Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Artistic" or not?

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

  • "Artistic" or not?

    Hi. I uploaded this shot without checking artistic, but now, because of the distance to the subject, maybe I should have. Here's the image:

    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    Should I re-upload as "artistic" or no?

  • #2
    Nice one.
    You probably should have ticked the Artistic box.

    Always strikes me as strange that a screener, who is the final arbiter of everything technical in a photo needs to be told that it is artistic photo. Something that we can all see just by looking at it.
    Wallace

    Comment


    • #3
      I think it is not artistic. That is no special angel or something, the plane is just too far away. Nightshot should have been selected as the only category.

      The categories are not to tell the screeners what kind of shot it ism we see this quite easily, they are there to help visitors find phtos more easily.

      You want sundown - search nightshot
      You want different and unusual shots - search artistic
      .
      .
      .

      Comment


      • #4
        It would help if you looked at the photo from the perspective of an Aviation Photographer rather than someone who takes pictures of aircraft, the picture has a completion feel about it, the end of a flight, the end of the day.
        The aircraft is well exposed and in focus and the exposure is good without being blown in anyplace. It would do well in a Camera Club competition and it is a real pity that its merits can not be appreciated because he has not ticked a box. It deserves Artistic.

        When you think about it why can't a screener reassign a photo rather than rejecting it, where it goes back to the photographer, who is perplexed as to why it was rejected so he tries again, to be screened again wasting even more of the screeners time when a simple re-categorisation would save time in the long run. It surely must be in a screeners interest to screen a photo once?

        Going back to the picture, if you want to play strictly by the rules, the aircraft is in fact "Backlit" and should be rejected.
        Wallace

        Comment


        • #5
          JUST TO MAKE IT CLEAR: we don't accept or reject a photo based on the "artistic" category chaecked/not checked. This category is simply for the user, who wants to search for - let's say - artistic photos featuring his favourite airliner and to avoid having to browse through numerous pages of side-on shots to find a photo of artistic nature.

          Re photo in question: I personally would reject it, as the dead space around the aircraft doesn't add anything to the photo itself.

          Cheers
          My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

          Comment


          • #6
            Your message is received Q5, S9+ 20 dB, without the need to shout.

            The artistic category seems to be so contradictory, meaning one thing but representing another.
            Me, I would understand Artistic to mean somewhere to place a pretty picture containing an aircraft, to others it is somewhere to place a picture of an aircraft with a pretty background, with as little dead space as possible, without the need to actually compose a photograph.

            No comment on a backlit rejection then?

            Take for instance this one.


            The tail is on the first vertical third and it has an offset composition the eye starts at the tail runs through the fuselage, diagonally and forward in the direction of travel to the setting sun, that's artistic and composition.


            This one is a picture of a plane taking off suitable for Jetphotos.net and as I have discovered "bad" photography - it's actually backlit, under sharpened, underexposed, the colour balance is all wrong.
            Wallace

            Comment


            • #7
              I 8we) never reject a photo just because of wrong categories if the error is not really stupid, like uploading an AN-22 as smaöö prop or a photo taken at noon as nightshot.

              However there are many photos uploaded with wrong categories and if there are other reasons to rekect, then we will check categories as well, if they are wrong.

              Btw attached is how I would imagine the original phtoo to look better.
              Last edited by seahawk; 2009-02-11, 12:31.

              Comment


              • #8
                Wallace, why do you say, that the third photo is suitable for JPnet? Just wondering ....

                The problem with artistic photos is, that there are no rules for this kind of photos. So we end up accepting wonderful photos with an aircraft far in distance and rejecting others, which to some may look similar to the accepted.

                Again: the "artistic" category clicked does not change a yota in the acceptance criteria.
                My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

                Comment


                • #9
                  wwwshack wrote
                  this one is a picture of a plane taking off suitable for Jetphotos.net and as I have discovered "bad" photography - it's actually backlit, under sharpened, underexposed, the colour balance is all wrong.

                  Wallace
                  I would be very surprised if that was considered to be acceptable.
                  Your other versions may have typical photo club text-book merit but I would hazard a guess that they would not get anywhere in a club competition as the image has absolutely nothing about it to hold your attention. If the aircraft was flying into a striking sunset then that might be different. Slavish application of artistic guidelines is not a passport to success.


                  It seems to me that trying to nail down what should be considered artistic is self-defeating. My understanding is that this category is designed to give wide latitude to screeners for those shots that do not conform to the normal JP net requirements but have some redeeming quality that outweigh any technical objections. This will always be a judgement call, not something you can define exactly in the "screeners manual".

                  Cheers

                  Chris
                  Last edited by cja; 2007-01-26, 11:39.


                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Its not artistic, its just a night/sunset shot. In fact it couldnt be more of a night/sunset shot if it tried. It is so night it is nearly wearing armour (I know its spelt knight but whatever).

                    Its a nice shot but what is artistic about it? Its an aircraft at night/sunset of which there is a specific tickbox!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by cja
                      My understanding is that this category is designed to give wide latitude to screeners
                      Chris
                      Photographers more than screeners. This category gives the photographer an opportunity to submit shots where the motive does not fall into other standard site guidelines, providing the shot shows a good enough reason for doing it. For example using an extra wide crop to incorporate a rainbow or interesting sky feature. At the other end of the scale a close up along a fuselage showing interesting reflections. My final example would be a scenic shot that is pleasant to look at with an aircraft in it where the main point of interest is not necessarliy the aircraft itself.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        The reason why I wrote that the third photo was acceptable to jp was purely because it is closely cropped and for no other reason.
                        I really prefer the contre-jour (excuse my French) version but that definitely is not for here.
                        Wallace

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The reason why I wrote that the third photo was acceptable was purely because it is closely cropped (something that I hate doing) and for no other reason. I did mention reasons why it is not suitable - backlit, under sharpened, underexposed and the colour balance was all wrong.

                          I prefer the contre-jour (excuse my French) version but that's definitely is not for here.
                          Wallace

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X