Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
What is similar photo?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by kukkudrillThat group of people includes me actually. But to be honest I still see little value in your second shot of the aircraft at the top of this page when both photos were taken from positions just a few paces apart. But maybe that's just me.
Edit. Maybe you should try to upload shots with more than just a few degrees if you already got one accepted.Inactive from May 1 2009.
Comment
-
Originally posted by MaxPowerYou have to think about that the last two similar shots of the SkyEurope Airlines was taken at 2003. Much had changed today since those got accepted. But I get your point. Similar upload yes. I hope you and the crew finds a solution for this similar upload issue. Btw one thing puzzled me though. You mentioned that it must be a personal thing that the screener rejected your shot ? I think too that it got over the line. A screener just mentioned about "how about a headshot" instead and so on, yet it got rejected. Sometimes I dont get it either.
Comment
-
Suly, two sets of your examples of OM-SEA were uploaded three years ago. Take a look at some of the other photos uploaded around that time. The general quality of uploads were much lower, and the screening standards much more lenient. Over time, with easier access to better photographic equipment, standards have obviously increased. Otherwise, we'd easily have a hundred similar shots of every aircraft.
As for the other pair of photos of OM-SEA taken in 2005, I would agree with you that they are indeed quite similar. Perhaps the screener missed it, or perhaps they were screened by different screeners...who knows. But regardless, that hardly qualifies as "tons of pics".
And if Brian is correct, and you indeed meant similar photos taken by different photographers, then your argument has no merit at all. Our similar policy clearly states that similar only applies to photos of the same aircraft taken by the same photographer.
And lastly, please understand that the similar rejection is a very subjective thing. Each screener might have a slightly different understanding of what is considered similar. We don't have a set degrees of difference two angles must have to not be considered similar.
Originally posted by sulyMaybe screeners just want to keep similar rule and I will get rejection on every MIG I will upload. Or check this http://www.jetphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=34758Last edited by Crazy764; 2006-09-01, 17:02.
Comment
-
Thanks to everyone
Thank you everybody for your opinion and thks to screeners for the job they do. I will not give up with those MIGs I will take more pics (tons of them) and I will try again.
Jozef
can you please clear my upload slots from rejected pics? please? ... no? OK
realy no? OK I am only asking...thanks again
Comment
-
Originally posted by sulyThank you everybody for your opinion and thks to screeners for the job they do. I will not give up with those MIGs I will take more pics (tons of them) and I will try again.
Jozef
can you please clear my upload slots from rejected pics? please? ... no? OK
realy no? OK I am only asking...thanks again
To those, who think, these are all "a personal thing that the screener rejected your shot": HELLLLOOO!!! Last time I checked, this was an Internet forum. I hardly know a few screeners personally, let alone the 1'000s of photogs, who upload here!!! And to be honest, judging by their attitude I can see here or elsewhere, there are some, which I'd like to meet in person, and there are others, which I am glad I have never to meet in person. But we have to screen the pics of all photogs, as if nothing happened, as if no photog was acusing us of treating them personally in an unfair way.
Gerardo
Comment
-
Originally posted by Crazy764Please show us these "tons of pics" of same aircraft, same airport, same photographer, and same angle uploaded fairly recently.
Taking off runway 13. LZ-MDM. Airbus A320-232. JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!
Comment
-
Suly, for goodness sakes, drop the subject and get on with your life or you are likely to make yourself unpopular around here.
Yes, there are some recently uploaded pics from photographers which could be regarded as similar. Posting a link to them to point out this fact will achieve nothing other than the photographer concerned getting a hit rate increase.
It will not affect the fact that your pictures have been rejected.
You take good pictures. I have enjoyed looking at them. Get over this setback and carry on taking good pictures.If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !
Comment
-
Originally posted by sulyOh yes you right, I event cant teel you which one is in DB and which is rejected.
More or less it depends on screeners decision than on some rule. Want argument?
Same photographer, same camera, same lens, same aircraft, same place (even same stand no.4 on apron1), same angel and both pics accepted
LZ-LDC. McDonnell Douglas MD-82. JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5783167
Comment
-
Originally posted by brianw999Suly, for goodness sakes, drop the subject and get on with your life or you are likely to make yourself unpopular around here.
Yes, there are some recently uploaded pics from photographers which could be regarded as similar. Posting a link to them to point out this fact will achieve nothing other than the photographer concerned getting a hit rate increase.
It will not affect the fact that your pictures have been rejected.
You take good pictures. I have enjoyed looking at them. Get over this setback and carry on taking good pictures.Inactive from May 1 2009.
Comment
-
Originally posted by sulyCan I have your opinion on folloving pics please?
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5805107
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5805109
But again, the similar rejection is up to the screener's discretion. I can't guarantee some other screener might not have rejected it.
Comment
Comment