Rejection: Similar Photo Uploaded

[Peter Kesternich]

Well - after quite a long absence here I have considered opening another thread. Today I got the following picture rejected

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=1206895

with the only reason being "similar photo uploaded". The photo the screeners were reffering to as too similar is

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5852587

which was accepted a few days ago.

I would appreciate any thoughts about this. To me the pictures are not similar at all, showing the aircraft from quite different angles, at a different phase of flight and with quite different backgrounds. But maybe I am mistaken there - so please feel free to comment. Thanks a lot in advance for the input.

Peter

[seahawk]

For me it a clear case, both pictures where taken 2 seconds apart, while the angel is also so not much different, so I did consider them similar.

[Peter Kesternich]

stefan - is similarity in pictures really a matter of time between them and angle of the view? a 45-degree difference is a 45-degree difference and there are only 360 degrees available consider a head-on shot and a 45-degree side shot... would you consider that similar as well? and you probably don't need ME to tell you that in aviation a lot can happen in 2 seconds.

[seahawk]

Similar always depends, apart from the different angel and the slight difference in height the shots are very similar, considering that you have another shot of it (showing the other side of the aircraft and Malage terminal) in the db and uploaded another take-off shot (slightly from behind and all sky) too.

It canīt be in the sense of the databse to accept 3 shots from one take-off run for exampel. One 48° front, one side on, one 45° back. Now add this for a landing and we would have 6 shots of the plane from one phtographer, now imagine more photographers... (and this is not that far from reality)

[Peter Kesternich]

hmmmmmmm - what's the sense of an aviation photography database?

[LX-A343]

hmmmmmmm - what's the sense of an aviation photography database?

To flood it with similar looking pics?

[kukkudrill]

To flood it with similar looking pics?

Luckily jp.net is not just a database ... otherwise they would only accept one photo per aircraft

[Peter Kesternich]

To flood it with similar looking pics?

*lol... gerardo... but you must admit, that "similar looking" like so many other criteria when it comes to the quality and finally acceptance of a picture, is highly subjective... for example, the aircraft in the rejected pic has not a shred of sky in the background, whereas the background in the accepted one is mainly sky...

i could go on now with what i think might be the sense of an aviation photography database, but unfortunately, my opinion doesn't count...

[Top_Gun]

*lol... gerardo... but you must admit, that "similar looking" like so many other criteria when it comes to the quality and finally acceptance of a picture, is highly subjective... for example, the aircraft in the rejected pic has not a shred of sky in the background, whereas the background in the accepted one is mainly sky...

i could go on now with what i think might be the sense of an aviation photography database, but unfortunately, my opinion doesn't count...

Your opinion counts, that's why you are voicing it. It just doesn't have much pull.

I've tried this before and agree with their reasoning. If I get a military plane working the pattern, he could make 10 passes in an hour. It's still the same reg# and even though the times have changed, there isn't much one shot is offering over the other.

We'd all like to have #'s in the DB, but unless they make you look at them and you're views go up per shot, then what's the point

[seahawk]

hmmmmmmm - what's the sense of an aviation photography database?

First off all to have at least one pic of every plane in the world for reference. As this has been achieved with your upload, it offers phtographers the option to show their best shots to a wider public.

Secondly it is a viewer orientated database and the viewer gets nothing if he sees a usual plane being taken 3 times within second during the same take-off run.

[brianw999]

I seem to recall a similar thread a few months ago where someone got "similar" rejections for some scrapped Mig shots. At that time it was reasonably pointed out that a 45 degree angle difference of the same aircraft, by the same photographer, is a rejection for "similar". I recently had one of two shots of a Diamond Twinstar rejected for the same reason. One was at ground level, from the right wingtip and slightly forward. The other was from a 25 feet elevated position, looking at the right side rear threequarter. A 90 degree rotation and 25 feet elevation dofference but still a "similar" rejection. At the time I thought it was unfair until I realised that, although there was a different view of the right side, it still essentially showed the same detail.

You mention your two pics having very different backgrounds. Surely it is the aircraft that is the interest point and not the background.

[Peter Kesternich]

Your opinion counts, that's why you are voicing it. It just doesn't have much pull.

Dave... just voicing an opinion doesn't make it count automatically. what MAKES an opinion count is if people are willing to listen to and to consider what other people say. but that is rather rare in internet forums and unfortunately j.net is no exception. which proves that following a great hobby doesn't necessarily make one a sensible and open-minded person

[RingwaySam]

Dave... just voicing an opinion doesn't make it count automatically. what MAKES an opinion count is if people are willing to listen to and to consider what other people say. but that is rather rare in internet forums and unfortunately j.net is no exception. which proves that following a great hobby doesn't necessarily make one a sensible and open-minded person

There in a no way situation here... At the end of the day it's volunteer work, they don't have to do it do they? They do a great job in my eyes, If something happens get over and stop moaning.

[seahawk]

The major problem is that some uploaders are pushing the limits. We have seen up to 6 or more shots from one usual airliner being uploaded from the same day. As much as I do understand Peterīs reasoning, if we would decide by the background it would not be long before we would have another discussion as to why we rejected 2 shots of a plane from the same side and nearly same angel, when one shows the terminal in the background, while the other show the hangar from airlien XYZ and the third shows another airliner in the background.

[LX-A343]

Put it that way: we listen to the comments made and we try to improve this site according to the opinions voiced here, but we can't please all.

Gerardo