Possible JetPhotos Rejection? C-32 Air Force Two

[Chris102]

Would Jetphotos reject these two photos of Air Force Two due to the obstructions? Also, regarding the third photo, would that be unacceptable for Jetphotos because it contains only the nose section of the aircraft?

Any help would be appreciated :D

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/3680/c32bi4.th.jpg (http://img401.imageshack.us/my.php?image=c32bi4.jpg)

http://img518.imageshack.us/img518/9940/c323uc0.th.jpg (http://img518.imageshack.us/my.php?image=c323uc0.jpg)

http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/9941/c322mf5.th.jpg (http://img117.imageshack.us/my.php?image=c322mf5.jpg)

[moose135]

I'm sure the first two would be rejected, and I'd bet the last one would as well. I think that would have worked if the C-17 wasn't blocked by that trailer. Too bad, looks like you had some nice access. Was this out at ABE?

[Chris102]

I'm sure the first two would be rejected, and I'd bet the last one would as well. I think that would have worked if the C-17 wasn't blocked by that trailer. Too bad, looks like you had some nice access.

Thanks for your help. I did try Photoshopping out the pole in the first photo, but I ran into some trouble reconstructing the flag on the tail.



Was this out at ABE?

No, they were taken at AVP.

[Chris102]

I have one more favor to ask. :D

I caught this CH-47D over my house 2 weeks ago - do you think it would be Jetphotos acceptable?

http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/4465/cdch47dkg2.th.jpg (http://img362.imageshack.us/my.php?image=cdch47dkg2.jpg)

Also, did you hear anything about 767 flight testing at AVP? The same day I took the CH-47D, a white 767 kept flying over, doing touch-and-go's at AVP.

[moose135]

Thanks for your help. I did try Photoshopping out the pole in the first photo, but I ran into some trouble reconstructing the flag on the tail.

DON'T DO THAT! If you get caught, not only is it an immediate rejection, but you might also earn a "vacation" from submitting photos. One thing both the big sites are serious about is that sort of manipulation. If you do some "creative" Photoshopping, save that for the personal collection.



No, they were taken at AVP.

That's right, your up in that neck of the woods. I spend a fair amount of time out that way, I have relatives in Mountaintop. Maybe we can get together the next time I'm out that way.

[moose135]

I caught this CH-47D over my house 2 weeks ago - do you think it would be Jetphotos acceptable?

That's a tough shot - it would have to be cropped closer, and without seeing the original, I don't know if that will leave you with a large enough photo to avoid a "quality" rejection. Also, I think if you brighten it up to get some underside detail, you will end up blowing out the highlights.

[T-Bird76]

Chris, yes we would reject all those pictures, the first two have obstruction, the third one doesn't show enough of the plane as the subject and it’s too far to the left. The main subject is the transport in the background which is also blocked. The helicopter shot overall doesn't meet the sites standards.

Oh as Moose said don't clone out things that large, we can pick that up very easily and would reject the shot for manipulation which then can a photog being banned. Cloning out dust spots and other small objects is fine, lamp posts are not

[Chris102]

Thanks for letting me know about the Jetphotos manipulation policy! As you can probably tell, I'm a beginner at both plane spotting and the use of Jetphotos, and I didn't know how strongly they felt about Photoshopping. You saved me a lot of trouble - thanks!

Thanks also for the opinions on the photos. :)
I am truly grateful for your help!

My photography has gotten better recently. The AF2 pictures were taken in October with my Canon Powershot A75. Since then, I've upgraded to the Canon XT. Although I have used the XT to spot only the Chinook so far, I did have it in Washington for President Ford's funeral, and you can notice my improvement in this photo: :arrow:

http://img262.imageshack.us/img262/1768/wh1620nd4.th.jpg (http://img262.imageshack.us/my.php?image=wh1620nd4.jpg)

:wink:

[Nick]

Why are you guys so bent on posting your photo's to a website.

[nwafan20]

Why are you guys so bent on posting your photo's to a website.

I guess it's just a "thing", I really don't know why I do it. I just get pride in getting my photos accepted I guess. It also allows me to share my photos with others.

[PhilDernerJr]

Why are you guys so bent on posting your photo's to a website.

It's something that tens of thousands of people happen to enjoy. Is there a problem with that?

As with any artistic expression, you further express it when you get the opportunity to showit to more people....hence the desire to upload it to a large website.

[mmedford]

nice shots of the c-32...

those engines are P&Ws right?

[T-Bird76]

Why are you guys so bent on posting your photo's to a website.

It's something that tens of thousands of people happen to enjoy. Is there a problem with that?

As with any artistic expression, you further express it when you get the opportunity to showit to more people....hence the desire to upload it to a large website.

Well said Phil and exactly right.

[Chris102]

nice shots of the c-32...

those engines are P&Ws right?

Thanks! :D

Yes. They are the P&W 2040's.

[Chris102]

Why are you guys so bent on posting your photo's to a website.

It's something that tens of thousands of people happen to enjoy. Is there a problem with that?

As with any artistic expression, you further express it when you get the opportunity to showit to more people....hence the desire to upload it to a large website.

Nice way of putting it. I agree :)