I Hate To Be Mean But...

[Will M]

Guys are you blind? Look at the Lufthansa titles. They're not sharp, they're panned just a tad like the rest of the picture.

Righto ,

You're the professional here it seems !

Please show us an example of what a "real" motion blurred pic should look like & taken by you.

I would of accepted the photo on technical merit alone , something different from the thousands of side-on shots we're all guilty of !
Good on him for trying and good on him for getting it accepted

And like Soren said the photographer has no control over the screening process what so ever.
So I think it's unfair and very impolite to single out not only the photographer, but also the rest of the people in the forums by suggesting we are "blind"

[MaxPower]

I'm with Steve. The plane is blurry.

Look... A follower !

I would of accepted the photo on technical merit alone , something different from the thousands of side-on shots we're all guilty of !
Good on him for trying and good on him for getting it accepted

Guilty of charge here too !

[pkonowrocki]

kinda of an oxymoron isn't it?
:P

Huh? What's oxymoron ??? moron on oxygen ??? J/k I know it's a rhetorical divice
The plane is kinda blury but you can't really see it as the background is also blury. So I think that the pic is ok

[medic1]

I say is a damn good shot for 1/25th of a second.

[E-Diddy!]

^^^You got that right...

Look at it in this way !

Our job is to feed the screeners, what they do with the "food" *read photos* is beyond our control. Good One Soren .


J

Sometime's they're digested, the bad ones get crapped out

[MaxPower]

Sometime's they're digested, the bad ones get crapped out

Ahihihihihi

Or it get spitted out again of disgust and dislike.

[ualwillstand]

I hate topics when people pick out photographs of not the greatest quality. It is a really unique shot and its a change from a motionless side shot. I took one kind of simular with simular quality issues.
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5736743

[MaxPower]

I hate topics when people pick out photographs of not the greatest quality. It is a really unique shot and its a change from a motionless side shot. I took one kind of simular with simular quality issues

Thumbnail code

[photoid=xxxxxxx]
=
[photoid=5736743]

[RingwaySam]

[photoid=5739545]

Now that's an awesome panning shot!!!

[BA747-436]

In future If you have an issue with a photo, it would be more tasteful to contact the admin crew or senior screeners and bring it to their attention rather than name and shame on a public forum.

[MaxPower]

And that said, if the person wants to do this, its still his ass (the threadstarter) who will get the rant, coz nobody does agree with the poster anyway .... Like this thread has turned out too. Like predicted. I wouldnt want another member question why the hell did it get in (if the viewer didnt liked it) So what.. I didnt shot the image for YOU anyway. I hope somebody gets my point here.

[brianw999]

I bloody well wish I could swing a 50 - 500 at 1/25th and get a pic like that.

...come to think of it?....I wish I HAD a 50 - 500. LOL.

Bloody good pic...and BTW, I don't like this kind of post either.

[Crunk415balla]

I think it looks nice, but was it needed to make a thread questioning weither or not someone's photo should have made it past the screening? If the screeners added it, they feel its acceptable, and that is all that matters.

[Top_Gun]

I think it looks nice, but was it needed to make a thread questioning weither or not someone's photo should have made it past the screening? If the screeners added it, they feel its acceptable, and that is all that matters.

I think the question he raises is valid. Screeners shouldn't be the one applying their standards, they should all be going by the sites standards. It gets very frustrating when you get all these rejections when you can point out just as many pics in the DB that have the same exact issues as your rejections.

All we're asking for is consistancy, if screeners have their own guidelines, then the site screening policy isn't consistant

[Will M]

We're giving the consistency 110% Dave , believe me , but we're never gonna get it right 100% of the time , the 2 vote = and add system is about as fair as it's gonna get I'm afraid.

I kinda agree with you in some respects but it's actually you guys that set the standards and raise the bar for yourselves , continually pushing your own limits and striving towards the personal satisfaction of getting better and better.