> 1 <

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 74 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 2156
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#4458 2010-01-02 GMT-5 hours    
Hi all,
I've created a new poll regarding photos of weapons and whether they should be added to the database. Please vote. More frequently now, we get photos of missiles, bombs, etc. and we have a hard time deciding on what to do with them. We'd like to keep the focus on aircraft, but sometimes they are a part of the aircraft or weapons system, making it hard to decide. Please vote and let us hear your comments here.

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

Author Message

lieuwehofstra


Photographers
See my 2,804 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 10
Location: used to be EHLW
Occupation:
Age: 49

#4459 2010-01-02 GMT-5 hours    
Displayed in front of an aircraft I'd say okay, although not a personal favorite :wink, but just a bomb or a rocket as sole subject I'd say no.

Author Message

Peter Terlouw


Photographers
See my 2,207 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 7
Location: Soesterberg
Occupation:
Age: 50

#4460 2010-01-02 GMT-5 hours    
I agree with Liewe. Displayed in front or on an airplane I would also say okay, if the whole picture is up to standards. Seperate pictures of bombs, missiles or fueltanks a big no.

Author Message

mark_munzel


Photographers
See my 870 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 52
Location: Vancouver
Occupation: Dad (plus some engineering to pay the bills)
Age: 48

#4461 2010-01-03 GMT-5 hours    
Ditto to Lieuwe and Peter's comments. I'm not a big fan of detail shots, so even weapons mounted on aircraft (third option in the poll) wouldn't be a draw for me.

-M.M.

Author Message

TomG


Photographers
See my 1,475 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 25
Location:
Occupation: Aircraft operations
Age:

#4462 2010-01-03 GMT-5 hours    
Not for me folks; lets keep the site focussed on the aircraft, all well and good if the aircraft themselves are carrying an array of armament but I'd prefer not to head down the route of having lots of shots just showing an AIM-9L or Paveway IV for instance.

Best regards & Happy New Year, Tom

Author Message

wsmms


Members


  Online status  

 
Posts: 13
Location:
Occupation:
Age:

#4464 2010-01-03 GMT-5 hours    
yes i agree with Liewe too just on an airplane or in front of them most of the people are here just for the love of the airplanes but to be honest with you i like the shots when they are firing one of them.

best regards ,Waleed

Author Message

sawyer98


Members


  Online status  

 
Posts: 2
Location:
Occupation:
Age:

#4465 2010-01-03 GMT-5 hours    
Really like the aircraft photos. I'm a model builder so also like the detail shots. BUT, I don't feel a "weapons only" element is necessary. Agree with others suggesting we stick to aircraft.

Author Message

N74JW


Members


  Online status  

 
Posts: 190
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Occupation: IT Administrator
Age: 43

#4466 2010-01-04 GMT-5 hours    
I guess I am the odd man out, as usual. Weapons and their photos wouldn't bother me as much, especially if there is a separate category. A function could be built into the site to offer a search that excludes images of missiles and bombs.

Author Message

Stu


Photographers
See my 535 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 14
Location: West Beckham Radar Station
Occupation: Contractor
Age: 52

#4467 2010-01-04 GMT-5 hours    
Agree with Liewe and Tom there

Happy new year Regards Stu

Author Message

ironfan


Photographers
See my 879 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 65
Location:
Occupation:
Age:

#4468 2010-01-04 GMT-5 hours    
I'm with the majority on this one, nope!

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 74 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 2156
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#4469 2010-01-05 GMT-5 hours    
Hi everyone,
Thanks for your input. Please don't get me wrong, we're not going to start adding thousands of missile, bomb, etc. shots, and adding their manufacturer, etc. in the drop down menus, but rather shots like this, as an example, is what I had in mind:

View large    View medium
Click here for medium size photo!

Photo © Tony Printezis

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

Author Message

Vasmadár


Photographers
See my 271 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 150
Location: EU, Hungary
Occupation:
Age: 27

#4470 2010-01-05 GMT-5 hours    
I think the aircrafts/helicopters are more important, but this photos looks good!

Lets Fly! :)

Best Regards,

Péter

Author Message

wsmms


Members


  Online status  

 
Posts: 13
Location:
Occupation:
Age:

#4471 2010-01-05 GMT-5 hours    
I think shots like these look pretty good.

Author Message

troy


Photographers


  Online status  

 
Posts: 62
Location: Nebraska
Occupation: manufacturing
Age: 54

#4472 2010-01-05 GMT-5 hours    
I agree. Aircraft are sleek,aerodynamic and just attractive. They are also a vehicle to deliver ordanance. Without the munitions, there would be no reason for millitary aviation.

Troy

Author Message

mark_munzel


Photographers
See my 870 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 52
Location: Vancouver
Occupation: Dad (plus some engineering to pay the bills)
Age: 48

#4473 2010-01-07 GMT-5 hours    
But here's the thing: how many different photos of an AIM-9 hanging off an F-22's launch rail would the database need? There are 3000+ AF.com members who recognize that not every grey airplane looks the same: there's a diversity of serial numbers, operators, markings, viewing angles, photo locations, etc. for each one. How many people see the same diversity in photos of missiles?

-M.M.

Author Message

lieuwehofstra


Photographers
See my 2,804 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 10
Location: used to be EHLW
Occupation:
Age: 49

#4475 2010-01-07 GMT-5 hours    
I do agree with Mark. IMHO these photo's ad nothing to the site. The strenght of airfighters lies in the diversity of high quality aircraft photo's from past and present and please don't get distracted too much from that. That's why more and more serious aircraft photographers keep uploading their photo's. Just don't go down the same road as A-net where they end up showing terminal buildings and toilets in aircraft

Author Message

Ghostbase


Photographers
See my 1,576 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 89
Location: Guildford
Occupation: Railway Guard / Conductor
Age:

#4482 2010-01-10 GMT-5 hours    
Well I voted 'Yes' regarding photos of weapons and whether they should be added to the database. I think that Airfighters could fill a useful gap on the WWW by being an information resource for all aspects of military aviation and this would include detailed photos of whatever role the aircraft is there to perform. So, for fighters this would be the missiles carried, for attack and bomber types this would be the various types of ordnance, for recon aircraft this would be the various cameras and radars, for transport aircraft and helos this would be details of the cargo cabin. We already celebrate nose and tail art, special colour schemes, and the boneyard.

Additionally, what about the earlier generations of unmanned missile / RPV / UAV such as the Regulus, Bomarc, Firebee, D-21, Snark and the DASH? In their time they were significant military aviation programmes which really pushed the limits of technology and I think photos of these would fit the Airfighters ethos.

I can understand the concern that Airfighters might become diluted by such photos but in practice I think it unlikely that there is a photographer somewhere out these ready to flood the site with photos of every AIM-9L ever built :wink One reason I have uploaded so few photos over the last 18 months is because I have taken up scale modelling again and I know from experience it is very difficult to find any one site on the WWW which can be used as a photo reference for missiles and ordnance.

So I say allow such photos to be added to the db and I am sure we can trust Ray and the crew to monitor this and call a stop if things do get too silly.

Michael

NB: Now where's that photo of the C-23A door mounted toilet bowl which I snapped at Mildenhall many years ago...

"Rolling..." B-36H serial 51-5734 Film 'Strategic Air Command' 1955 - Six Turning and Four Burning!

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 74 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 2156
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#4526 2010-01-20 GMT-5 hours    
Everyone, thanks for your input. While it is apparent that those types of detail shots may appeal to some people, just a matter of personal taste, it is obvious that to most they do not. Thus we will probably not accept any types of shots showing just the missile or bomb, or any other ordnance for that matter, unless there is some really significant importance behind it. Thanks for your support and sharing your thoughts with us.

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

Author Message

YIFLY


Photographers
See my 6,507 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 48
Location: Near Gettysburg, PA
Occupation: US Correspondent Aviation Photo Journal
Age:

#4527 2010-01-20 GMT-5 hours    
The subject is a slippery slope. I vote NO, keep the site just the way it is.

“There is no hunting like the hunting of man, and those who have hunted armed men long enough and liked it, never care for anything else thereafter.” -Ernest Hemingway

Author Message

Ghostbase


Photographers
See my 1,576 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 89
Location: Guildford
Occupation: Railway Guard / Conductor
Age:

#4534 2010-01-21 GMT-5 hours    
Quote
admin :
While it is apparent that those types of detail shots may appeal to some people, just a matter of personal taste, it is obvious that to most they do not.



Ray, I am not sure I understand how you came to this conclusion. The poll consisted of three choices, two of which were in favour of allowing the uploading of photos and weapons on Airfighters. 47% were against, while 51% were in favour (to some degree). There was no corresponding balance with the 'no' vote so we don't know how many of the 'no's were totally against the idea or perhaps more mildly so.

The number of negative comments in this thread could be interpreted as a majority but in fact only three people (out of 3030 registered members) have come out and stated a loud and clear unqualified 'no' - and two of them repeated their objection as well!

So sorry, I really don't understand how "it is obvious that to most they do not".

A lost opportunity in my humble opinion. It would have been great to have had some photos of Hound Dog, Blue Steel, and the AS-4 'Kitchen' in the database.

Michael

"Rolling..." B-36H serial 51-5734 Film 'Strategic Air Command' 1955 - Six Turning and Four Burning!

Author Message

troy


Photographers


  Online status  

 
Posts: 62
Location: Nebraska
Occupation: manufacturing
Age: 54

#4540 2010-01-23 GMT-5 hours    
I agree. If you combine those who wanted it in some form, it is 51% to 47%. I don't think you can say a mojority doesn't want them. In the end, you're the administrator and will be making the final decision. Just be honest and say you want it that way.

Troy

Author Message

admin


Administrators
See my 74 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 2156
Location: S.F. Bay Area, CA
Occupation: Webmaster
Age:

#4541 2010-01-23 GMT-5 hours    
Hi Troy,
No, actually quite the opposite. I've been wanting to include them all along as I think they're definitely an integral part of the whole weapons system. Without them the aircraft alone would be quite ineffective. But I do value other people's opinion, especially the crew's, and I'd like to go along with what everyone wants. It's definitely not a case of it's "my way or the highway". On many occasions I've sided with the crew, and sometimes such as this, asked the member's opinions in a poll or forums posts. After all the site is for the photographers, regular members, and guests that visit the site everyday.

You're right it is just about 50/50 and that's why I stated that we will evaluate each photo on it's own merit and as a result some will make it through and others will be rejected.

-Ray

This is the oldest I've ever been.

Author Message

Ghostbase


Photographers
See my 1,576 Photos

  Online status  

 
Posts: 89
Location: Guildford
Occupation: Railway Guard / Conductor
Age:

#4557 2010-01-31 GMT-5 hours    
Quote
admin :You're right it is just about 50/50 and that's why I stated that we will evaluate each photo on it's own merit and as a result some will make it through and others will be rejected.



Can't ask for more than that! Thanks Ray

Michael

"Rolling..." B-36H serial 51-5734 Film 'Strategic Air Command' 1955 - Six Turning and Four Burning!

> 1 <