Two photos - similar look - one rejected?

[Felix448]

Hi, I´d like to comment on something that leaves me a bit baffled if I´m honest.

I was recently spotting at LEJ, July 2nd, to photograph the LH A380 arrival / departure amongst other things.

A few days later, I uploaded this image from the trip to JetPhotos:



This photo has been rejected due to being backlit. I already knew that this was a borderline acceptable shot but tried it nonetheless. The lighting on departure was basically head-on with the 380 so somewhere between borderline backlit and acceptable.

Now, I´ve recently noticed this shot in the database, which apparently got through:

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/1101758

This has been taken on the same day / time, same aircraft, basically the same position. To be fair I´m a bit baffled how this got through, despite being just as lightly backlit as my shot above. I´m not trying to attack anyone, but am questioning how two shots that are so similar except for a slight difference in perspective, shutterspeed and editing can get rated differently.


Best Regards

[wkd001]

Very curious about the follow up here, as this is something what triggers me also. It's at screeners discretion, but a more clear guideline for these kind of shots would be highly appreciated as I've seen more almost backlit photos getting accepted here, and I've also had several rejects for similar shots.

[ErwinS]

We have more than 20 plus screeners, and to be fair it is a borderline shot, so yeah one got screened by screeners who found it acceptable and the other was screened by screeners who didnt found it acceptable.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

We have more than 20 plus screeners, and to be fair it is a borderline shot, so yeah one got screened by screeners who found it acceptable and the other was screened by screeners who didnt found it acceptable.

Actually we are 38 active screeners nowadays and yes, on such borderline cases we can go both ways.
It would have been backlit for me as well but both images have a very fine editing and I suppose it was missed by those who screened the accepted one. Good for the photographer but yeah, probably a little error from our side; nothing that would deserve a deletion though.

Because, yes that might happen sometimes. We do make errors and with 50000 pics + screened per month it would be totally unrealistic to think we don’t make a few bloopers here an there…

Have a nice day
Alex

[Felix448]

Good for the photographer but yeah, probably a little error from our side; nothing that would deserve a deletion though.

I wouldnt want anyone to loose an approved photo. Just scrolled through the recent flights for D-AIMM and was surprised to see that almost the exact shot that I´ve recently "lost", is now on here.

I understand that there will be instances where it depends person to person if a shot is viable or not. I´m just so used to the usually very strict screening process and it took me a bit at surprise.

Maybe it´s possible to define the backlit category a bit further in the future. As with this instance here, the light was almost straight-on to the aircraft´s nose. You can hardly see a shadow on the tailsection. The only stronger shadow that might reveal a sidelight / backlight would be the wing-body-fairing section. Light on this day was pretty smooth already, which also increases the diffused look.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

We go by if there’s light on the tail or not. On standing planes, we can also check the shadow on ground. I’m not sure we can get anything more precise than that but any suggestion is always welcomed

Cheers
Alex