How NOT to shoot Airliners.

[Wazza]

Thought I would just share some shots that aren't up to standard for airliners.net

I'm not great, but do try to get some shots up on there from time to time.

Well my photoshopping skills are bad, and the lighting on the days were maybe not the best.. Often a quick reject, as there's no motive in the shot. And the excuse is "bad quality"

Well here's a few examples of the "Quality" not up to A.net standard shots.

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20051231_a6-emu_280305_bravo.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20051231_vh-ogb_nzaa_19072005.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20051231_5w_sao_nzaa_140820 05.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20051231_b-hxj_nzaa_30072005.jpg
(heat haze never helps)

Maybe I should have remembered the standards of their site before submitting them. My acceptance rate has shot from 88% down to 66%. All that does is restrict the number of upload spaces... Not that I need 40-50 at a time anyway!

Another fussy example, here:
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20051206_a6-erh-chch2.jpg
(First upload, runway was made level, or close to)..
Rejected for Bad Angle - (not level)

So I rotated 0.18 degrees CCW to make the building/pole uprights level
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20051231_a6-erh-chch.jpg
And guess what? Rejected again for Bad Angle. Makes me wonder why their tolerance level for a straight shot is within 0.1 degrees.

Well just confused, will now probably only upload really rare shots in future, and focus on paid photography..

How about one more. :p
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20051206_zk_hhv_aerial2.jpg
"Bad Double" for being too similar to this one:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/971348/L

But when I looked into it before uploading, I thought it was some rarity, as it's the only aerial shots over Auckland out of thousands.

End Rant.
(can't post this at A.net, as I'm not a paid member.. not that this would help.. )
Anyway, the point of this, was to show some shots I've done, which I know aren't perfect (obviously)..

[adamsti]

Don't worry about anet. The screeners are idiots as far as I'm concerned, (no I do not submit to them, and never will). They would not know a good shot if it hit them in the ass.

[Jon Foster]

Well, I like your shots!

Jon.

[Wazza]

Well they've now accepted my last 3, which were my favourites of the 21 I submitted. Only 8 accepted, that has to be the worst ever. And I thought people get slightly better at taking pics/editing over time. Guess not. (Actually, they persistently say their standards increase more and more, but much faster than the quality progression on the cameras themselves). It's becoming almost a requirement to have a 100-400L as a bare minimum, yet I'm shooting with a basic Sigma 70-300.

Anyway, this was my favourite of the 21 submitted, and probably would have lost my cool completely if it was rejected for Bad Quality also.

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/984697/L/

Thanks guys for understanding the A.net crap, and for liking the shots Jon.
:)

[Marauder61]

www.Airliners.zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Wake me up when my flight lands ok?????????:p

[mijbril]

just played about for 10 minutes with your first one in PS. (not that I lay claim to great PS skills either :D)

Not sure if it's any better or not, LOL... perhaps a little less gloomy.

As it is, I quite like aircraft shots most of the time & yours did nothing to make me think otherwise :)

Sorry if I stepped over the boundaries editing one slightly. (enjoy your NYE)

[Wazza]

That's a nice edit.

Just looked at the reject notices again, and the A6-EMU shot also had Bad Common. Said would need a more interesting motive/ rather than a side shot, like every other one.

Anyway, on image editing, I've had a couple of NZ photographers I know, been banned for over editing, "Bad Manipulation"

I definately like your light look, and the shot I had linked was basically as it was shot. Uglorified. :lol:

[Wazza]

:) Just a bit happier, just before heading out to town for partying..

Had several more accepted.

Here's a couple I did like,
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/984776/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/984783/L

Thanks for taking the time to look, and everyone have a safe and happy New Year!
Party Time.

[MDJAK]

I've never heard of a.net, not that that matters any.

Can you tell me/us a little about it? Is it just a website for submission of airplane shots, and shots that must be perfect?

I think your shots are excellent. How close are you to those planes? It doesn't seem to me that the lens you are using would allow you to be that close? They are very sharp and I truly enjoyed looking at them.

Happy New Year.

mark

[Wazza]

Thanks Mark.

Yeah Airliners.net is the world's largest aviation photo database, but also has VERY high standards of acceptance. Their stats and FAQ show 1/4 shots are accepted only. But I think that's mostly because there's a lot of new people, who send their average cool shot, but it's got several minor things. Several of my friends have submitted 20+ images, and had none accepted. Once you start to learn exactly what they're looking for, it does make it a bit easier in getting them online.

Anyway, since buying my 20D in February, I had shot 65,000 photos up to 3 weeks ago when the camera broke. (electrical fault, where the shutter constantly fires even when powered off). Of those shots, 30-35,000 were aviation photos. And of those, I've only got 255 on the site. It's very time consuming to spend a while editing a shot, uploading on my slow 56K, and then waiting anywhere from 5-16 days to be screened, and then accepted/rejected. The queue is the smallest I've ever seen it this year. Only 4800 shots left, and only 3-4 days waiting period.

Anyway, a few more shots were accepted again

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?photographersearch=Warren%20Williams&distinct_entry=true

As for closeness. This is New Zealand's largest and main International airport. There's no such thing as security and police presence. There is some, but they just wave, or really don't care.
So these shots are taken behind a 2metre tall wire fence, with some barbed wire.
The close taxiway, Bravo, is only about 70metres away, so larger aircraft come pretty close with their wingtips.
The other touchdown shots, and flybuy shots are all 500metres away from the main runway, and using up to 400mm.

[topsyturvy6234]

My favorite shot is the last, though it bothers me that in the majority of the shots something of each aircraft is cut out of the frame.

[Wazza]

Thanks. The reason for those tight crops, is just to bring more detail to the body themselves, and make the regos more readable.

I'm just a big fan of close crops,
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/984783/L
(not a crop, just 400mm)

But these shots like below, I don't like too much
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/806964/L/

Generally, keeping the aircraft body centered looks better IMO

:)

[RockOne]

Some great shots. Really like the Pacific Blue shot. Not sure what they use to define level at A.net, but I've had a bedlevel rejection with 2 power poles and 5 fenceposts, none of which was "vertical", but leaning (all in different directions, and by different amounts.

[johngraham2002]

firstly your postskills look great to me
secondly you did a great job in the conditions around you
thirdly bugger everybody else if YOUR happy then thats the most important thing about the madness that is photography

great shots thanks for sharing

[The Notorious STG]

I don't know what the people at A.net are thinking sometimes, that 738 shot was great!

[*Zwitter*]

A.net is a spotter site - not a photography site.

Why they're so fussy is beyond me - Just post your best stuff here and leave them to whatever it is they're trying to do :D