Only 10K to go...

Whoa.

7004 at the time of this posting! Wow Zane.

Good job.

It is cool to see the aircraft that you have posted.

I guess most members here found this site by looking for some information, most likely a registry number.

Excellent work Zane. Congratulations.

Ken

Now that I am working overnights at work, I have more time to post photos since it is quiet in the MCO operations office at Midnight... i am not gonna let anyone catch up to me MWHAHAHAHAHA!

I started posting here in November 2006 too when I found this place by accident also. I was typing in a NASCAR tail number and I came up with this site without a picture for the plane - probably a Jack Roush 727-100. I figured I could add that picture since I had it. Originally I was just going to do NASCAR planes. I think the biggest poster when I joined in 2006 was Michael Martin with 3,000 some pictures. Originally I was just going to add my NASCAR pictures and call stop right there - hence why I have a NASCAR aircraft section in my folder. Then I was only adding stuff that there weren't pictures for. I didn't realize until later on that you could also do military stuff - then this site 16,900+ some pictures later got addicting.

Daniel.

By the time Zane has 17,000 photos here, you probably will have 35-40,000. Working at a busy airport does have its advantages! But guys and gals, its not just the numbers-for those who haven't organized in some fashion your aircraft photos-do it before they become unmanageable so others can research them. Who is going to wade through 3-5,000+ unorganized photos? Only those enchanted with finding needles in haystacks! My amount of constant worldwide email attests to the value of logical organization where one can find what is sought in aircraft photos or articles here.

And, I repeat my plea for meaningful and accurate aircraft photo descriptions. What in the Hell is that single slash sign appearing for virtually every aircraft photo description of a recent photographer?-a lazy subterfuge that accomplishes nothing except to demean that photographer and his photos. I tell it like it is! Get with the program and stop cheating the system as a means of rapidly adding photos!!!

Furthermore, some of our FAA descriptions are inaccurate or incomplete. You have an opportunity to correct the descriptions and enhance value of your photos if you know your aircraft.

Doug a GOOD photo needs no description unlike much of the dross that people including yourself post which need a description or a magnifying glass to see what it is! my collection has somewhere between 30 and 40 thousand individual aircraft my specialtly is corporate of which I have over 13,000 individaual frames shot but you wont see many of these as the weather was cloudy or they are not up to my standards for putting in the public domain. so you will be seeing many thousand more meaningless dots slashes parentheses etc!!!!!! have a nice day

Nick

Nick,

First I want to thank you for sharing your photos.

I am not an expert at aircraft and the description helps me a great deal.

Under the search aircraft photo...

When I type in N33YK...

http://www.airport-data.com/search/search3.html?code=N33YK&search=Search

I not only get the profile for this aircraft but I also get any photos of other aircraft that it may have been with. In this case (N9011M)

The description provides a set of "Key words" that help people like me find aircraft or "like aircraft" very quickly.

That is why the Description is important to me. Anything you could add that has more than one aircraft, or perhaps some details would be helpful to me.

But I really do appreciate you posting your fine photos.

Best Regards,

Hi Bluedharma,

Thanks for your kind comments concerning my photo's I rarely if ever post a shot with more than one aircraft in fact I dont think I have uploaded any pictures with more than the subject frame my sole intention here is to display one good reference photo of each aircraft shot from as close to side on as possible only for the most part with good sun and always with the reg clearly visible so anyone searching by reg type or location will find what they are looking for if it was shot by me.

Thanks again

Nick Dean

Nick,

Thank you for your prompt response. I understand that your specialty is corporate jets.

And again, I really enjoy the photos you have loaded.

In this case I tend to agree with Doug regarding the descriptions.

It is unlikely that we will pull you "to the dark side"... however, let me give it my best shot.

Here are some motivating factors to place descriptions with your photos.

1.) Just what Doug said. Meaningful and accurate aircraft photo descriptions are helpful to people like myself.

2.) This site is indexed by Google quite extensively, and descriptions help those on the "outside" find your pictures!

3.) I have several (Non corporate) aircraft that go by names(titles).

I can look for N28KT, but to those who live in Colorado it is called "Power Play".

By adding "Power Play" to the description, I am able to find photos and also enable others to find it as well.

http://www.airport-data.com/search/search3.html?code=POWER+PLAY

Once again, I appreciate your posting photos...

Since this is a forum-dialog... I just wanted to put out a few more reasons why I like the description.

What each person does it up to them.

But it does help "Me" when descriptions are placed with the photo.

And it helps Google find your stuff faster!

Thanks again.

Best Regards,

Most of my descriptions have the name of the event that I'm at. In past forum posts Doug has pleaded that we put the aircraft type in the description. Some of us do that. Because I've had a number of aircraft photos have their registration number change, I've started putting the make, model and C/N or serial number in my descriptions too. For example, my photo of N850NW isn't the one currently registered.

This is a picture of C/N 450. It was registered when I posted it, it was de-registered and now C/N 496 has the same tail number. If you have the serial number its much easier to figure out the new registration number.

I have a number of light sport aircraft photos that I took at Sun-n-Fun 2007 and the registration numbers have changed, and there lost so to speak.

Nick, I know you have been posting many "green Boeings" and I commend you including the next registration number for the aircraft. There's several users taking pictures of new Airbuses from Toulouse, France. The same registration numbers are getting reused over and over again. It's helpful if the description indicates a registration number that stays around for a while. It think some of the contributors have been doing that.

Hi Timothy,

With green Boeings it essential to post the actual reg the frame will carry as I must have 60 737's with N1786B alone and without keeping track of dates line numbers etc it would be next to impossible to keep them all straight many aircraft such as the 1-11's I have just posted are no longer registered so the info is in the description section I am about to upload 200 or so Dukes but they will for the most part get the / as I dont think a description is necessary and as Bluedarhma said I probably wont come over to the dark side but I do hope you enjoy my pictures. By the way nice TBM I need that one!

Have a good night

Cheers

Nick

Doug,

I doubt I will ever get 40,000 photos on here. Only so many planes you can take at MCO or TPA. I notice I might have shot the same Southwest 737-700 at 4 different airports, or some other planes multiple times at various airports or even the same airport different days.

I was at an airshow the other day, but I had to trash most of my flying pictures because the geniouses who arranged this airshow had us facing the sun and I don't need a backlit F-18 posted, when I could get a perfect lit F-18 at another show. I might post it once just because I don't have this aircraft serial. Basically all I could salvage from this airshow I was just at were the static displays.

I gotta get more fussy with my photos that are taken on cloudy days or when a cloud goes over the sun - seems to be a common occurance here in Orlando lately. The weather is great on my work days but the days I have off to take pictures it is cloudy or even rainy, then as soon as my days off are over there are perfect cloudless days again.

I get a lot of problems also with aircraft changing registrations by the time I finally get to posting them too.

First, I thank Paul, Timothy and Daniel for their comments. Through the years here you all have been most kind and cooperative. True gentlemen all. My personal meeting with one of you at Oshkosh this year was a fortunate event.

For Nick Dean, I will cut right to the chase since you identified yourself in this Forum thread. An AIRCRAFT DESCRIPTION IS A SITE REQUIREMENT HERE because Ken Wang immediately realized the value of it and he established the requirement from day one in August 2005 for members. And most importantly, he most graciously allows members the ability to edit their submissions. Think about that. No amount of weaseling excuses can bypass that. Your silly subterfuge is just that, a subterfuge. Get with the requirements of the site, so aptly elucidated by others. I will not come to your defense of the idiotic slash mark describing virtually every photo of yours; it a not an aircraft description in any sense of the word. It makes no sense whatsoever. Be a man and cooperate. Stop being an unctuous pecksniff! Your slashes are an obvious attempt to cheat the system. Non of your excuses hold any water. Stated differently, put up or shut up!

I've rarely had the need to directly criticize members here, only except when they have ripped off copyrighted photos without permission. Your behavior is unique, and not in the spirit or requirements of this site. I have long belonged to a national club whose motto is "Unity and Friendship". Let's all continue to show a bit of each here.

Doug,

Get a life, no one is making you look at my photo's if you dont like the way I am uploading dont look at them although you probably should so you get an idea what a good photo is supposed to look like! FOR EXAMPLE ENTER N233N IN THE REG SEARCH, I REST MY CASE!! and Ken is welcome to remove them all and ban me from the site if he wants but I am not changing the way I upload just to satisfy you although the site will be poorer for it as I dont upload very many sub-standard images and yes at the rate I am going you wont be #2 for much longer

Cheers

The Unctious Pecksniff!!

I guess most members here found this site by looking for some information, most likely a registry number.

Excellent work Zane. Congratulations.

Ken

That was how I found this site.

And it is very cool. I have learned much from being here.

Thanks to Ken for the opportunity to be a part of this site.

Best Regards,

Sometimes I find it really hard not to throw my two cents in.

Mr. Dean, do you suppose you could exercise just a wee bit of humility? This isn't a professional photographers' site so you can expect to see all levels of quality as people contribute what they have. It isn't about showing off how many or how perfect the shots are, it's about sharing and also providing what might be the only photo anyone has seen of a particular aircraft.

I found this site while researching info about a Windecker Eagle

http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/N4198G.html There was the part about sharing a photo so I downloaded it, which is the only photo of that bird on the site (and only one of two I have found on the net, for such a record-holding bird). That got me started downloading all the stuff I had, which was mostly military and some antique/classic civil. Several months back I started downloading stuff from an aircraft recognition slide program I developed. Many photos are just what I was able to get at the time. But many are the only shots on the site for those birds. So no matter what the quality, someone can see the plane.

As for descriptiions, since most shots really don't need one (most data is on the profile), I was at a loss what to put. Many have changed call signs so I at least put "ex -N12345" or give a minor detail as to why the shot was taken or what was happening. These sorts of descriptions are easy and not time consuming and, if you're at least as computer savvy as I am (which ain't sayin' a whole lot!) you can just type something once and keep putting it on each photo (many of mine say, "taken for aircraft recognition training").

You have some really nice shots, but I don't see where they are any real spectacular, bragging about stuff. I haven't looked at all your shots, but I haven't seen any "artsy" stuff or anything that really makes your stuff stand out from so many others, so I just don't understand the braggadocio.

So perhaps you can chill out a wee bit, and enjoy the site and play by the rules established. You can meet some very interesting and friendly people here! At least I have.

Glenn

Hi Glenn,

I dont know if you noticed but I wasnt the contributor who threw the first volley that would have been the diatribe from Doug I was merely explaining and defending my position and furthermore many of my shots do have a description especially for reg changes W/O's WFU's B/U's etc and as you mention yourself "most shots really dont need one" a tight side on shot of a frame with the reg clearly showing decribes itself so I am really at a loss to understand what the fuss is about although I am finding it highly entertaining bantering back and forth, and as for upload quality I draw your attention to item 6 in the photo upload requirents section QUALITY is the first point made, anyway thats my final word on the subject Oh by the way I did look at your tri-motor shot's from Iowa City....Very Nice.

Have great evening

Cheers

Nick

Nick,

I agree that "quality" is a consideration, but that is a very subjective description. Sometimes what may be poor photographic quality to most people will be plenty acceptable quality when its the only shot available or if it is showing something unique.

I understand other have fired volleys, but yours is the only one reeking of pride - as if all but your shots are inferior. And that was my point.

Whether a photo needs a description is irrelevant; the rules ask for one. And that is all anyone is asking - play by the rules.

Wooo,

this is starting to sound like an airliners.net Airbus vs. Boeing discussion board.

Then again this isn't airliners.net - shots don't have to be that perfect Eurofighter shot with the Swiss Alps in the background, or that beautiful Kai Tak approach with a 747.

I have a variety of stuff - some that the quality is $h!+ - that I took when I was 10 years old with a Kodak Disc camera - but that is where I got some Pan Am, Eastern and other defunct carrier shots. I had a decent film camera during late 80s and early 90s, but a not so good scanner that left a funny line through my pictures when they scanned, then I had a crappy Nikon point and click that left even my perfect sunshine and perfect angle shots looking grainy - all of those shots on here.

I can't help getting clouds in my shots - some people don't live in perfect weather all the time like west coast areas where they have blue skies almost all the time. I live in the Sunshine State, which is ironically also the Lightning Capital - so my afternoons here from May - Sept are pretty much shot everyday due to either a storm cloud blocking the sun, or an actual storm occuring nearby which pretty much kills the sun. Unfortunately, mid afternoon is when the best aircraft come to MCO also and the busiest operation is summer. Once the weather gets nice like it is here now, airline service really reduces itself at MCO.

I know my first 5000 or so photos on here were anything goes - but I am only going to post "poor quality" stuff if it is something really rare or old - anything common - ie Cessna 172s, Southwest 737s (with exception of special paint SWA planes) is going to have to be of much better quality for me to post it.

Anyway back to the original post - Zane - congrats on hitting 7,000. I thought I had 7,000 at this time last year, but I guess that was when I hit 10,000 - I made my 10,000th shot a special shot by taking a picture of the A380 when it visited MCO on a trial run.

I think when I was at 7,000 I was battling Doug Robertson for top spot on here. We were playing chicken with each other around 6,000-7,000 for a while.

Mr. Dean,

It is time I corrected you once and for all. You started this with your private email from this site to me unjustly criticizing a photo of mine with vulgar language that was completely uncalled for in addressing a complete stranger. I didn't start this in this Forum.

In retrospect, I should have forwarded your hateful and boorish invective to the A-D site manager, who always gives such email recipients the privilege of diverting wrong email. Instead, I politely addressed and answered your email-my mistake.

I am pleased, however, that you did take my polite suggestion to organize your many photos here so that they would be useful to others in research.

But, you still have never addressed your subterfuge in getting around the site's requirement for an aircraft description. A slash sign describing many of your different aircraft simply doesn't meet the site's requirements for an aircraft description, and I would point out to you they are the site's requirements, not mine. You are trying to negotiate them away in this Forum, without much rational support. Please respect Ken Wang; by your behavior you certainly are not.

My plea for aircraft descriptions came before your visibility on this site. Many foreign military aircraft photographs were being uploaded with just the visible tail number as description. My simple plea was for an aircraft ID in such cases. It is time you stopped gaming the established system.