Backlit

[paulc]

http://www.jetphotos.net/img/4/2/6/5...1328636562.jpg


Had the above image rejected for being backlit. Bearing in mind the aircraft is departing on an east west runway (taking off to the west) and I am shooting north - the sun is approx 90 deg from the right and given that is it July it is high in the sky. A highwing is always going to cast a shadow.

Had a Grumman Duck also rejected for the same reason - again taken from the same location. Have taken numerous shots from same location without ever having had a backlit rejection.

[Simpleboy]

Verticle stabiliser is in a shadow. A clear indication of it being backlit, however marginal it is.

[paulc]

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=7313403

ok - this has more of a shadow yet was accepted - just looking for consistancy here.

[LX-A343]

^^^^^^^^
The accepted photo you are showing here has less shadows. Compare the light on the fuselage of both photos.

[paulc]

The Bonanza has a shadow being cast by the horizontal stabiliser - it is very clear. The Cessna has no obvious shadow of the tail. Yes the light levels might be a little less on the Cessna but they are uniform across the fuselage (did not want to overexpose the white areas - tops of wings etc)
As I said I am just after some consistancy here

[Darren Howie]

On an aside the tail being lit or not is not always a sound way of judging backlit. When the aircraft is in a turn for instance it is very easy in a high sun situation to have a shadowed tail yet not be backlit.
Doesn't apply here but something to think about..

[paulc]

My Grumman Duck photo fell foul (or should that be fowl) of that - it was a go around and did a turn across the runway to get back into the pattern. Given the number of wings / struts a Duck has several shadows were cast and it was rejected as backlit.

[Darren Howie]

Given that Paul you really need to put a note in the information to screeners tasting that the fact he tail is in shadow is in a banking turn not because the un is behind.
More information makes a screening decision far easier and accurate than less..

[Hinkelbein]

Given that Paul you really need to put a note in the information to screeners tasting that the fact he tail is in shadow is in a banking turn not because the un is behind.
More information makes a screening decision far easier and accurate than less..

I don't see why this would matter. Backlit = backlit, the reason why is not an issue. Or am I mistaken?

[paulc]

Am just querying the backlit rejection definition - on an west / east runway looking north the sun is never going to be in front me - at worst it will be 90 deg to my right. I was in this spot from around 7am until noon and have uploaded (succesfully) numerous other shots taken within a couple of minutes either side of this one without problem.
As I said I am just after some consistancy.

[brianw999]

I don't see why this would matter. Backlit = backlit, the reason why is not an issue. Or am I mistaken?

Not necessarily. Here's an example of what Darren is saying...

[photoid=6306152]

The helo is in a descending left bank turn and sideslip which has caused the tail to go into shadow. The sun was above, to the right and slightly behind me. The rest of the aircraft is no worse than toplit and retains good detail.
I will however concede that this one of those razor edge decisions "Is it backlit, isn't it backlit". I believe that this one was accepted on the grounds that the nearside detail was clearly visible. It would possibly be rejected these days for backlit so I use it purely as an example.

[paulc]

Have checked my RAW image data and the shots taken either side of that one were accepted without problem. Both were taken within 1 minute of the rejected one.

[brianw999]

If you look at the rudder on the Cessna there is a fair bit of right rudder input whereas the Beechcraft has a neutral rudder. Even then there is a very slight shadow at the top of the Beechcraft rudder indicating that it was just on the cusp of becoming shaded. Add in the fact that the sides of the Beechcraft are flat and taper quickly towards the tail and it will catch more light from the right side. As it is it was good enough not to warrant a rejection.
For the Cessna I would hazard a guess that the sideslip to the right has thrown the side and fin into shadow. Add in the fact that the Cessna fuselage is more rounded as it does not taper so quickly and it was enough to become shaded and therefore rejected for backlit.
Both images were on razor edge decisions. The Beech on the side of acceptable and the Cessna on the side of unacceptable.
To be honest, to me this indicates good consistency in decision making.

[paulc]

Strange having queried a backlit rejection I suddenly find a whole lot more which are rejected for the same reason. On an east/west runway shooting north or north west it is impossible for the sun to be behind the subject. I have appealed these but I have little faith in that process.

[paulc]

3 appeals - 3 rejections - what a surprise. Even though the tails of those 3 are not casting any sort of shadow and the fact that I am shooting in a N/NW direction should indicate that it is physically impossible for the sun to be in front of me (high in sky for sure but not in front).