Double standards in screening - sky shots

Tony, I checked the latest photos page and to be honest I do not see too many sky shots there. Can you post the pictures here so we can provide some feedback?

I know how it feels to be somewhere when the light is no good. I have similar skyshots from LHR.... was there always when the weather was not fine, unfortunately. Never occurred to me to test it here, though.

As already mentioned above, also I can't see "a lot of sky shots accepted recently". Yes, there are some, but not "a lot".

The intention is really not to accept skyshots. Yes, some "slip" from time to time. But not lots.

Tons of skyshots get rejected, every day. Not just yours.

What I find annoying is at most Airports in New Zealand there are NO viewing areas which means you have to take pictures of them from the ground looking up. Also I had one photo screened recently and one of the editors said the angle wasn't good. That is also what annoys me that the editors just decide to reject a photo on angle or something as little as that. I try to get good angles on them but it just dosent work because of the locations we have at our airports. Dont you think we could Loosen the strictness on Sky Shots. But I cant say much I got one in but then it looked too distant so....

What I also find is that in summer the heat haze is so bad that sky shots are no option have a look-

But then in Winter the weather is cold and crap. Its a pity.

This post has been edited by Jarod on 31st January 2012 - 21:40

Attached photos:

Tony, as a direct perpetrator of the confusion I would only say that to me sky shot is sky shot.. Without any personal animosity.

AP.net crew wants to give this page a different nature than for example Jet Photos.Therefore, we minimize the amount of sky shots.That's all.

There are skyshots, and skyshots.

Technically speaking, this is a "skyshot":

Yet no wonder it got accepted.....

...while it may happen that the site becomes much stricter on the ordinary skyshots we try to address, e.g.:

Attached photos:

I havn't read the forums for a while however my take on the whole skyshots thing was as long as the quality is perfect and the light is interesting then it would be acceptable. Has this changed now? I wouldn't have uploaded around 10 skyshots recently from LHR if I had've known differently.

Dave

Come on Tony, they are really sky shots that are similar to hundreds of other photos taken daily at LHR. The light is average, Alitalia looks soft. AP is probably the only aviation photography site that would not accept such sky shots due to motive, you can always publish them at all other websites.

Dave, the text on the photo upload page remains valid:

At the moment we are discussing it within the Screening Team and I hope we will come up with clearer rules.

When not sure about the photo, think about it from the perspective of AP visitor. Ask yourself if there is any reason why the visitor should view your photo? Does your photo depict news, rare plane or moment, action, great light, composition, story, rare angle, close up or someting else worth seeing? If yes then great.

I will be brutally honest, but screening consistency is a dream, we try to minimise it and we do see some improvement, but inconsistency will always be with us.

This post has been edited by Martin Krupka on 1st February 2012 - 19:39

id better cut back on my sky shots then from LHR :-)

Yes, a skyshot. But a nice combination of light, angle, quality.... I believe such photos belong here.

Special light can make make wonders even if an ordinary A319 of EasyJet (or any other common/boring ac/livery combination) is the main subject on the photo....

Yet again, there are skyshots, and skyshots.

Attached photos:

The problem with skyshots is that AP screeners became too lax in rejecting skyshots and the situation has developed where they are becoming the norm for members to upload..

It has always has been AP's policy to only accept skyshots by exception, AP has made no secret of that. It's in the T&C that EVERYONE agrees to EVERY time one uploads a picture.

If you can understand that then there would be no problem with skyshots, just don't upload them to AP!

Personally, the blue sky over one airport is just the same as another and I really try to avoid uploading skyshots in the first place.

what about banking departure shots like the ones from 09R at LHR, most of them are in a clear blue sky, still technically a skyshot, or are they considered different??

I am not a screener but I would accept them, there're not like skyshots for me I just love them! (especialle the angle) :-)

This post has been edited by Emanuel Linert on 1st February 2012 - 22:50

Wallace, with respect that statement was a spectacular contradiction of itself. What on Earth are screeners there for if they're going to accept images which, as you point out, go against A-P's T&C's? All you're doing is making it blindingly obvious the crew don't know their own site's terms and conditions. The crew hit accept or reject, therefore the ultimate responsibility for standard sky shots ending up on the site comes down to the crew. Fact.

You either accept sky shots or you don't, you can't have it both ways. And you certainly can't blame members for uploading images when the crew accept them. Come on, get it together.

This post has been edited by Paul Nichols on 1st February 2012 - 23:57

Just a note full members here upload direct to the DB with a check from screeners that the image conforms. I do try and avoid sky shots however new or repainted aircraft can look good in a nice sky back ground so I have uploaded them. It is quite clear on the upload page that sky shots of the common type can be rejected and I gather that also applies to full members? Airshows to me I try to keep sky shots to a minimum and as mentioned above there are plenty of other sites that will accept them(for now anyway). Looking for the unusual is always a priority for me and for something not already in the DB. AP has always been about special shots and artistic flair which makes it unique. Plenty of other web sites to upload standard shots of common subjects. Cheers

Paul, the Crew do know the rules very well, however the rule for sky shots has been vague and what one find acceptable can be rejected by other screener. I am a bit guilty here as I try to opose almost every new rule the team suggest as I believe that all the rules can eventually bind the photography and the fun associated with posting photos to AP.

The rule was sort of vague on purpose - if you upload a common sky shot you risk that the photo may not (the actual rule says 'will not') be accepted. It eventually comes to Screener's judgement.

Heated discussion is going on among Screeners now as well so stay tuned.

This post has been edited by Martin Krupka on 2nd February 2012 - 08:00

Martin, I know the crew do generally, I was more pointing out the fact that Wallace ostensibly blaming members for uploading images that go against the site's T&C's but are then accepted by the screeners is quite possibly the single worst thing a crew member could possibly have said in this thread. Hopefully the discussions will clear this matter up!

Tony, a little inconsistency will always exist with any screening team and that has to be accepted, but blindingly obvious contradictions and blaming members for the crew accepting photos really isn't the way to do things, hence me diving in with my comment!

This post has been edited by Paul Nichols on 2nd February 2012 - 11:27

Hi guys. I have had a few sky shots accepted but on the latest one that got through said: "Skyshot exception (New registration)." I was surprised they said that due to the fact that I have had other sky shots accepted which were new registrations in db as well but no comment.

I only upload sky shots if the plane isn't in the db.

I tried to upload a sky shot of ZK-PBK and it wasn't allowed so I have given up on it.

Could you post it here for a look please?

Hi Bernard, the Screener tried to provide some explanation, that's all.

sorry, I just wanted to see it for myself.

Here is two pictures of ZK-PBK I think they're quite good.

Attached photos:

They look alright to me (as a non screener) and I wouldn't have thought that one would be rejected for "sky shot" but my monitor is quite misleading and I find it hard to judge sharpness and what not. Thanks for letting me have a look.

No problem Bernard

Hi

I'm interested to know if banking shots (from narrowbodies, no new a/c or liveries...) can be considered as sky shots or not, as D. Morrell asked above.

For ex. :

Regards,

Javier

Attached photos:

The banking sky shots are quite rare. They need to be of sufficient technical quality like any other shot though.

Following this discussion we have created a new page that explains our policy on sky shots in more detail:

Sky shots policy

I hope this will enlighten the whole issue. The link to the guidance will be placed to the Upload page and also sent to all Full Members.

This post has been edited by Martin Krupka on 12th February 2012 - 08:52

Thanks for that!

This post has been edited by Bernard Schiffl on 11th February 2012 - 10:04

Nice one Martin :)

Credit for creating the Sky shots page belongs to Wallace Shackleton, Michael Carbery and Tony Marlow. :-)

This post has been edited by Martin Krupka on 11th February 2012 - 10:46

So i have to get some of my shots allowed by screeners discretion, the angles you highlighted for discretion in my opinion are not the same as the normal side on boring sky shot, not much point in being an FM?

"Screener's discretion" only relates to images uploaded for screening. As a Full Member you can upload what you want but we ask Full Members to use this as a guide.

I like a lot the "Darryl sky shots", quality, size, lighthing, sharpness...and I think there's a public for this kind of photos in A-P.net.

Javier

I fully agree with Javier's comment, close up sky shots of good technical quality, even in decent daytime light, surely have a decent sized viewing audience here at A-P.net. It would be a shame to see the site reject such photos.

I can see why side on sky shots can be frowned upon however close ups showing the fuselage and engines, aka Darryl-eske photographs, can be quite interesting to view.

Hello Everyone,

I know for a fact that in Brazil things are very difficult. That is so true that 95% of the photos taken in Brazil (on all sites) are either skyshots or taxishots. I have some publisehd photos on other angles such as "about to land with some runway with some ground elements", but to shoot them I was nearly arrested a few times and had to do it hidden, which compromised quality and increased the distance I was to the object. We simply don't have a Heathrow nearby.

Also, not only me, but also quite a few A-Pnet members that I am friends with, have noticed that lately rejections have been much more common, reaching the point where a lot of them are just silly and annoying. Sometimes I get a photo accepted on other sites, the airplane is not on the A-Pnet database, it is not a skyshot or a taxishot, and it gets rejected here because of let's say "jpeg compression". The most present word in those discussions was the word "inconsistency".

For that I suggest maybe a triple screening process. It takes longer, but is also less unfair, if a photo has to pass the judgement of 2 out of 3 screeners, without them knowing the other screener's oppinion. However I have no idea how the screening process works from the inside. 4 Months ago I never had uploaded an airplane photograph in my life and had never touched Photoshop or Camera Raw before. I actually didn't even know what RAW was for...

But on the other hand, some of my photos I only upload here, since this is the Creative Aviation Photography. I guess A-Pnet goes beyond the photography of airplanes, and I guess it means to be a great photography website that has some aviation to it, which is a great approach. I guess A-Pnet is a website with a different approach to aviation photography, which makes life much easier to the ones with credentials or airports that allow you to be near the action and makes life hell if you don't have any of these.

I would like to add that when I started photographing airplanes, Darryl Morrel's Skyshots were my inspiration. Me and my spotting buddies called a shot on that classic LHR angle "The Darryl Morrel Style" and I would hate to see them vanish from the newly added photos. I plan to one day go to LHR and shoot some pics with you, Darryl. Many thanks for so many great photos you have added here and for inspiring me to seek aviation photography.

The screeners here are very strict and some people use the difficulties to give up, while others, like me, use it to get better and better, to get creative, to make up a photo even before reaching the airport, and seek the Eyecatcher like seeking the love of the pretty dream girl. Everytime I go spotting, 5 out of 3 words in the car is "Eyecatcher".

Let's not forget also to mention that the most difficult part of aviation photography is to convince the wives and girlfriends that you are going to photograph airplanes instead of being with them and not photographing airplanes itself.

And guys, I also get mad, I curse, I say names and I feel that my photos were unfairly rejected a lot of times (specially when I see some of the older shots that were once accepted here and sometimes still are - inconsistency again), but have you guys noticed the high level of the photos of the past month or so?? I get lost among so many great shots, getting better day after day!! One or another should't be published, but the great majority are simply great, different, creative and with great quality.

All I know is that after all, when I get a photo accepted here, I am proud that I did a good job and I look forward to make it even better the next time. The results are on my increasing views, increasing rating averages, a lot of photos making 1st place of the 24hs period and all that.

I am far away from where I want to be (56% acceptance is not exactly a good record), specially Photoshop and Camera Raw wise, but altough a lot of times I think a rejection was unfair, I use my rejected photos as fuel to make it better the next time!

Sorry about the long post, but I guess it showed my double-emotions as far as rejection goes. I hope it will all get better soon and we can all be happier.

Great Photos for Everyone!

Renato

Hi Renato,

there is a third screener - you just have to use the 'Appeal' button and one of the senior screeners will review your image.

CMS Herbert, photography is subjective and always will be. You can be assured that the well-thought rules are here for purpose and that the different aspects have been discussed within the screening team in detail.

I can name about 10 aviation photography websites and some of them would probably accept photos that we reject, so there is always some way to get your photos online. If not, there is always Facebook or Flickr.

Renato, your post provides an interesting feedback. Inconsistency has been always the issue number one. When I used to upload to A.net I remember there was new inconsistency topic in the forum almost every week. It is easy to get annoyed when you see photos taken by others being published and you feel that they are not better than yours. But remember that you are always subjective when making such conclusions. I would recommend to focus on your own photography, that is the best way forward and to enjoy the hobby.

I thnik we all agreed to go with certain rules when we decided to join AP. At least it was like that in my case :)

Part of it is acceptance of screening methods. I know it is hard to swallow rejections/criticism/different opinion especially those who decide about publishing your own work, but we have to be fair - it happens everywhere in life. Alternatives are known - 1. creating own page/site/FB/Flicker 2. adjusting to rules of publishing site (and get over subjective screening :) ) 3. dropping the hobby and becoming cactus photographer (no risk of blurred shots due to movement of object or shots with clear blue sky :) ). Of course there is room for combination of two first options and this is what I want to do, because option three is not an option :)

Okay, my 2 cents....

Since i´m a pretty new kid on the block here, i´m still not fully familiar with AP. Personally i don´t like 90 degrees side on shots, and indeed sunny weather and clear blue sky´s to my opinion is pretty boring. AP is a creative aviation photography site, and i have to say, i really do feel challenged in becoming more and more creative.

I shoot planes preferely 3/4 head on, and wings are no priority for me. Head and shoulders combined with the engines, allways give a strong visual performance of the plane (there are others here who shoot like that, Daryl for example). In that case, unless nicely exposed, images can be interesting, even with sunny and clear bleu sky weather. I have 3 examples (quick edits, so not the best quality)........1- Surinam A-340, slightly from below and 3/4 head on. This qualify´s to be rejected due to the AP rules, but to my personal opinion, this would be acceptable. 2- Singapore A-380, banking away from me, with sunny and clear blue sky, allso qualified as a clear blue sky and sunny picture, but since this ones into a banking angle (another plane position i like to shoot), it should be okay too. 3- Triple 7 China southern cargo, again 3/4 head on and slightly from below, in this case nicely lit from below by the snow covered land, which makes it too acceptable, to my personal opinion. Just curious about your thoughts guys.....

Cheers

Menno

Attached photos:

nr 2

Attached photos:

nr 3

Attached photos:

Well personally I'll say this - 1 and 3 fall under the screeners exception and as they are of sufficient quality I'd pass them. Number 2 I'd probably classify as a sky shot and reject.

Number 2 can be considered as a "inverted banking"... by the angle. 380 fill a lot of place in frame, with good details and shadows.

If we analyse in the same way pics on ground (with nothing special in background or a poor view of the terminal, landscape...) we will see only 10 pics by day here,

:-)

Michael so if a full member uploads shots that fall into that criteria for what you have just mentioned does that mean photos will start getting deleted, i personally think unless the screeners are all together on this things are going to get inconsistent.

The downside of the so called sky shot rule for one it doesnt give much hope to people that live in locations where they are very limited for ground or decent angles, the other is it doesnt give much chance to the new photographer starting out.

Also do heli shots come into this rule?

I for one shoot at 2 airports. Heathrow and Luton, both in the summer months apart from a few hours in the evening if your lucky are severly restricted because of heat distortion, so i can imagine in hotter countries it is worse, personally i think A-P should take into account different factors depending on location.

Regarding Menno's shots, I would have screened them in exactly the same way as Michael.

Darryl, I don't see any reason why we should remove any of your skyshots. The last few you have uploaded would all come under the "screeners exception" category as they are good quality and certainly out of the ordinary.

It's true that some airports offer limited opportunities for anything other than skyshots and while I know this sounds harsh, there are other places to uploads these images to.

A-P was never intended to be a site for photographers to display every shot they took on their visit to the airport. The goal was to be a platform to display "different" and interesting shots while still catering for the average aviation photographers good quality images.

Right from it's inception A-P has consistently had a policy against standard skyshots. That has always been the case and will always be the case. As a result of this thread I hope we have clarified what we will and will not accept in this category and I thank Tony for kicking it off.

Darryl, I had a few helicopter skyshots rejected. I am travelling now, so I feel it would not be polite to put links to another website here, since this is my wife's lkaptop and not my PC.

Michael, I knwo about the appeal thing, but I only used it 3 times. Two to get more feedback on the photo and learn how to make it work and one because I really thought it was unfair and am still not convinced, but I had at least 100 rejections I beleive. So I can swallow it quite easily. Some I though it was unfair due to horizon unlevel (SDU shots that I will explain below) but l sometimes adjust it, sometimes don't, because it has been accepted elsewhere.

My final word on all that discussion is: PROVE YOURSELF with 3 eyecatchers, 5000 views and 65% acceptance in the last 3 months and then think of making some nice skyshots. By then you won't be thinking of posting a plain skyshot, and your mind will already think creatively, and also you know that plain skyshots will have little page views here on A-Pnet. I guess every editor and screener will say amen to this paragraph.

Also...

Heat Haze is horrible in Brazil. Everytime an airplane comes close to the runway (so we get them ground elements) forget it. Is either that or poor light, when the sun is not out. Taxi shots are rare as well on good quality.

It is possible to make a Darryl Morrell Style shot in Rio, I had a few of them published (only one, link below, was accepted here), but only when the weather (the light as well) is as horrible as it can get, so Runway 28 is used for landing. However you must stay inside your car, with the engine on, and get out of it on the very last second, take the photo and run back in. The risk is getting robbed!! This is Rio de Janeiro!! =S

I called it "Heathrow In Rio": http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/174203/pr-mhi-tam-airbus-a320/

At SDU I can make shots like the link below, but at least 50% of them get rejected due to horizon unlevel. The funny thing is that what is accepted here is rejected there and vice versa, so basically I know that 50% will be rejected no matter what I do to level it. The bay is curvy (causing the false impression that it is unleveled, and if you level with the bay itself, most of the shots will be indeed unleveled, unless the perspective allows it), the buildings are in perspective and are built up and down the mountains, sideways sometimes and the cherry on top: Usually a wide angle lens or a 50mm is used, which makes it even more difficult. LINK: http://www.airplane-pictures.net/photo/167629/pr-avc-avianca-brasil-airbus-a319/

I consider this shot one of my masterpieces, it is only one in 50 shot that you can click exactly with this composition and get a decent quality, also it is very rare and mostly early in the morning that planes land on runway 02, getting the christ statue as our background.

Downside of SUD: Only smaller planes come in, just a little over 1300m long runway. =(

Upside of SDU: If the wing of the plane was 2x longer, it would cut my head off. I get to be right there, near the action. If I wanted to commit suiced I could just run a few steps and get runned over by an airplane, since there are no fences to stop me, just a secutiry guard that sounds an allert everytime a plane is landing or taking off. In good weather, quality is not at all an issue here.

Justing wondering if any of these sky shots would be considered acceptable for the site. All of them are fairly high quality and some with nice dark clouds in the background.

Attached photos:

number two;

Attached photos:

number three;

Attached photos:

And lastly number four;

Attached photos:

The BA and China are more of the motive we look for. The Air Bridge and Lufti would be more dependant on how the screeners assess the quality and how common they are in the datasbase.

I have a question. Help with decision please. Is this one considered as a sky shot?

Attached photos:

Or this one

Attached photos:

or this one

P.S. Is it possible to let upload 3 images in one post? Though not to make 3 posts...

Attached photos:

These would both be dependent on Screener's exception but based on the thumbnails possible skyshot rejections.

I don't want this to become a thread for pre-screening. Please refer to this link that gives the info already on the upload page.

Sky shots policy

This post has been edited by Tony Marlow on 21st February 2012 - 19:34

Tony, I've read the policy.

As you can see I've uploaded three nearly the same photos (really taken from one point though in different conditions). I couldn't find example close enough to my photos in the sky shots policy. That is why I asked my question. Just to understand if those ones fall under sky shots conditions.

Thanks a lot for the answer and help ;)

This post has been edited by Vasily Kuznetsov on 21st February 2012 - 19:39

Cheers Tony for the input, sorry for dragging the thread off course, I should have used the pre-screen thread. Apologies for that!

Dave