The photos were of low esthetic qualities - bad angle, included
I know the picture has window reflections its a bit hard not to get that on this sort of shot and yes if it was a 'common' picture I could agree with the rejection but I looked at all the Jaguar pictures on Anet and not one cockpit shot is on here so I would have thought this would be accepted because it is rare?
It was screened by a trainee so do you think I should appeal? is it rare enough and good enough to go on the database in your opinions?
EGFF From UK - Wales, joined Sep 2001, 2201 posts, RR: 12
Reply 7, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1936 times:
Oh, finally somebody here to help me, lol ...
Someone mentioned flash, i didnt use the flash in order for the computers and other lights to stand out ...
Dan, dark? Look again, it's not that dark ...
Jon01 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 116 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1902 times:
If they are not over exposed , then they have been brightened up too much. There is clearly no detail on the upper (sun lit) areas, you should be able to see the panel joins. The darker (shady) areas are very grainy.
The 'haze' shouldn't affect quality much with shots taken this close.
I fear it could be the use of a magnifier/lens converter on this type of camera (Sony F?) that affects quality/exposure on a fast moving subject.
AndrewUber From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2528 posts, RR: 39
Reply 12, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 1797 times:
Great pics Shuan!!! I think the screeners are just cranky lately... they've rejected a few GREAT shots of mine as well.
If it were me, I would enhance the color saturation and contrast a bit. These don't look "soft" to me, but then I've uploaded some photos that you could see a mouse hopping in the grass between the runways, and they still get shot down for being soft.
My two cents would be to enhance, re-upload, and hope for a different screener!!!
Keep up the great work!
On this shot, I used no flash, and turned the lights on the panels all the way up. I did do a bit of editing, but they finally accepted it.
BO__einG From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 2771 posts, RR: 18
Reply 13, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1776 times:
Looks nice but yes I agree that overexposure is the key word here.
I think the first photo has the worst overexposure but the 3 after that have a little bit lesser amount of it.
The fourth one, yeah its good but just too dark.
Try and adjust the curves by bringing it down a little in photoshop. It might help but guarantee isnt 100%