art... it's white. remember the conversation we all had at the last slide show? doesn't this seem like a repeat of just that? by the way, you do have a small dust spot right above the last window in front of the L2 door.
art... it's white. remember the conversation we all had at the last slide show? doesn't this seem like a repeat of just that? by the way, you do have a small dust spot right above the last window in front of the L2 door.
it is mathematically impossible for either hummingbirds, or helicopters to fly. fortunately, neither are aware of this.
Here's Boeing's definition of the color:
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/200 ... 0719g.html
Paragraph 4:
On an airplane's exterior, four shades of blue and two shades of white
combine throughout the plane's length as a visual depiction of the
horizon and sky.
And from the linked fact sheet
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/200 ... tsheet.pdf )
Six colors comprise the new livery:
• Four varieties of blue – shades of light, medium and dark along with
a brilliant aqua.
• Two varieties of white – a standard bright gloss white and a
luminous Mica satin white.
• A reflective Mylar clear coat
Mica and Mylar finishes differ in appearance and effect because of the
reflective particles in the paint. The reflective particles in Mica
paint are plastic rather than metal, and are much smaller and more
granular in texture. Mylar contains larger more reflective pieces,
creating a luminous glow when light reflects off the airplane.
Now, in reference to some of the comments here:
Monty, don't worry. I no longer feel that sense of urgency to get those shots uploaded to A.net. In fact, I've been sending them up to JP first. You go where the rewards are and the bull**** isn't :). Haven't you noticed my numbers climb pretty dramatically the past couple of months?
Matt, someone else told me last night I had a dust spot over the "N". I loaded the photo in PS looked at it closely, even did an equilization and I still don't see a dust spot on it. But, that gives the head screener, the almighty Sultan, the chief whachamacallit at A.net an out to reject it on appeal. Which I'm laying odds on they will do. What happened to the days when they would accept a pic with a minor imperfection, send you and e-mail telling you about it and asking that you reupload it? Afraid we've seen the last of those days.
Art[/b]
Art i notice everything...even when someone tries to tell us that snow white is snow white ;) i noticed the stats from the NYC guys have escelated and Derek Pedley has recently submitted a few shots from RIAT. :)Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
unfortunately Tom they only thing A.net is consistnent at is being inconsistent, i got a reject yesterday for badlevel, the fuken photo was .001 of a degree out or something stupid like that! it was so minor that you needed to look at the photo for about a minute before you "convinced" yourself it was not level! who the **** looks at a photo for that long to judge the snow white of white or the milky white of white? nobody i'd venture to say! just people who are looking to reject photos via a set of guidlines drawn up by a person who know sqaut about photography!
to me all Mike has done on the a.net thread is brighten the photo and adjust the color cast...the color on the upper fuselage is still OFFWHITE allbeit a little brighter thanks to some adjustments, first they tell you not to manipulate a photo in such ways then they tell you that you must do it so the color is supposedly "correct"...no matter how much you adjust it it's always going to be offwhite! my rejects on there no longer get resubmitted, especially when they are ambiguous at best and run the risk of getting the chop a 2nd time for some other reason!
i think this pretty much confirms what A.net is really like! anyone else it's a bad double?!?!
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/887516/L/
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/887517/L/
Art and Matt, I can't believe those photo's where rejected, it's a real shame about all the negative vibes coming out of that site, it is almost as if there is that glass is "half empty" way of thinking going on there. I have recently reduced my uploading significantly instead trying to concentrate on JP where I still get rejections but at a 'MUCH" lower rate and there are some very friendly and helpful people involved with that site from CK on down and that means something to me. One of the things that really bugs me about a.net is you get no credit for having photo's that would probably be very popular with visitors to the site, it does not seem to play a part on the screening considerations. Art, Matt and Eric's shot's will do very well if they get uploaded again thru the appeal or resubmit process. As for me my current acceptance rate is 26 pct, however of my last 6 uploads, 3 where rejected and 3 made it to #1 of the last 24 hours and where on the front page of the site. 1 of the 3 rejections made it #1 of last 24 at JP and the second made it to number two. But it seems as far as the screeners are concerned that means nothing as far as my credibility as a photographer is concerned. I will stop rambling now, maybe some day things will change.
Ron
Hey look it's just like the picture that Art took. Yet there it is on A.net.
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/888631/M/
I'm no expert but color and sharpness look the same.
I think this must be A.net's way of trying to keep the amount of uploads down. Unfortunately they don't want to say that so instead they make up some baloney story which obviously by the pic is easily seen for what it is.
-p
Sweet.
My workflow is posted on a.net? Where?Originally Posted by Tom_Turner
Edit: Nevermind, I found it. Sweeeeeet...
I can join the mile high club without being in an airplane, you got nothin on this.
http://www.jetspotting.com/logos/xjspotlogox1small.jpg
G'day All!!
Seems like Anets badqual rejects are the flavor of the month all over the place.
Some of the shots above like Eric's Citation,Matts LAX shots and Art's MD11 show clearly how far they have gone at looking for things to reject photo's by.
What i would like to know is exactly who if anyone is calling for these type's of shots to be rejected?
Anet is being flooded by side on taxi shots with the occasional stunner that sneaks through the gauntlet.
I went through 400+ images the other day and couldnt find one shot i would call a good photograph.All where side ons or parked aircraft.
What was really funny was that i accidently reuploaded a shot of a NW 744 i took which was already up as i had two similar.
The shot i already had up got rejected for badqual when i accidently reuploaded it.Just shows how consistent they are.
Here's my contribution to the badqual reject file.
http://myaviation.net/search/photo_s...348&size=large
Cheers
Darren
Well, Darren, the fact that I just looked at your badqual shot is enough to make me cry...it's freakin' fantastic! Well done.
The fact that you shot it on a crap day probably had a lot to do with the rejection; I got badquality for the following shot , and the only explanation I got in the forums was that it was bounced because the weather sucked.
http://myaviation.net/search/photo_s...539&size=large
Well, as far as I'm concerned, that's not the only thing that sucked!
Brian
"My wife is an air traffic controller. I married her because I've always wanted to screw the FAA." - B. Wulle
You have got to be kidding.
I dont think they seam to realize that you don't normally get lots of moisture in the air on days when the wx is 8/8ths blue sky!!
Great shot Brian.Its one of the few shots i have seen from a wing view with some nice moisture effects.
Lovely.
Their loss again.
This one got done for
baddistance,badquality.
Mmmmmmm
http://myaviation.net/search/photo_sear ... size=large
Sometimes they just dont see what we are trying to do.
Great looking pastel clouds,nope we dont want to see those in the frame.
Is it a photography site???
Seeya
Darren
There is a serious question that needs to be asked: What is airliners.net for? Is it for looking at browsing amazing airplane photos or is it a catalogue of photos of aircraft? It used to be the former, which is why I used to go. Now I think it's becoming the latter.
I can join the mile high club without being in an airplane, you got nothin on this.
http://www.jetspotting.com/logos/xjspotlogox1small.jpg
No, Eric, it's just becoming stupid.
Mr. "747 coming out of the bush" repled to a request I submitted for priority screening today.
He sent a simple reply...Screeners,
I have uploaded three photos of Air Canada's new E175, and would like
them to be considered for priority screening:
[email protected]
Upload ID 1624638
Upload ID 1624634
Upload ID 1624625
Thank you,
Brian Futterman
And I laughed.
I think it's time the Head Screeners actually got a head.Peter, what are you trying to say? My request most definitely
satisfies the prerequisites for priority screening, primarily the
following (excerpted straight from the thread):
Priority Screening
* New types
* New colour schemes
* Combinations of the above (e.g. first of new type with existing airline)
This is an entirely new aircraft family, the FIRST Embraer 175 in
commercial service (so obviously a new type for the airline). The
fact that it is new to LGA, while I note that in the remark, is hardly
the driving force behind my valid request for priority screening.
Brian Futterman
Eric, note that I said "a head, not... ;)
"My wife is an air traffic controller. I married her because I've always wanted to screw the FAA." - B. Wulle
I agree Eric its become a DB for aircraft and has totally drifted away from anything to do with real aviation photography.
WIth such tight boundaries for what is acceptable and what is not any artistic freedom is totally restricted.
I have in fact been pretty surprised that some of my Tokyoshots still got through as i figured theywhere way past moisture effects.
Anyway enough rambling and great Citation shot mate it should be in a calender.
Cheers
Darren
just another day at the office!!
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/889955/L/
http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.s ... entry=true
Though I agree with Brian on those pics being priority, I think what is happening here is that the screeners have become tired of the standoffish emails and threads in av-photo when they reject a pic or deny a request. This over time is just going to hurt you. You also have to remember that anet is not a democracy and that Johan can do whatever he wants. It is a privelege to be on anet and have photos accepted into the DB, not an obligation. If their standards seem high then there are three choices. Keep working and uploading. Upload to JP only, or start your own aviation photo website. I feel that helping each other improve when our pics get rejected and talking about it is great, but when you constantly approach the screeners and voice displeasure at their procedures and judgement openly in the long run you will never get a fair shake from them . I kind of see this happening already. Remember that the workload for the screeners this summer has been record highs and to see emails in their inbox about rejections and the such is not the best thing. Their were two threads Brian posted there, one was the cockpit shot issue with the wall and there was another that got deleted almost immediately that I can't remember the topic. This I feel will just hurt in the long run, especially when Brian uploads.
'My idea of a good picture is one that's in focus and of a famous person doing something unfamous.' Andy Warhol
On the plus side, a different version of my citation shot made the cut:
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/890566/L/
I can join the mile high club without being in an airplane, you got nothin on this.
http://www.jetspotting.com/logos/xjspotlogox1small.jpg
Bookmarks