Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rejection - 9/11 Flag shot - "Bad Motive"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rejection - 9/11 Flag shot - "Bad Motive"

    The following shot is of AA gete 32 at BOS, the departure gate of AA Flight 11 on the morning of 9/11/2001.

    http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=1334954

    I put it in under the flight number of the 777 in the background. It was rejected for "Bad motive".

    Should I have worded/described it differently? Any cropping/editing to improve the shot?

    Is there any way this shot could could make it on JetPhotos?

  • #2
    Yes, take it from a different angle. The lighting is poor, and there isn't much of the plane visible. I realize the meaning you are trying to put behind the shot, but just because it's 9/11 related doesn't mean it's gonna get accepted. That gate can be viewed from the parking garage. If you can get up there, and get a decent angle with a plane and the gate with the flag, go for it.

    Just my $.02

    Comment


    • #3
      I think its a total no go.

      The main focus of the photo is the flag, not the airplane.

      There is also a large dust spot on the LHS of the frame.

      There is also too much foreground clutter, and i dont see how this photo would actually benefit the db.
      Last edited by Paul Maier; 2007-02-28, 05:30.
      My photos on J.net

      Comment


      • #4
        Agree.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by BA747-436
          Agree.
          I wouldn't call a gate "foreground clutter" being that it's one and only use is for aviation. That being said, I do agree that more of the aircraft ahould be showing and lighting was not the best.
          Follow me on Twitter! www.twitter.com/flyingphotog

          Comment


          • #6
            If you were able to get out on the ramp and shoot from behind probably a better motive, but then agian not so great of an angle.

            Comment


            • #7
              The site is called Jetphotos, not aviationgatephotos. Fair enough is the majority of the fuselage was visible but its not.

              Its a well thought out pic and a nice shot but I can see why it has been rejected on this particular site.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by FlyingPhotog
                I wouldn't call a gate "foreground clutter" being that it's one and only use is for aviation. That being said, I do agree that more of the aircraft should be showing and lighting was not the best.
                Well we as screeners do call gates, pushback trucks, ground equip, catering trucks etc all foreground clutter for the simple reason that they clutter up the photo and get in the way of the main subject which naturally is the aircraft. The rejection 'foreground clutter/obstructing clutter' covers anything that is in the way of the aircraft. whether directly linked to aviation or not. In closing, a gate in the way of the aircraft, which is obviously the subject of the photo is considered foreground clutter/obstructing clutter.

                Theres just to much going against this shot to make it acceptable. I'm sure there are other opportunities to shoot the US flag with an AA aircraft nearby/flying overhead.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by philh
                  The site is called Jetphotos, not aviationgatephotos.
                  Its a well thought out pic and a nice shot but I can see why it has been rejected on this particular site.
                  Then why do we allow pictures of airports & towers, they aren't jets?

                  I agree the shot doesn't work at all, but I do like his concept.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Top_Gun
                    Then why do we allow pictures of airports & towers, they aren't jets?
                    There you go ...
                    Originally posted by BA747-436
                    The rejection 'foreground clutter/obstructing clutter' covers anything that is in the way of the aircraft. whether directly linked to aviation or not. In closing, a gate in the way of the aircraft, which is obviously the subject of the photo is considered foreground clutter/obstructing clutter.
                    My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I wasn't saying the shot in question should be accepted, the previous poster who I quoted was saying the site isn't aviationgate photos.

                      Hence my questioning airport and tower shots

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Gates are ugly.
                        My photos on J.net

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Towers and terminals are a major part of the physical airport and there is a tick box for them. I would say it goes down to common sense as to how far this stretches i.e. an aerial view of Terminal 2 at Heathrow may be accepted whereas a pic of a seat in terminal one departures wouldnt be as it doesnt show any viable feature of the airport. Gates in this instance are a small moveable entity that add nothing to a shot or image of an airport.

                          Thats my take on it anyway but I`m not a screener!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Your not a screener but at least you understand the concept

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X