Over the years I've had several motive rejections for poor cropping, when cutting out part of the wing and/or stabilizer on photos that are not 90-degrees side-on's. Either the crop was too tight or not tight enough.
I'm curious if there are any guidelines for this. IMO if the fuselage is more or less centered and the crop is more than just a tiny part of the outer edge/point of the wing/stabilizer, it should be OK.
E.g. this one got rejected for cropped not tight enough (after I cropped it tighter, it was accepted anyway): https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 033505.jpg
IMO this crop is fine as the fuselage is centered and a significant part of the left wing and horizontal stabilizer are cropped (not just a tiny edge).
Similar story for these (just some examples):
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 918475.jpg
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 640449.jpg
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 640443.jpg
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 456509.jpg
I just came across this photo, which I would consider a poor crop, but it got accepted: https://www.airliners.net/photo/Flair-Ai ... 90/5056299
Here only a tiny part of the right stabilizer is cropped. IMO this one should be cropped tighter, till near the edge of the flap or the outer flap fairing, in order to center the fuselage.
So I'm curious why the screeners would regard the Flair Air a better crop than any of the other examples above.
Thanks in advance for the feedback.
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Re: Motive - crop
First off, Flair Air is 100% a bad crop and shouldn't have been accepted. It's worse in that respect than any of your examples.
You biz jet that was accepted is not centered either. I would have cropped just left of the flap track fairing, then equal distance from the engine to the right edge of frame and the nose to the left edge.
Same logic for the 737 BBJ.
Last three are awkward because you're cropping out a small amount of the h-stab. I would either crop wider to include the full h-stab or tighter and exclude the winglet.
Just my opinion... of course you've got 50x more shots in the db than I do, so what do I know!
You biz jet that was accepted is not centered either. I would have cropped just left of the flap track fairing, then equal distance from the engine to the right edge of frame and the nose to the left edge.
Same logic for the 737 BBJ.
Last three are awkward because you're cropping out a small amount of the h-stab. I would either crop wider to include the full h-stab or tighter and exclude the winglet.
Just my opinion... of course you've got 50x more shots in the db than I do, so what do I know!
Re: Motive - crop
The GLEX needs a tighter crop on both sides and I'm pretty sure I rejected or SO'd that image for that reason.
The Corendon needs a tighter crop on both sides (incl. cutting off the wing/winglet).
The BBJ needs a tighter crop on the right.
The KLM needs a tighter crop on both sides (incl. cutting off the wing/winglet).
The Transavia needs a tighter crop on the right (and possibly on the left).
The Flair Air is absolutely horribly cropped and should have been rejected for that. Will ask the photographer for a reupload.
The Corendon needs a tighter crop on both sides (incl. cutting off the wing/winglet).
The BBJ needs a tighter crop on the right.
The KLM needs a tighter crop on both sides (incl. cutting off the wing/winglet).
The Transavia needs a tighter crop on the right (and possibly on the left).
The Flair Air is absolutely horribly cropped and should have been rejected for that. Will ask the photographer for a reupload.
Re: Motive - crop
airkas1 wrote:The Flair Air is absolutely horribly cropped and should have been rejected for that. Will ask the photographer for a reupload.
I suspect it was accepted as a priority upload for first shot of that plane/livery. Not saying the crop shouldn't be better, just that I understand why it was accepted.
Re: Motive - crop
scbriml wrote:airkas1 wrote:The Flair Air is absolutely horribly cropped and should have been rejected for that. Will ask the photographer for a reupload.
I suspect it was accepted as a priority upload for first shot of that plane/livery. Not saying the crop shouldn't be better, just that I understand why it was accepted.
Probably yes, but still doesn't excuse the crop and is grounds for a rejection. Even if it is a priority photo. Anyway, I've had contact with the photographer and the photo will be replaced.
-
- dutchspotter1
- Posts: 532
- Joined:
Re: Motive - crop
Hello all,
Regarding the following photo: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 275703.jpg
I just received a cropping rejection for this one, right in frame, even though it is cropped in the same way as the improved Flair Air mentioned in my earlier post (https://www.airliners.net/photo/Flair-Ai ... 90/5056299).
I cropped a fair amount of the horizontal stabilizer and wing, not just the outer tip, included the flap track fairings and left some space on the right, upper and lower side.
IMO the rejected version looks much better than the tight-cropped version (https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 288759.jpg) as you will see a bit more surroundings, grass at the bottom, etc in the rejected photo. Alternatively I can crop less tight than the rejected photo to include the whole horizontal stabilizer, but this will undoubtedly result in a rejection of not including the entire wing and if I do include the entire wing, the fuselage is far more right in frame than the rejected photo, making it even more unbalanced.
What to do?
Regarding the following photo: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 275703.jpg
I just received a cropping rejection for this one, right in frame, even though it is cropped in the same way as the improved Flair Air mentioned in my earlier post (https://www.airliners.net/photo/Flair-Ai ... 90/5056299).
I cropped a fair amount of the horizontal stabilizer and wing, not just the outer tip, included the flap track fairings and left some space on the right, upper and lower side.
IMO the rejected version looks much better than the tight-cropped version (https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 288759.jpg) as you will see a bit more surroundings, grass at the bottom, etc in the rejected photo. Alternatively I can crop less tight than the rejected photo to include the whole horizontal stabilizer, but this will undoubtedly result in a rejection of not including the entire wing and if I do include the entire wing, the fuselage is far more right in frame than the rejected photo, making it even more unbalanced.
What to do?
Re: Motive - crop
Leave the top, bottom, and right crop as is, bring in the left to just past the fairing. Distance from tip of vertical stabilizer to left edge of frame should be same as distance from tip of nose to right edge of frame.
Re: Motive - crop
If you want this photo accepted, I'm affraid your only option is the crop of the new edit. Alternatively, you could try a more side-on photo and solve the crop issue that way.
-
- dutchspotter1
- Posts: 532
- Joined:
Re: Motive - crop
So how is the rejected Egyptair any different from this one that got accepted just a month ago?
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 227963.jpg
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 227963.jpg
Re: Motive - crop
dutchspotter1 wrote:So how is the rejected Egyptair any different from this one that got accepted just a month ago?
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 227963.jpg
It isn't. Just another example of the inconsistent screening which we all experience.
Re: Motive - crop
Kaphias wrote:dutchspotter1 wrote:So how is the rejected Egyptair any different from this one that got accepted just a month ago?
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 227963.jpg
It isn't. Just another example of the inconsistent screening which we all experience.
For sure, it is more or less the same. And usually that crop as on the Enter Air is seen as too wide as well. Personally I would also prefer it with a tighter crop.
In the end it slipped through.. I don't know if it all has to do with screening inconsistency everytime... People make mistakes. Crops are subjective...
I would just crop the Egypt Air a bit tighter and it should be fine. It is a nice shot.
-
- dutchspotter1
- Posts: 532
- Joined:
Re: Motive - crop
While I'm still trying to figure out if/when and how much a stabilizer may be cropped, how about this one: https://www.airliners.net/photo/Allegian ... 82/5298327
Re: Motive - crop
That Allegiant is a very awkward crop for me, because the aircraft is very nearly side-on. I doubt you're going to get that into the database.
***EDIT***
I just noticed it's been accepted. I'm very surprised as I honestly think the cropped stabiliser looks very awkward.
***EDIT***
I just noticed it's been accepted. I'm very surprised as I honestly think the cropped stabiliser looks very awkward.
Re: Motive - crop
The Allegiant does not meet the standard for cropping. Unless there were some extenuating circumstances, I'd say it was screener oversight.
Jehan
Jehan
Re: Motive - crop
Gave you the benefit of the doubt for the Egyptair. Still looks right in frame to me though and there is no reason why you couldn't crop the flap track fairing in half to get a better crop on it. So my suggestion for a next time would either be to shoot it more side-on or when it's still further away (if you still want such a crop).
-
- dutchspotter1
- Posts: 532
- Joined:
Re: Motive - crop
Curious what you think about these crops (not my photos, just a nice casus):
https://www.airliners.net/photo/SAS-Ire ... 1N/5624503
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Blue-Ai ... 30/5624499
Re SAS:
1) OK, or
2) should be cropped tighter, or
3) should include the whole stabilizer.
Re Blue Air
1) OK, or
2) should include the entire right wing, or
3) should be cropped tighter (if yes, how much)
https://www.airliners.net/photo/SAS-Ire ... 1N/5624503
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Blue-Ai ... 30/5624499
Re SAS:
1) OK, or
2) should be cropped tighter, or
3) should include the whole stabilizer.
Re Blue Air
1) OK, or
2) should include the entire right wing, or
3) should be cropped tighter (if yes, how much)
Re: Motive - crop
The SAS should be cropped tighter, between just left of the flap track fairing and the same distance between that & tailcone on the right side next to the #1 engine (if that makes sense). So #2.
Personally I dislike such crops as the Blue Air, but we allow them and that trumps any personal preferences. Looks OK as is, so #1.
Personally I dislike such crops as the Blue Air, but we allow them and that trumps any personal preferences. Looks OK as is, so #1.
Re: Motive - crop
I've always found the 'distance' rule here ambiguous — there's a real big difference between the subject actually being too small in the frame and having breathing room. The SAS to me looks fine (it's without doubt balanced) but the Blue Air looks awkward — to think that the awkward one is acceptable and the okay-looking one not points to a need to update the rules (in my opinion). Surely the better crop would've been to include the whole wing and a rejection highlighting that fact appropriate?
Crops that are way too tight I think look worse than those with perhaps too much breathing space... yet there doesn't appear to be much in the way of a rule governing too tight crops. But that's always been an issue here: the 'sacrosanct' rules of yesteryear seem to be something which which no-one dares interfere.
This image of mine was originally rejected (in 2015) for distance but made it on appeal:
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Albatro ... YudA%3D%3D
Karl
Crops that are way too tight I think look worse than those with perhaps too much breathing space... yet there doesn't appear to be much in the way of a rule governing too tight crops. But that's always been an issue here: the 'sacrosanct' rules of yesteryear seem to be something which which no-one dares interfere.
This image of mine was originally rejected (in 2015) for distance but made it on appeal:
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Albatro ... YudA%3D%3D
Karl
Re: Motive - crop
Surprised it made it on appeal; For me distance remains an issue. Perhaps some leeway was shown since it was a new reg. Nice lighting on it.
Jehan
Jehan
-
- clickhappy
- Posts: 9175
- Joined:
Re: Motive - crop
JakTrax wrote:Crops that are way too tight I think look worse than those with perhaps too much breathing space... yet there doesn't appear to be much in the way of a rule governing too tight crops.
I agree with this, my opinion of images is cropped like that is that they're that way because they weren't level and, when cropped, there is nothing left. If you shot film, or you print your work, you will always leave margin to work with. If you don't the finished product is garbage.
JakTrax wrote:But that's always been an issue here: the 'sacrosanct' rules of yesteryear seem to be something which which no-one dares interfere.
But, I strongly disagree with this. Lots has changed. It is up to the individual to decide if that is a good thing, or not.
-
- dutchspotter1
- Posts: 532
- Joined:
Re: Motive - crop
Here is another interesting example I just came across (again not mine):
https://www.airliners.net/photo/America ... LR/5674471
1) OK
2) cropped too tight; should include the entire stabilizer (and some more space on the right to make the fuselage more centered); and/or
3) high in frame
https://www.airliners.net/photo/America ... LR/5674471
1) OK
2) cropped too tight; should include the entire stabilizer (and some more space on the right to make the fuselage more centered); and/or
3) high in frame
Re: Motive - crop
Hi,
nothing wrong with the crop. Actually quite some (including me) prefer it when the stabilizer is cropped on such an angle, though an ERJ145 might perhaps not be ideal for it.
But generally we accept such shots either a) with the stab fully included or b) with a tighter* crop close to the tail / the engine (depending on the angle)
A good example for a): Stab fully included
a good example for b): Crop close to the tail
Shots in between, let's say with the stab cut in the middle or at 3/4 will typically get rejected. The Corendon you posted initially is a good example of what is not acceptable / considered unmotivated crop.
Please let's not open a discussion wheter one prefers a) or b)...but the shot in question clearly falls under the b) category, so nothing wrong with it.
*Tighter crop doesn't mean ultra-tight. Some space to breath (as on the example above) is preferable.
One can discuss high-in-frame for sure.
Julien
nothing wrong with the crop. Actually quite some (including me) prefer it when the stabilizer is cropped on such an angle, though an ERJ145 might perhaps not be ideal for it.
But generally we accept such shots either a) with the stab fully included or b) with a tighter* crop close to the tail / the engine (depending on the angle)
A good example for a): Stab fully included
a good example for b): Crop close to the tail
Shots in between, let's say with the stab cut in the middle or at 3/4 will typically get rejected. The Corendon you posted initially is a good example of what is not acceptable / considered unmotivated crop.
Please let's not open a discussion wheter one prefers a) or b)...but the shot in question clearly falls under the b) category, so nothing wrong with it.
*Tighter crop doesn't mean ultra-tight. Some space to breath (as on the example above) is preferable.
One can discuss high-in-frame for sure.
Julien
Re: Motive - crop
dutchspotter1 wrote:Here is another interesting example I just came across (again not mine):
Slightly HIF (but passable), otherwise OK.
-
- dutchspotter1
- Posts: 532
- Joined:
Re: Motive - crop
JKPhotos wrote:A good example for a): Stab fully included
Although the whole stabilizer is included, it feels unbalanced because the fuselage is not centered. So with the sabilizer cut in half (like the Corendon B738 and SAS A320), there would clearly be a motive, namely centering of the fuselage.
Re: Motive - crop
Well if that is your opinon then that's fine, but you would have to accept that the official airliners.net stance is different and we won't accept stabilizer's cut in half generally.
-
- dutchspotter1
- Posts: 532
- Joined:
Re: Motive - crop
Alright, so to be clear, what exactly is the official a.net stance? No cut stabilizers unless cropped close to the fuselage? Anything about cut wings and flap track actuator fairings?
From the upload/acceptance guide:
Not sure what "balanced" means, but I would interpret that as a centered fuselage.
From the upload/acceptance guide:
- A motive rejection will be given if the horizontal stabilizer is clipped (unless the photo looks balanced).
Not sure what "balanced" means, but I would interpret that as a centered fuselage.
Re: Motive - crop
dutchspotter1 wrote:No cut stabilizers unless cropped close to the fuselage?
Something like that. Cut flap track fairings are fine.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests