PDA

View Full Version : I need some advice!



Mellyrose
03-15-2006, 09:02 PM
As most of you guys already know, I've started taking photos with Phil's camera and began uploading to both Jetphotos and Anet. My first round with Anet went well, getting 2 out of 3 accepted, from my first time out spotting. The most recent, though, not so great.

I uploaded 5 (still my limit, with no reputation on the site) and all 5 were rejected. While I know that their standards are high, there were a couple of these that I am still confused about...I appealed 2 and got the same reasons back the 2nd time around. They were both accepted onto JP, so Iím just linking to there.

I really want to improve the quality of my photos before I upload them, but I honestly am at a loss, since I was meticulous with the editing. I'd love some of your opinions on these shots.


This was rejected for "contrast issues."
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5690714


This one I was especially confused about. It was rejected for "incorrect use of certain features of the image processing software or deliberate attempts to alter the image." I was totally consistant with the editing process with this one, as I am with the rest.
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5690737



Constructive criticism is 100% welcome and encouraged!

:?: :?: :?: :?:

Tom_Turner
03-15-2006, 09:17 PM
Hi Mel.

The undercarriage is a bit dark on the Finnair. Camera settings may not have been optimal?

The Song, I don't know. Its an unusual rejection message. Any neatimage on the fuselage at all?

Tom

T-Bird76
03-15-2006, 09:59 PM
I agree with Tom, under the wings of the FinAir bird looks a bit dark. I'd use the dodge tool to make it a bit brighter.

The Song shot looks good to me, I'm not sure what they are looking at. The rejection reason could have been a bit more clear.

PhilDernerJr
03-15-2006, 10:07 PM
Not to answer for Mel, but the darkenss can be an effect gotten from using levels. Dodge is also frowned upon by Anet. ;)

As for neatimage, I don't have it and Mel just learned what it was. Do people still even use that thing?

jakbar
03-15-2006, 10:09 PM
I agree about the contrast issue. The undercarriage is a little dark. Try Shadows/Highlight to reduce that. That's probably going to produce a better result than the dodge tool. Or, if you are comfortable with Curves, you might be able to do a good job with that instead.

On the Song picture, a couple of things jump out at me. The sky is kind of grainy/blotchy, thus suggesting that perhaps some incorrect application of USM. The plane also some soft spots on it, which are further suggestive on incorrect and/or inconsistent application of USM. But these are nitpicks, really. What I think would be helpful for all of us is if you could give us a rundown of your editing workflow for this picture.

Mellyrose
03-15-2006, 11:03 PM
Ok....I should also point out that I edit on my laptop (great screen, but still, a laptop). While I know this isn't ideal, it's what I have...I have used Phil's desktop for several photos, but especially once I get my own camera, I won't be able to do that for 100% of my shots...I'd like to figure out a way to compensate for any discrepencies between what I see and what the screeners (or anyone else, for that matter) see.

Anyway, this is my method.
*I begin by cropping it to 1024x683
*Adjust the levels
*Adjust saturation
*Adjust brightness/contrast
*Color balance to remove red and green casts
*Unsharp mask....% depends on shot, but usually at least one full pass
*Equalize and remove dust spots

That's pretty much it. I don't let myself get carried away with anything...and I'm learning when a photo just isn't editable, no matter what I am "able" to do with it in photoshop.

Tom_Turner
03-16-2006, 12:10 AM
Sounds like a good workflow to me Mel.

Not being as talented as some others here with post-processing, I don't often try to "reel in" too many shots that aren't in the zone to begin with.

I do about the same as you, although I opt for curves more than levels, and go very easy on the saturation and brightness/contrast these days.

I have to say though, judging from all your shots, those accepted and these rejected, you've skipped a big learning curve many of us had to the struggle though. All your shots are well composed and basically pretty good. You're going to be dangerous! :)

<<
Anyway, this is my method.
*I begin by cropping it to 1024x683
*Adjust the levels
*Adjust saturation
*Adjust brightness/contrast
*Color balance to remove red and green casts
*Unsharp mask....% depends on shot, but usually at least one full pass
*Equalize and remove dust spots >>

mirrodie
03-16-2006, 12:18 AM
first off, I have to say the same guy must have been editing our pics.

I got something similar "digitally manipulated"

really left me scratching my head as I follow the similar work flow as you and dont even know my way around photoshop to even know what that means!

second, I usually email back the screener and and them outright what is wrong so that it can be fixed. Helps me to learn the lingo.

Mellyrose
03-16-2006, 12:24 AM
I appreciate all of the input. I still have open ears for more though!

As far as my editing knowledge, I am fortunate enough to have had certain skills before I was even introduced to aviation photography (or Phil, haha). I am excited to have found a hobby that includes Photoshop (it's my life....no, really...it is! :P)

Mario...I wasn't sure if I could/should e-mail the "appeal" screener back. He didn't tell me anything different than the original rejection, and that frustrated the hell out of me. I didn't want to press the issue, but I would love to know what the heck it meant!

Haha...in regards to me being "dangerous," you should know that I am my own worst critic, and most competitive with MYSELF! I've never liked comparing any of my art with other's, and I don't see myself doing that with plane photos either.

I do hope to increase my acceptance rate and keep it up though!

Tom_Turner
03-16-2006, 01:15 AM
Mel, those two Songs. Is that an actual shot someone took or is that photoshopped? The pink I mean..not the "notes" haha.

Mellyrose
03-16-2006, 01:38 AM
Haha...it's Art Brett's shot...a popular one, too (his most popular Song shot, actually). See the original here: http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0377762/L/

I guess I can take your uncertainty as a compliment, since I did, in fact, do it in Photoshop!

Mr Smith
03-16-2006, 01:40 AM
ok guys here is a little bit of what i do...Mel just sent me a PM for assistance so i hope you all benefit from this just a little, screening photos at JP we get to see it all, so i like this method and its easy and fast! for dust i just equalise the photo, switch to band aid, undo the equalise and clean up the spot, i don't layer because it is time consuming.

1st off this is if your using photoshop 7 or CS

i like to keep it easy, all these flows gimme the ****s cos it's just complicated and it shouldn't be!

1) open image and level it, what i do to level is this, rotate it what you think it needs...

http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2kxw.jpg

2) then run the side of the page up against a building and see if it's level, it should run smoothly along the page thats open.
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2lo2.jpg

3) if it appears level then do a free crop with nothing in the size boxes.

http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2n84.jpg
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2ngh.jpg

4) now time for sharpening, firstly go to unsharpen mask and use the following settings

http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2nuq.jpg
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2o43.jpg

5) now it's time to reduce the size, i like to go down in increments of 500, so 2520 in the second pic here should be reduced to 2020
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2ohg.jpg


reduce from 2520 to 2020
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2ov5.jpg

6) then back to USM which i reduced from 45 to 35
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2qf4.jpg

7) now it's time to crop the pic, i prefer 1024x683 so nobody can flog the thing! try to keep the cross hair as centered as possible
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2qut.jpg
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2r9h.jpg


8) now for the sharpening of the image, if you have focal blade then use this, i like to sweep over it with a light sharpen, but for those who don't then this is what you should do.

http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2rsx.jpg

looks nice and sharp
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2rsx.jpg

then i fade that sharpen by about 30-50% so it doesn't look to harsh by putting 50% in the opacity box that comes up

http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2tr6.jpg
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2u12.jpg

9) now for bright and contrast, with this image i will add about +5 for bright and the same for contrast
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2uex.jpg
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2usj.jpg



10) then save the image at 12 so no compression is evident
http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2v6f.jpg

11) and the result is this. crisp and clear, dunno if i levelled it properly cos i am in a hurry...but thats my process and i've managed to get nearly 3000 shots online with the 2 sites.

http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2wr6.jpg


for Mel,

i added +10 of bright for delta and +10 of contrast and the same for the finnair.



http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2y6c.jpg

http://i2.tinypic.com/rj2zok.jpg

Mellyrose
03-16-2006, 01:48 AM
Monty,

Thanks so much for taking the time to share that with us! It's a very different approach than I am used to, but I will definitely be trying it, or at least incorporating some of it into my flow. A reputable screener and uploader can't be entirely wrong, eh? :-D

Thanks again. Much appreciated.

Mr Smith
03-16-2006, 01:53 AM
well i could be giving dimensions for playmate of the month so you could all get well n truly screwed! but i hope not :) this method filtered down to me from a guy who i think is the very best at editing, if i have a problem i go to him...hope it helps you out, let me know how you get on.

Mel, can you email the finnair and song to me please

[email protected] the full 2mb images please.

Mellyrose
03-16-2006, 01:57 AM
Well, with dimensions like 35x23x72, that playmate would have a BIG ASS! :shock:

I'll e-mail you tomorrow...not on my laptop right now.

:)

spacecadet
03-16-2006, 01:55 PM
As for neatimage, I don't have it and Mel just learned what it was. Do people still even use that thing?

Probably not anyone with a decent camera.

I have gotten a couple photos accepted on a.net taken with my old point and shoot where I used it, though, and then I've had others photos rejected where I *didn't* use it but was accused of doing so. I specifically had one appeal response that said "too much neatimage" when I had never even touched it on that image (it was a shot of a JAL 747 that had some "interesting" reflections that looked maybe oddly smoothed-over, but that was just the way those reflections looked on the smooth white skin of the plane). That basically cemented it for me that *some* of their screeners just don't even have any idea of whether something's been digitally manipulated or not, even just to reduce noise. That's pretty much when I gave up even trying to submit things; it was a situation similar to this, I guess. But I believe at that time there were many people complaining about the same thing; I do know there were a lot of newbie screeners that had just started up, so maybe it's better now.

I'm looking at the Song photo on a calibrated Apple 23" Cinema Display HD and I don't see what the screener apparently saw. If I *really* had to guess at what he/she saw as "incorrect use of features or intentional alteration", I would say maybe it's the rear wheels (the actual wheels) that are the problem; they're completely blacked out, whereas the shadow from the wings doesn't look like it should be quite that strong. They may have thought the contrast had been bumped up too high and then the white point set incorrectly. (Again, different screeners could and obviously do see things totally differently, though.) Could probably be fixed by starting from the original again. It would be that much easier if you've got a RAW file of it, which would probably have a bit more dynamic range that you could exploit, and without being destructive to the image.

Mellyrose
03-16-2006, 09:13 PM
Ok. I just did a reedit of one of my favorite shots that was rejected from Anet. I used Monty's technique. (Remember, I'm doing this on a laptop, so it might not be perfect, still)

Here is my ORIGINAL edit:
http://www.nycaviation.com/hosting/AA_A300_N14077_31RArr_030506.jpg

and then the reedit:
http://www.nycaviation.com/hosting/AA_A300_N14077_31RArr_030406_Reedit.jpg

Which do you guys think looks better? I know it's subtle, but I really am striving for perfection here. :)

spacecadet
03-16-2006, 11:41 PM
I know I'm a n00b here (not on a.net), but just another opinion to add to your pile...


Which do you guys think looks better?

The second one definitely has lower contrast and slightly higher brightness. I'm on my wife's laptop now though and her screen sucks :)

I originally thought the first one was better and the second washed out, but simply tilting the screen on this thing down made the first one look too contrasty and the second one fine, as far as exposure.

But check the tail. Look very closely. Look at the diagonals, the edges. Compare to the original. I see photos like this on a.net from time to time and I honestly am never sure how they get through. This is most likely a resizing/sharpening artifact. You did it properly the first time; the second time, you ended up with jagged edges. (You can see the same effect on the flaps on the left wing.)

I think some combination of what you did with brightness/contrast on the second one, with the sharpening/resizing method you used on the first would probably be right.

What was the reason for the original rejection given on this one? Just curious if it was contrast or something else.

Mellyrose
03-17-2006, 12:10 AM
This one was also contrast issues. I was very disappointed with this reject, as it is probably my favorite shot (even though its just an A300) of my own, so far.

Though I've been using Photoshop for years, I am just trying to fine tune my plane photo editing skills....I think that with everyone's advice I'm getting closer to a comfort level.

Thanks!

:-D

Mr Smith
03-17-2006, 01:28 AM
jaggies are a pain in the tit to avoid, no matter how hard you try the just keep producing milk! interesting analogy i know :) Mel, you can use lower USM settings also, 45 is not a concrete amount, i find AA is one of the harder ones to edit because of the color in baremetal, that being said you image on my LCD doesn't have jags at all...might be just this site has compressed it a little.

mirrodie
03-17-2006, 01:41 PM
wow, and that is why I can be bothered with anet.

You take the photo and you touch it up, but Anet standards are not about being a photographer as much as being a photoshopper. what a PITA. Mel you have great photo skills but according to anet, jsut your ps skills need to be worked on..

man, life is too short. i mean seriously. The difference is so sublime that it causes one to lose the forest for the trees. its a great photo for mel's sake!



Oh, and BTW, that shot that was most popular on jpet??? rejected by anet an hour ago.....I am hardly surprised.

T-Bird76
03-17-2006, 01:56 PM
Why did they reject it Mario?

Mellyrose
03-17-2006, 02:07 PM
And what's really ****ty, is that I AM a skilled photoshopper. It's just frustrating for me knowing that because of certain personal opinions, my work may not be acknowledged.

:?

T-Bird76
03-17-2006, 02:21 PM
I wouldn't get that bent out of shape over it, if A.net or JP.net rejects something big deal, if you can fix it go ahead but if you can't move on.

jakbar
03-17-2006, 02:31 PM
wow, and that is why I can be bothered with anet.

You take the photo and you touch it up, but Anet standards are not about being a photographer as much as being a photoshopper. what a PITA. Mel you have great photo skills but according to anet, jsut your ps skills need to be worked on..

man, life is too short. i mean seriously. The difference is so sublime that it causes one to lose the forest for the trees. its a great photo for mel's sake!



Oh, and BTW, that shot that was most popular on jpet??? rejected by anet an hour ago.....I am hardly surprised.

Uh-oh...it's anti-a.net time again. :roll:


I wouldn't get that bent out of shape over it, if A.net or JP.net rejects something big deal, if you can fix it go ahead but if you can't move on.

Ahhhh....the soothing voice of reason.


And what's really ****ty, is that I AM a skilled photoshopper. It's just frustrating for me knowing that because of certain personal opinions, my work may not be acknowledged.

Mel, hang in there. The Photoshop skills used for this very narrow type of photography are obviously a little different than the Photoshop skills you might use for other applications. You just have to train yourself to use the same tools in a different manner. It is clear from your posts and your examples of work that you have a solid command of Photoshop, so don't worry too much.

I love the Song banner in your signature, by the way! Way cool!

spacecadet
03-17-2006, 02:36 PM
man, life is too short. i mean seriously. The difference is so sublime that it causes one to lose the forest for the trees. its a great photo for mel's sake!

I agree, though now that I've seen the comparison again on a good screen (I'm back on my work Cinema Display HD), I see way more jaggies than I could last night in the second photo. Basically all down the cheat lines of the livery on the fuselage. The second version is definitely worse.

There is also very little difference in the contrast when looking at these on an Apple monitor, and they both look fine in that regard (the difference is so slight that it's hard to say which one is "right", but they both look fine). I don't have much doubt that many of the contrast rejections on a.net are coming from screeners working on 2.2 gamma PC's looking at photos edited on 1.8 gamma Macs.

Anyway, the first version is better simply because of the jaggies on the second. Whatever resizing and sharpening methods were used there were not right.

I wouldn't really worry about getting acceptances to a.net... they've got their stable of photographers that the screeners are used to accepting hundreds of photos from a week and you basically have to emulate them to have any chance at this point. They're locked into sort of a tunnel vision about what aviation photographs are supposed to look like. (I was told by a screener once quite specifically that their idea of proper composition has nothing to do with proper photographic composition. Their position is that aviation photography and other forms of photography are mutually exclusive.) That said, even if you do a good job at emulating the right style, they'll still pick random things out to reject you for pretty often.

I personally haven't thought it was even worth uploading to them for a while now, but that doesn't mean I won't ever again now that I've moved to a place where I'll probably be taking a lot more aviation photos. But I definitely agree with whoever said it's really not worth getting worked up over. A good photo is still a good photo, whatever the screeners at a.net say about it. They're less interested in "good photos" than they are in simple documentation, as the aforementioned conversation I mentioned above confirmed to me. (And really, there's nothing strictly wrong with that; they're not a photography site, they're a site about airliners.)

Mellyrose
03-17-2006, 03:03 PM
Hmm. Every single one of you made fantastic points. I guess I AM a little bit biased about Anet and JP because of all of the mumbo jumbo debate over the 2 sites here on the boards.

I feel that both sites have great quality photographs, but I think the challenge of Anet is what I am seeking in some aspect. As much as I am not a competitive person, there is an undeniable undertone surrounding these sites. Yes, every form of art that I enjoy, I enjoy for myself, but if you can't share it and have it appreciated, it is not fulfilling the potential it has, as art.

It's satisfying getting my work on Jetphotos, and that is where I plan to "showcase" the majority of my shots, especially once I have my own camera and more freedom...I guess that getting an Anet shot just feels almost like I've "won" something at this point...considering I only have about 10-15 upload-worthy shots, from 2 spotting outings.

I'm looking forward to spotting again and having a fresh batch to work on and edit...I have some ideas on how to fine-tune some of my editing techniques....thanks to everyone! :mrgreen:


P.S. Thanks for the compliments on the Song Banner! As soon as I saw that shot of Art's I knew I wanted to do something with it. I thought it was cute...kind of a double meaning since the planes look like they're ready to kiss and "make music"....they are Songs after all! And OF COURSE, I had to make one pink :wink:

T-Bird76
03-17-2006, 03:05 PM
I'm looking forward to spotting again and having a fresh batch to work on and edit...I have some ideas on how to fine-tune some of my editing techniques....thanks to everyone! :mrgreen:

I have over 1000 photos that I took in a week you're more then welcome to help yourself to a bach of them, lol

Mellyrose
03-17-2006, 03:08 PM
Actually, Tommy...I may take you up on that offer! I'd love to have some practice material. PM me, kid. :wink:

mirrodie
03-17-2006, 03:43 PM
Uh-oh...it's anti-a.net time again.


Hey Josh? Quit being a tool, eh? You are slowly transcending the boundaries of stoogedom.


Im not anti anet. (besides, I am involved there anyway, so how you figure?)
I simply have different goals. And if I can share my fun on jpnet with my friends, then I'd rather invest time uploading to anet in other ways.

Mellyrose
03-17-2006, 03:45 PM
Hey, kids...no fighting in my thread! I swear to god I'll turn this car around.

mirrodie
03-17-2006, 04:01 PM
oh mommey, will you spank me?

Mellyrose
03-17-2006, 04:21 PM
I thought it was your job to spank the Shosh? That's what you said last night, anyway...(I'm not even joking, guys) ;)

Mr Smith
03-17-2006, 05:51 PM
well here is a farmiliar photo to most of you...

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1018437/L/

suprised it got in actually with the noise on the fuselage. :)

Mel, just mess about and find what method suits you, don't worry if you get rejects, just take it out on Phil! ;)

PhilDernerJr
03-17-2006, 07:07 PM
And what's really ****ty, is that I AM a skilled photoshopper. It's just frustrating for me knowing that because of certain personal opinions, my work may not be acknowledged.
:?

A lot of people seem to take on this mentality. I think it's important to realize that Airliners.net, and even JetPhotos.net, is not the be-all-and-end-all of validating your work as good or bad or even existing.

Your work is your work, and everyone needs to be proud of their personal results and realize that photo websites do have their own standards. Getting a rejection does not mean that anyone is a bad photographer, not does it take away the chance for someone to get their work "acknowledged".

And that's a great thing, I think. The fact that Airliners.net looks for different shots than JP is great, because if they all looked for the same stuff, how boring would it be? That's the whole idea of art, different interpretations.

I know that Mel is starting to get used to how we all have dealt with this for a long time now. It's the same hazing that all newcomers go through.

PhilDernerJr
03-17-2006, 07:09 PM
oh mommey, will you spank me?

Looks like Mario will be catching an ass-kickin from me AND Shosh tomorrow.

moose135
03-17-2006, 07:20 PM
So I think, I've got a bunch of photos on JP.net, let me try one on a.net. I submitted this one, shot from BK during our recent outing:

http://www.nycaviation.com/hosting/JM_VH-OEG_2006_03_04_B.jpg

The rejection message I received said:

These photo(s) do not appear to be level, i.e. the angle of the camera does not seem to be straight compared to the horizon.

Am I missing something here? You know, like the horizon?

I guess I'll have to save it for my desktop.

jakbar
03-17-2006, 08:23 PM
I'd appeal that one, Moose. The screener could have made a mistake.

spacecadet
03-17-2006, 08:59 PM
I'd appeal that one, Moose. The screener could have made a mistake.

Yeah, but he'd probably get it rejected by another screener for something else. This kind of photo often gets rejected for "badmotiv" because it's not quite a nose shot and obviously not a full body shot. That's really what they seem to want; they want either nothing cut off whatsoever or they want just the nose.

It's pretty common also for shots without a visible horizon to get rejected for bad leveling. I don't think most screeners are dumb enough to *actually* think it's bad leveling, but that's basically their way of saying "there's no way to tell whether this is level or not, therefore I'm going to have to reject it." Everything on the site has to be level, I mean that's the rule; or at least the rule as most screeners interpret it.

I think there's probably a better chance that this would get rejected again on appeal than that it'd get accepted.

He could try rotating the image so the nosegear strut is straight vertically. That would *not* mean the shot is level but it might be a way to satisfy the screeners, at least in terms of leveling.

NIKV69
03-17-2006, 10:08 PM
Yeah, but he'd probably get it rejected by another screener for something else. This kind of photo often gets rejected for "badmotiv" because it's not quite a nose shot and obviously not a full body shot. That's really what they seem to want; they want either nothing cut off whatsoever or they want just the nose.


Then what is this?

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/0915219/L/

Poor generalizations like this is what leads to these pointless discussions about this topic that has been beaten to death. I can't believe after 2 years this topic continues. The screeners at anet have no alterior motives, they don't get their rocks off by rejecting rather than accepting or anything else. Johan has set the bar a certain way and that's it. I think the reason more and more new photographers are being frustrated is not because of their photos rejected, but more because this mindset has been created that the anet screeners have all these little quirks on what they like and what they will accept. I think if you stick to the basics of both taking the picture and editing the picture you will find that all of this talk is complete BS. I take a very basic approach to PS and I get results that anet still accepts. Of course when you attempt harder shots like nose shots and close ups it will be harder to achieve the motive and quality anet accepts. Which is what you would expcect. Don't confuse new and intermediate photographers into thinking anet's screeners won't give a shot a fair shake because a certain shot is not a full body side on or a perfect close up nose shot, because then photographers that are learning are going to have the same narrow minded attitude and instead of trying to improve the shot they will just complain about the rejection.

Moose,

I would email the screeners and try to find the one who rejected the shot. The rejection reason doesn't sound right, that is a great shot and I wouldn't give up so easy.

jakbar
03-17-2006, 10:43 PM
Poor generalizations like this is what leads to these pointless discussions about this topic that has been beaten to death. I can't believe after 2 years this topic continues. The screeners at anet have no alterior motives, they don't get their rocks off by rejecting rather than accepting or anything else. Johan has set the bar a certain way and that's it. I think the reason more and more new photographers are being frustrated is not because of their photos rejected, but more because this mindset has been created that the anet screeners have all these little quirks on what they like and what they will accept. I think if you stick to the basics of both taking the picture and editing the picture you will find that all of this talk is complete BS. I take a very basic approach to PS and I get results that anet still accepts. Of course when you attempt harder shots like nose shots and close ups it will be harder to achieve the motive and quality anet accepts. Which is what you would expcect. Don't confuse new and intermediate photographers into thinking anet's screeners won't give a shot a fair shake because a certain shot is not a full body side on or a perfect close up nose shot, because then photographers that are learning are going to have the same narrow minded attitude and instead of trying to improve the shot they will just complain about the rejection.

I am in absolute and total greement with every word of your post.

NIKV69
03-18-2006, 12:01 AM
I am in absolute and total greement with every word of your post.

Thanks Josh, I wasn't going to touch this topic but you read statements like this and it makes you wonder.



I wouldn't really worry about getting acceptances to a.net... they've got their stable of photographers that the screeners are used to accepting hundreds of photos from a week and you basically have to emulate them to have any chance at this point. They're locked into sort of a tunnel vision about what aviation photographs are supposed to look like. (I was told by a screener once quite specifically that their idea of proper composition has nothing to do with proper photographic composition. Their position is that aviation photography and other forms of photography are mutually exclusive.) That said, even if you do a good job at emulating the right style, they'll still pick random things out to reject you for pretty often.

This is especially alarming, there is a reason these so called "stable" photogs get hundreds of pics accepted. They are good! Furthermore the anet screeners do not have tunnel vision, your so called tunnel vision is actually Johan's guidelines. I also doubt very highly this theory that a screener will pick a random thing to reject your picture for even after you have "emulated" one of the photogs from the screeners "stable" has any truth to it whatsoever. It's adds to this hysteria and paranoia that newer photogs do not need. Moose is a prime example, he is a good photog who took a great picture and could use some advice on how to #1, evaluate the rejection and #2 possibly improve the shot since he has the original and can make changes and edit again. Let us not forget that a rejection is not a death sentence. With some patience and an open mind you can surprise yourself. I hope Moose pursues it because looking at the pic I feel it can get into the DB.


That's pretty much when I gave up even trying to submit things; it was a situation similar to this, I guess. But I believe at that time there were many people complaining about the same thing; I do know there were a lot of newbie screeners that had just started up, so maybe it's better now

I think if you visit anet now you will see that this is not the case. You also have to remember that any new screener is overseen by a senior screener while they train so the level of accuracy is not effected, you also get notified that your pic was screened by a screener in training so you can always appeal and a senior screener will look at your photo.

I would hope that if we are going to post in this thread, a thread that upcoming photogs like Mel and Moose are in need of good advice that we would give good advice, it's not fair to give them the famous "anet screener conspiracy theory"

spacecadet
03-18-2006, 12:55 AM
This is especially alarming, there is a reason these so called "stable" photogs get hundreds of pics accepted. They are good!

They are good at what they do. Other people are good at what they do too. Yet one photographer's photo is accepted and another is rejected. There are reasons for that; it has nothing to do with how good somebody is generally, as several other people have said already.


Furthermore the anet screeners do not have tunnel vision, your so called tunnel vision is actually Johan's guidelines.

I never said anything different. That doesn't change the fact that they have a very specific subset of traits that they look for in images. (I specifically mentioned the nose shot/full shot distinction - one of the traits that they look for is that an image fit into a pre-defined category on the site.)

I have gone through all of the guidelines on the site many times and have talked to several of the screeners looking for clarification on some of them. So I'm not unfamiliar with what you're saying, nor am I even denying it. I don't think you're arguing with me on the points you seem to think you are. The reasons why they have tunnel vision are kind of moot; they don't matter. The fact is they have a set of things that they look for and if your photos don't have those things - even if you're freakin' Ansel Adams doing a weekend of shooting at JFK - you're not going to get your photos accepted.


It's adds to this hysteria and paranoia that newer photogs do not need. Moose is a prime example, he is a good photog who took a great picture and could use some advice on how to #1, evaluate the rejection and #2 possibly improve the shot since he has the original and can make changes and edit again.

I'm not going to get into these "hysteria" issues. I'm simply giving an opinion. The people who seem to get so bent out of shape on this sort of thing always seem to be the people on your side of it. I have no emotion whatsoever on this; a.net has no influence at all over my life (except for all the time I spend in the general discussion forum there!).

The advice I gave is to straighten the shot. The example you posted was straighter than the one Moose posted. I then said don't get your hopes up, because it's likely it will be rejected again, which is the truth. I say this from experience; I've had enough photos rejected for things other than the original rejection reason on appeal enough times to know that it does happen, and probably a good percentage of the time. Different screeners see different things. They're human beings, not robots. (That doesn't always mean they make mistakes, either; just that one may see a badlevel, one may see a badmotiv, one may see both, one may see neither.)

I just don't understand this obssession with getting photos on a.net. If you submit a shot and they reject it, I mean jeebus, forget about it. There are more important things in life to worry about. Is that one shot being on a.net going to affect your life in any tangible way whatsoever? Worrying about it will affect your life a whole lot more.


I would hope that if we are going to post in this thread, a thread that upcoming photogs like Mel and Moose are in need of good advice that we would give good advice, it's not fair to give them the famous "anet screener conspiracy theory"

A "conspiracy theory" would be to suggest all these screeners get together and actively try to thwart new photographers. I don't think anybody has said anything like that. What we, and specifically I, have said is that the screeners are doing their best to adhere to a specific set of style guidelines that has evolved over time since the start of the site and that they now have a set of photographers that understand those guidelines and that they trust. While those guidelines are rigid, photos are not, so borderline photos from new photographers will be judged differently by different screeners, but when all is said and done it is the screeners' job to look for reasons to keep photos off the site. That is their mandate. They are trained to look for leveling issues, or contrast issues, or motivation issues, or whatever. So the judgement of a screener is not the judgement of the quality of a photo; it is simply the judgement of the photo's suitability to being on the a.net web site. Those are two different things, and even some of the screeners will tell you that (and I know that because one of them did tell me that).

You and me both are trying to encourage these new photographers, we are just doing it in different ways. I am trying to do it in a more general way that looks at the big picture. I don't care about a.net. I care about helping someone be a better photographer, and helping them to feel good about their work even though it has been rejected by a.net. a.net is a great resource for airliners, but ultimately 99% of the photos on it are disposable; they are just a documentary record of particular airliners in particular places at particular times. I am just saying this is not the ultimate goal that any aviation photographer should be striving towards. Set your sights a little higher. Try to take photos that have some lasting impact and just don't worry about what the screeners at a.net think of them. Because that's not ultimately what matters.

(I will say there are also some fantastic shots on a.net, some of which were probably taken by people right here. But I remember one day I went through trying to prove much this same point and managed to pick out around 75 nearly identical photos of a Continental 757 sitting on the ground at an airport in identical lighting conditions and with nearly identical backgrounds. I posted them all in one post on the photography forum there, and it was kind of hilarious seeing them all together like that. Oh well, I'm easily amused, I guess.)

Of course, I don't always practice what I preach and I've got plenty of boring photos on my hard drive of airplanes sitting on a tarmac somewhere. But that doesn't mean I don't strive for better. And I don't even bother uploading shots like that to a.net, because to me, there's not really any point in even looking at them more than once. (I am basically a beginning aviation photographer too; my background is more general photography and, actually, motion picture film.)

Mr Smith
03-18-2006, 05:48 AM
well JP has it's purpose, you'd never see this shot on a.net...

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5694104

mirrodie
03-18-2006, 08:41 AM
sorry if a debates been sparked....


I'll stand by my points though. Photography should be fun. ONce it becomes tedious and frustrating, its no longer photography.



And seriously, as I stated most early on, look at Mel's two version of hte same shot. both beautiful...

but b/c some one individuals perception of perfection, all this chit chat. not worth it. rahter be walking, drinking wine, snowboarding, loving, wathcing a movie, misspelling, ****, you name it...I'd much rather be doing something else than that.;)

PhilDernerJr
03-18-2006, 12:08 PM
Poor generalizations like this is what leads to these pointless discussions about this topic that has been beaten to death. I can't believe after 2 years this topic continues. The screeners at anet have no alterior motives, they don't get their rocks off by rejecting rather than accepting or anything else. Johan has set the bar a certain way and that's it. I think the reason more and more new photographers are being frustrated is not because of their photos rejected, but more because this mindset has been created that the anet screeners have all these little quirks on what they like and what they will accept. I think if you stick to the basics of both taking the picture and editing the picture you will find that all of this talk is complete BS. I take a very basic approach to PS and I get results that anet still accepts. Of course when you attempt harder shots like nose shots and close ups it will be harder to achieve the motive and quality anet accepts. Which is what you would expcect. Don't confuse new and intermediate photographers into thinking anet's screeners won't give a shot a fair shake because a certain shot is not a full body side on or a perfect close up nose shot, because then photographers that are learning are going to have the same narrow minded attitude and instead of trying to improve the shot they will just complain about the rejection.

I am in absolute and total greement with every word of your post.

Wow.

http://www.crwflags.com/art/countries2/un.gif

T-Bird76
03-18-2006, 01:32 PM
Poor generalizations like this is what leads to these pointless discussions about this topic that has been beaten to death. I can't believe after 2 years this topic continues. The screeners at anet have no alterior motives, they don't get their rocks off by rejecting rather than accepting or anything else. Johan has set the bar a certain way and that's it. I think the reason more and more new photographers are being frustrated is not because of their photos rejected, but more because this mindset has been created that the anet screeners have all these little quirks on what they like and what they will accept. I think if you stick to the basics of both taking the picture and editing the picture you will find that all of this talk is complete BS. I take a very basic approach to PS and I get results that anet still accepts. Of course when you attempt harder shots like nose shots and close ups it will be harder to achieve the motive and quality anet accepts. Which is what you would expcect. Don't confuse new and intermediate photographers into thinking anet's screeners won't give a shot a fair shake because a certain shot is not a full body side on or a perfect close up nose shot, because then photographers that are learning are going to have the same narrow minded attitude and instead of trying to improve the shot they will just complain about the rejection.

I am in absolute and total greement with every word of your post.

Wow.

http://www.crwflags.com/art/countries2/un.gif

Phil not even the U.N could have pulled that off!!!! This is some kind of miracle of God. Hey Nick was Michael Landon involed somehow? LOL

NIKV69
03-18-2006, 11:12 PM
They are good at what they do. Other people are good at what they do too. Yet one photographer's photo is accepted and another is rejected. There are reasons for that; it has nothing to do with how good somebody is generally, as several other people have said already.


This statement makes little sense, please clarify, are you saying one photogs work is welcome and the other who uploads the same quality pic gets rejected for reasons that are not meeting the eye and go against the screening policy? What does anet gain from this? Who are these several other people that also have made this baseless claim?


I'm not going to get into these "hysteria" issues. I'm simply giving an opinion. The people who seem to get so bent out of shape on this sort of thing always seem to be the people on your side of it. I have no emotion whatsoever on this; a.net has no influence at all over my life (except for all the time I spend in the general discussion forum there!).



Wrong! The people on my side of this argument DO NOT get bent out of shape after a rejection. Quite the contrary, I use a rejection as a way to correct the mistake I made, either in the photograph (by getting out and shooting again) or editing (by editing it again). What gets people that think the way I do bent out of shape is your mindset and propaganda that only brainwashes certain newbies into thinking their rejection is motivated by things other than the screening process and policies.


(I will say there are also some fantastic shots on a.net, some of which were probably taken by people right here. But I remember one day I went through trying to prove much this same point and managed to pick out around 75 nearly identical photos of a Continental 757 sitting on the ground at an airport in identical lighting conditions and with nearly identical backgrounds. I posted them all in one post on the photography forum there, and it was kind of hilarious seeing them all together like that. Oh well, I'm easily amused, I guess.)



It's sad to see you would waste people's time in av-photo like that. I am still confused as to your point of that post. What is wrong with a tarmac shot of a 757? If you are trying to say that harder shots that just fall short of anet's guidelines are still great well good, then think that and don't upload to anet, just save all the rhetoric too.


Phil not even the U.N could have pulled that off!!!! This is some kind of miracle of God. Hey Nick was Michael Landon involved somehow?

These two men were seen in the Costco lot.


http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-12/905683/jonathan.jpg

Mark Gordon - "Jonathan what are you looking at ?"

Jonathan Smith - "Peter Max is coming in"

Mark Gordon - "Who are those two guys with the cameras shooting it?"

Jonathan Smith - "Nick and Josh"

Mark Gordon - "It seems our work is done here"

Mellyrose
03-30-2006, 11:00 PM
'bout damn time!

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1025303/L/


Like I said to Phil, just minutes ago:

ZoMellyRose (10:52:01 PM): haha, scrolling down on an anet screening email is like opening a Willy Wonka Chocolate bar...and hoping for the golden ticket

LGA777
03-31-2006, 09:46 AM
Beautiful shot and Beautiful weather Mel, it's Phil's loss and the worlds gain !

Congrats

Ron Peel

Msh744
04-01-2006, 06:40 PM
this might be a bit late for this topic, but just a shortcut for leveling photos that I learned a while back, I think from the airliners.net forums.

use the measure tool (under the eyedropper tool) and draw a line along the edge you want to be horizontal or vertical (ie: horizon, side of a building, lightpost, etc). then go to Image --> Rotate Canvas --> Arbitrary... and the degree measure needed to turn your line horizontal or vertical will already be there.

hope that made sense.

Mellyrose
04-14-2006, 05:10 PM
Just wanted to share my excitement that I uploaded 5 photos a couple weeks ago (5 is still my limit on Anet) and all but one (I forgot to upload it as special marking) got accepted at once! What a relief it is to open a screening e-mail from Anet and just have a list of acceptances, instead of reasons you suck!

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?pid=34401

:)

...and thanks for all of the advice guys!