Airliners.net Rejection

[gary1701]

I've certainly had softer chopper images accepted

Dean,I think you need to re-phrase that.

Oops, that's the sort of thing I'd normally say. Pulling up the originals I don't see any issues at all. Infact, and this is from somebody who shoots a lot of AH images the serials are amongst some of the most clear I've seen - for a Apache anyway! Looking carefully at both images in comparison to others I'm inclined to think they might be at the lower end of what I would normally sharpen a image to so I'm hoping it's just a simple too soft issue rather than any real blur. Both are now back in with a noticeable increase in sharpness although it'll be a few days before the verdict comes down. Thanks for the input and I'll post the results up.

Gary

[Craig]

I'd be inclined to say both - It's more noticeable on the first one though, as the serial is closer. How does it look on the full-size?

It might be because the rotor blades from the tail are in front of it on the first.

I think the second picture in particular is pin sharp for an AH shot Gary and it will be interesting to see what happens.

[Wallace]

I hope that you'll forgive me for playing devils advocate here. Both shots are slightly under exposed, there is some room for improvement by adjusting the white point slider in Photoshop Levels.

One trick that I use to to look at an image in Photoshop Levels and adjust the white point slider while holding down the Alt key. This is normally used to detect if there are any clipped tones but it is also useful to see where sharpening has been applied and it is only around the edges of the Apache that it seems to be most noticeable. Good exposure means good sharpening.

With a low contrast colour scheme like the Apache it may be worth using a different sharpening technique, such as High Pass Sharpening as it works in a different way and may give that extra but of border contrast so necessary when sharpening images.

[gary1701]

No problem Wallace, and sorry for not coming back earlier, been a busy week! The second pic is in on the second attempt, the first got kicked out again on 'soft'. It is back in on the queue again after another attempt but if it fails that I'll have a go at the technique that you mentioned. Thanks again.

Gary

[DeanW]

Can anyone spot the cheeky bit of photoshopping that's gone on in this photo?

[POL]

My god, how obvious is that?!

P.S. Nice avatar Dean

[Ben Montgomery]

Not quite on the topic of rejections, but is anyone else finding A.net really buggy at the moment? I'm trying to search for Ka-50 pictures, sometimes it brings up the search results, other times not (using the exact same search terms). Just brings up a "could not find any results page", but takes about ten mins to do it.

This happens every so often, but it seems to have been going all day today?

[POL]

Not worked at all for me today, won't search at all!

[Ben Montgomery]

Triple clicking everything seems to help!

Cheers Chris - glad it's not just me!

[MikeB]

Can anyone spot the cheeky bit of photoshopping that's gone on in this photo?

That's shocking . Unbelievable that some photographers get banned for removing snow markers etc (de-cluttering the photo) yet some people can photoshop faces into mirrors!

[POL]

And we know how much you love "de-cluttering" Mike!

[Wallace]

Always nice to see someone get one up on an a.net screener

Remember, the crime is not in cloning, it is in getting caught!

[Sheff]

I find the Airliners.net saga very funny. It's like Studio 54 all over again - the more difficult they make things to have a photo accepted, the more some people want to be accepted.

It's worth remembering that Airliners.net is not some sort of international repository of all things great and good. It is simply a bunch of aeroplane enthusiasts with a web site. Their judgement on what should or shouldn't be accepted is entirely subjective. For heaven's sake, they don't even have a relevant name for the site!

It's rather sad that the site has become a pseudo battle ground for amateur photographers who seem to think that getting a picture accepted is some sort of achievement. It isn't. If you choose to submit your pictures to the site then that's great, but if they reject them it is of no consequence to anyone. It just means that some random guy who looked at your pictures didn't like them. Who cares? His idea of what constitutes a nice picture probably varies wildly from mine... and yours.

Okay, there are some lovely photographs on that web site. But I do wish people would stop investing so much importance in the site and their rules. Some of the pictures might be nice (and most are dull as dishwater to be fair) but ultimately the site is of no consequence to anyone. Don't lose sleep over getting pictures submitted. Leave that to the fools who think it actually matters one jot!

[Wallace]

We share a common belief about the sunshine site.

I really dislike what they have done for aviation photography in general, for instance the absolute belief that a picture must be close cropped and centered, which is lousy composition in my book.

But to each their own. It make folk happy so it can't be all that bad.

[blakey]

I dont want to slag anyone off cause its up to them how they live their lives, but it does make you stop and think how others live and how empty their lives are

Take RIAT, that place is a Mecca to some, their whole year is geared up to that one week in Gloucestershire. Every year without fail, i mean its over a month away and they're getting excited about seat numbers in the stand (FRIAT)

If RIAT is their Mecca then A.net is definitely their Bible, its their acceptance in life and i'll admit in 2008 i too was drawn into it like the 'cult' that it is, i say that because thats exactly what it is, luckily i escaped by calling the head screener a few choice words and telling him where he should go, i was banned from uploading for a year lol

Ok i think i recall sometime in 2010 i received an email saying i was able to upload again (begging me to come 'home' ) but by then all their brainwashing was out my system (and im now able to take an ordinary photo again)

Others are not so lucky, they still upload and have cold sweats everytime they open an email, (was my photo good enough for our great leader failure is not an option)

My only concern is the ones Brainwashed into this way of life are getting younger and younger

Happy uploading folks

[pikey01]

Im not really in to the Anet thing, but does this look a tad....ahem fake to anyone else?

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Poland-- ... 1393541/M/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Mike]

Ermmmmmmm..................

Yes !

[pikey01]

http://pl.youtube.com/watch?v=qEJibcs3QiU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; hmmmm still not convinced

[MarkG]

Its so un-amazing what you can do with the Photoshop airbrush tool...

Thats not to say, used properly its really effective!

[SamP]

It's fake.

Take a closer look, the nose gives it away... There is no reflection of the photographer in it, just a marshaller. That would indicate that the photographer is at a different height to the marshaller, obviously, lower. However, does the composition of the photograph look low enough to be at kneeling height to you? It doesn't to me... Also, where could that marshaller possibly be standing? He's not behind the photographer, or beside him, simply because the photographer would be reflected in the nose aswell. Finally, last but not least, where's the reflection of the '30' markings on the runway? Because the photographer would have to be standing just behind them in order to compose the photograph in such a way. It's not a case of ''the reflection of the 30 markings hasn't reached the nose yet'' because the marshaller is reflected in it, and as we know, he's not standing infront of the photographer!

So, in conclusion... Can I be a screener now?