is a rejection reason. Include and you'll be fine. Proper centering doesn't mean that the fuselage should always be dead in the middle.

Hi guys,

What about this one?
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...318svo-b747-tso-ei-xli-takeoff.jpg

Regards,

Fyodor

Fydor, take a look at this shot
View Large View Medium

Photo © Andreas Wessel


It's un centered because of the SK 737, which means your photo probably will get accepted as well.

Eskil

Quoting FYODOR (Reply 9):

Justified rejection, It does not really work. You have cropped out jet ways and the A320 is too distant and obstructed by vehicles, The best way this shot would work with just the airport building in the background which if it is a bit high in frame would be acceptable but currently as it stands its just a messy crop with not much happening in frame.

Cheers Mark

Mark, with all respect let me completely disagree with you. With my understanding of composition - runways are important thing called to 'put' building to the ground'. Overvise it will 'hang in the air'. At least thats what I was learned 30 years ago in photography school. As about A320 I even missed it while you didn't mention - it is completely minor part of the picture.

It is indeed doesn't mean that crop you advise is somhow wrong - I always was on poit that it is only photographer who decide on composition. And if photographer is experienced we have trust and respect his experience even if we'd say "I see it in the better way'.

As I understand the new rule (but I might understand it wrong indeed) it was called exactly to give photographer freedom to decide on true centering and exclude such subjective discussions.

Eskil, I not sure your case is proper for the situation. In my picture we have two objects which are combined. A bit like airport adv as you may often see in different booklets and screens.

Regards,

Fyodor

Quoting FYODOR (Reply 12): It is indeed doesn't mean that crop you advise is somhow wrong - I always was on poit that it is only photographer who decide on composition. And if photographer is experienced we have trust and respect his experience even if we'd say "I see it in the better way'.

You can choose whatever composition you want but whether it is acceptable than that is another matter, The purpose of the changes in "centering" is not to accept any crop because the photographer likes it. There will still be standards with centering/distance shots, If it works than we will accept it if it does not than it will be rejected.

For your image to work with that crop than having all the gates filled up with aircraft or having a aircraft taxiing below frame would work for that style of crop that you have done.

Quoting FYODOR (Reply 12): As I understand the new rule (but I might understand it wrong indeed) it was called exactly to give photographer freedom to decide on true centering and exclude such subjective discussions.

We are aiming to give more leniency in relation to "centering" whether it is a little high/low in frame we want to accept rather than reject it for being abit off center, We have always accepted off centered photos if it is justified and there are plenty of examples in the database but in your case there is not much going for it with such a loose crop. I did not screen it but do agree with the rejection but that is just my opinion.

Cheers Mark

Just to add some vision to the discussion, albeit both of the new centering and motiv rules. Would an image like this with the tail/fuselage not quite centered and the left/right rotor blades cropped as they are, run foul of the new interpretations.
I am specifically not asking for a screening of the photo as such, regarding other possible defects, just wondering if it would be judged to be outside the new interpretations.

Baldur

Quoting baldursveins (Reply 14):

I see no reason why that centering wouldn't have been accepted under the old guidelines as well.

Hi Baldur,

Quoting baldursveins (Reply 14): Would an image like this with the tail/fuselage not quite centered and the left/right rotor blades cropped as they are, run foul of the new interpretations.

As Vik said, I also cannot see why there should be an issue with the centering/cropping of your picture, past or present rules. Helicopters are somewhat more difficult to crop, as they are less symmetrical than airplanes, have a different volume distribution, and have some odd parts sticking out (blades, one-sided stabilizers, etc.). During screening we take this into account.

Quoting FYODOR (Reply 12): As I understand the new rule (but I might understand it wrong indeed) it was called exactly to give photographer freedom to decide on true centering and exclude such subjective discussions.

Quoting aussie18 (Reply 13): We are aiming to give more leniency in relation to "centering" whether it is a little high/low in frame we want to accept rather than reject it for being a bit off center, We have always accepted off centered photos if it is justified and there are plenty of examples in the database but in your case there is not much going for it with such a loose crop. I did not screen it but do agree with the rejection but that is just my opinion.

   This is a nice summary. Sorry Fyodor, you are absolutely entitled to have your own opinion about your shot and upload it like that, but we need to apply the acceptance criteria as consistent as possible across the team, and at least I fully agree with this one.
In any case, you are uploading some very interesting and many times technically very challenging pictures, which not only we but also a lot of our visitors seem to like, so please keep'em coming    !

Cheers,
Andrés

Quoting baldursveins (Reply 14):

IMHO, if shots like that were to be rejected something would be going very wrong with the site.     

Quoting acontador (Reply 16): you are uploading some very interesting and many times technically very challenging pictures

Accidentally, my friend, just accidentally. I can't be a good photographer without proper knowledge in basics of composition.
 

Quoting acontador (Reply 16): which not only we but also a lot of our visitors seem to like

At least they see half of what screeners do.   But is is better than nothing like it was time ago.  

Yours,
Fyodor

[Edited 2013-08-10 05:06:37]

The centering rule was established on this site by the first owner of the site.

He was not a photographer and clearly understood little of the commonly accepted aesthetic rules and conventions of photography - the rule of thirds, etc.

The centering rule should be abolished. Period.

Hi Viv,

I don't think it is really that bad, actually the current system allows for motivated off-center airplanes. Just a few examples from today's accepted ones:

View Large View Medium Photo © Zohar Azar.

View Large View Medium Photo © Niklas Ahman

View Large View Medium Photo © Mark Kwiatkowski

View Large View Medium Photo © Matteo Stella - Malpensa Spotters Group

Incidentally, the last one is a good example of the exception to the distance rule. Personally, I would have placed the aircraft about 1/3 from the right, but we are flexible and I would have accepted both.

Cheers,
Andrés

Quoting acontador (Reply 20): current system allows for motivated off-center airplanes

Anreas, the point of Viv is different and I share it - point is that in global photography you should opposit - to motivate objects-in-center. Overwise you can be critisized for low-esthetic.It is 'rule of thirds', which Viv mentioned above. I not a big fun of it btw - there enough cases there you can not to apply it and put object in center. I'd not call it rule at all - it is advise. But it is general approach.

Center rule was critisised even 10 years ago by many photographers and I never heard any argument - why Anet standards of photography should be so different from global ones? But the only answer I heard is: "it is because it is".

I see no problem with Anet centering if photographer decide to follow that way. But I clearly misunderstand why somebody see the problem in classic composition to be done at photo. I agree with Viv - centering (and from my prospective - distance) rule doesn't have much sense and looks as 'rule for itself'.

Quoting acontador (Reply 20): Just a few examples from today's accepted ones

I like all of them. Very good such images are accepted - they are good and tell the stories.

As about second one (of Niklas) if you or Mark could explain why mountain over the plane is better than terminal below with plane - I might will better understand the reasons of the rule.  

Fyodor

[Edited 2013-08-10 08:56:10]

[Edited 2013-08-10 08:56:42]

Andres, sorry, I've missed the letter in your name. I've no excuse  

[Edited 2013-08-10 10:44:06]

Hi Fyodor,

Quoting FYODOR (Reply 21): Center rule was critisised even 10 years ago by many photographers and I never heard any argument - why Anet standards of photography should be so different from global ones? But the only answer I heard is: "it is because it is".

Please remember that we are here in the Photography forum, but the Airliners.net viewers encompass much more than these rather strange group of plane-crazy guys (and way too few ladies   ), and somehow this site has to address all types. I have always seen this site both as a great place to see top photography, both technically and aesthetically, but also as the single best aviation picture database around. This is not something that was instantly created, but something that evolved through the years while the site was growing. Within this period of time, and shaped without a doubt a lot by Johan and later Gary and the "old guard", a distinctive "A.net" style of pictures evolved. This has never been carved in stone, and has also continually evolved further, as we are witnessing right now with the latest changes.

Just as one example, have a look at Tim de Groot's pictures, look when they were uploaded, and you will see that many of those do not comply with one or many standards at that time, and yet are amazing pictures that truly deserve to be here.

The screening team is not some abstract entity or a computer, it's real people, photographers and uploaders just like yourself, who volunteer their time and dedication just for the joy of helping others putting their images online (and sometimes getting the rude email with lots of ****-words). It may be the 560th picture of the An-222, a KLM 737 landing side-on with a blue sky background, or one of your great night cockpit shots taken over Siberia. They all deserve to be here, some for their photographic value, some for their database value, as long as they meet at least a few minimum criteria. Some photographers are continually pushing the boundaries and forcing the team to continually reevaluate where the current borderline lies, which is a very good and healthy way of keeping the site alive, but also may become a frustrating affair for these photographers.

In the end, Airliners.net is many different things to many different people.

Cheers,
Andrés

Quoting acontador (Reply 23): this site has to address all types.

Great words, Anders. Thats what I'm taking for all my presence here. It is really good after these 10 years to see site is going to be that it could be and should be. As I mentioned before I see no problem to welcome all kinds of aviation photography. There are no conflict between what you call 'database value' and 'photography value' overwise if someone do not want to see it for his unknown reasons. Thats why I think some rudimentary rules should not be applied at all.

Quoting acontador (Reply 23): place to see top photography,

Sadly many good photogs had left the site for the past years. We have a chnace to return some of them and attract new. Many top photogs you can find here:
https://aviationphoto.org/
Pay special attention to Katsu Tokunaga - world best aviation photographer in my (and not only my) eyes. I happy I have a luck to know him personally and was able to learn something from him.

Quoting acontador (Reply 23): but also may become a frustrating affair for these photographers

I see not much reasons for these people to be frustrated. If their photos will be accepted, why should they be unhappy that other photographer with another vision was also welcomed? But I can tell you for certain - those phogos who were in eternal rekection list because of motive, centering etc. - they were were frustrated definitely. For obvious reasons.

Regards,
Fyodor

Taking = talking
Rekection = rejection
 

Interesting to see some of those examples shown by acontador. I have some pictures from the Atlantic City airshow that I was on the fence about due to centering, but good to see there is this recent change and discussion. I guess having a plane a little high with the smoke below showing an idea of the path would be acceptable now and worth a shot uploading. Thanks!

Quoting viv (Reply 19): He was not a photographer and clearly understood little of the commonly accepted aesthetic rules and conventions of photography - the rule of thirds, etc. The centering rule should be abolished. Period.

The latter statement I agree with fully - not so sure about the first. Johan was not a photographer (in any serious way), but he certainly appreciated a good photo. I'm sure he was aware of the basic rules of composition - if he wasn't at the start, he was certainly made aware of them on numerous occasions!

I think we have to look at the bigger picture (no pun intended). What he achieved was perhaps the largest, moderated non-commercial image collection on the 'net with a remarkably high overall standard. That it has thrived for so long despite the constant frustrations faced by so many uploaders is a bit of a mystery. Why not upload elsewhere? What is it that makes A.net so addictive to so many?

Perhaps it is the arbitrary rules that both make it work, and pose a challenge. I believe Johan's background was psychology - and there were times when I was uploading here that I wondered if the whole thing was just a massive experiment in human behavior!

Cheers,

Colin

Quoting screeners (Thread starter): Finally we would like to announce that the quality team is now contactable via email as listed above so if you have any questions regarding a rule or a recent accepted photo that you feel there may be issue(s) with than please contact them and one of the screeners on that team will respond to your email

Is there an approximate turn-around time to hear back from a screener? I sent an e-mail but have not heard back so I'm wondering if it failed to get to anyone.

Quoting mjgbtv (Reply 28): Is there an approximate turn-around time to hear back from a screener? I sent an e-mail but have not heard back so I'm wondering if it failed to get to anyone.

Your email has been received and your image has been discussed quite a bit , We will get back to you with our findings soon.

Cheers Mark

Quoting aussie18 (Reply 29): Your email has been received and your image has been discussed quite a bit , We will get back to you with our findings soon.

Thanks, Mark. I appreciate the update.