The contradiction of aviation photography...

[Perriwen]

In all these graphics and photoshop classes I've been taken lately, there's been a heavy emphasis on the rule of thirds. I have to wonder...why does the rule of thirds seem to not apply to aviation photography, such as A.net and jet photos insisting the image be PERFECTLY centered, whilst non-aviation photographers say being centered is bad?

I've decided to challenge this 'centered' rule a bit...and if it really works, it may become more regular for me. I've already got one I consider myself very pleased with, even if screeners deem it bad due too 'too much blank space'. C and C is welcome!

[Derf]

The rule of thirds is possible with aviation, it is just much more difficult. Most of the aviation shots are more to document the aircraft and your trying to fill the frame. Airliners and Jetphotos are more about documenting aviation. People are learning from them and they are for the most part lack some photography skill. I say this as they are not usually trying to compose an image but rather than fill the frame at a certain angle to get a shot accepted. When the aircraft is up against a blue sky it is not really possible to use the rule of thirds. I usually will try rule of thirds and make it possible about 1 of 100 shots. When I shoot non aviation, I shoot rule of thirds about 80 of 100 shots when shooting non aviaion.... BIG DIFFERENCE.

It is possible for rule of thirds if you try hard, but it would not be accepted on the major aviation picture sites...here are some examples





There will be times where it is just not practical



but when shooting non aviation I always try to apply rule of thirds



Here is a quick breakdown of rule of thirds...
http://www.megapixel.net/html/articles/composition.php

[Perriwen]

The blue sky I can definitely understand, though I was referring more as to things where there were other things visible. I keep thinking back to how creative some of the pictures of sports cars you see can be, and hoping to somehow apply that same creativity to aviation.

[Derf]

The blue sky I can definitely understand, though I was referring more as to things where there were other things visible. I keep thinking back to how creative some of the pictures of sports cars you see can be, and hoping to somehow apply that same creativity to aviation.

You can, it is just not done as often for the reasons mentioned

[moose135]

The blue sky I can definitely understand, though I was referring more as to things where there were other things visible. I keep thinking back to how creative some of the pictures of sports cars you see can be, and hoping to somehow apply that same creativity to aviation.

To echo Fred's comments - most of what you see on A.net or JP.net are simply photographs to documents aircraft. They aren't "aviation photography" websites, they are "aviation websites with a database of photos". You can get very creative with your photos, they just may be rejected if you submit them.

[Perriwen]

To echo Fred's comments - most of what you see on A.net or JP.net are simply photographs to documents aircraft. They aren't "aviation photography" websites, they are "aviation websites with a database of photos". You can get very creative with your photos, they just may be rejected if you submit them.

But that's what baffles me...why would a place that simply has a database of photos reject a photo that's not 'perfectly centered, etc, etc' and meeting their 'high quality standards' if they aren't going for photography in general.

[moose135]

It's a carry over from the "slide shooter" days of documenting aircraft - square, side-on, "perfect" light, filling the frame with the aircraft, so you can see the logos, registration, etc., not a place to "show off" your photography skills. They have started accepting more "artistic" shots, and I always found JP.net to be more willing to take something outside the standard. Of course, A.net lets some non-typical stuff get in now and then...

[Perriwen]

regardless of what they call themselves, it's amazing they take so many shots of the same airliners, yet pass up aircraft painted up so uniquely as this:

[moose135]

If that wasn't back-lit, it could make it in. I have a ton of non-airliner stuff on both sites.

[Perriwen]

That's the thing, though. The uniqueness of the paint scheme should overrule the backlightedness to have something like that in the database. I mean, it's a Piper....in camo, with a freaking shark mouth. How many of those have you seen?

[moose135]

I agree it's a unique scheme, but it's not a "once in a lifetime" shot - it would be possible (maybe not for you on that day...) to get a photo of the aircraft in better lighting conditions. If it was a newsworthy event, or if it were the last (or only) photo of an aircraft that was destroyed, I could see it being accepted.

Here's one I have on JP.net - it's back-lit, and there are nearly 400 other shots of the aircraft in the database, but it was the first A380 landing at JFK, so they accepted it. If I submitted the same shot, of a daily LH A380 flight, I would expect it to be rejected.

[megatop412]

I always find myself making a distinct decision about what "kind" of aviation photos I'm trying to make. Sitting in the Costco lot making snapshots of passing airliners that fill the frame and are as centered as possible, is very relaxing to me. However, it's like the difference between listening to Dylan and Z100. You don't really need to do much thinking about the pop songs on Z100(sorry to pick on them).

If I want to 'create' a shot that tells a story or moves a viewer, more thought goes into it, and the rule of thirds comes in more often than not. The art shots get people thinking, move them emotionally, etc. Fred shows some excellent examples of his, I need to work more on my own and make less Z100 shots.

I could care less what sites "accept" my interpretation of a moving depiction of elements interacting with one another, because I can't depend on them to get what I'm trying to do.

[jerslice]

I've always wondered why they won't adapt to the rule of thirds. It can be done, it can look good...and you can show off your skills that way. Otherwise all its about is quality instead of composition.
Anyways, my needless two cents.

[Derf]

This is the never ending debate, it is up to them on what they get accepted. I have had pictures rejected that I was sure would make it in, I would get red in the face and want to shake my fists at the sky but it is no use. It is not a photography website, it is an aviation website. The owners are not photographers, they are aviation enthusiasts. I have see some of the best photographers leave and request all images pulled because they do not like that there great "artsy" shots were declined. I was upset, I made my own website. Now I upload what I want and not what someone will let me. My portfolio of the website is what I want to represent me, not what people think is good enough to represent me on their website. All the crying about it being a great paint job and cool teeth for a Piper is meaningless because they own the website and they make the rules. I know how you feel because I was there, I cried about my photos and I go nothing but pissed off. IT IS NOT WORTH YOUR TIME TO COMPLAIN about it. There are dozens of the same complaints on the site and Hundreds of posts. There will be hundreds more. It sucks and you will have to do what we do, get your own site and post what you want. Been there, done that and purchased the T-Shirt. Sorry your still at the Been there. P.S. I understand why it was rejected do to back-light and agree it is a cool scheme. I would be proud to have that shot in my portfolio.

If you continue to let it piss you off, you will eventually Anet and Jetphotos. Let it roll off your back and do something different, make your own site.

Sorry your upset, Like I said.... I HAVE BEEN THERE MYSELF. I do not upload much of anything because of how upset I normally get.... Learn from my mistake, it is not worth getting upset.

[mirrodie]

Like Fred said and rightfully so, you have to make your own or hope another better site comes along.

Anet is now what it was and I havent uploaded to either in ages. I know something better may come along one day.

Like Fred said, don't go nuts over it. We've all already done that for you previously!