Bruce From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5089 posts, RR: 13 Posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1349 times:
Anybody want to venture a guess as to what makes this a badscan? I can't figure it out. True, it is a large size and i could have down-sized it but would that really help? Is it the color of the sky? All of the letters and numbers are clear.
Bruce From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5089 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1322 times:
Well, I choose my upload size for an image depending on my assessment of the overall quality of it..... my normal is 1200x800 and the highest I ever do is 1500x1000 which i save for the ultra-sharp or otherwise stand-out photos of which this one appeared to be.... but i seem to be missing something that the screener saw I guess. Its not a major thing, if a smaller version would have made it look "better" I would have gone for that.
I did upload a different version..the shot taken right after this one in sequence, and made that one smaller. But my favorite was this one...........
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
Kereru From New Zealand, joined Jun 2003, 873 posts, RR: 40
Reply 6, posted (12 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1284 times:
I agreed with another screener that it was bad scan and soft although marginal and rejected your photo. Look around the nosewheel and overall it is a little soft too. I think your comment about it being sharp in the remark led me to reject it because it was soft.
You can always appeal, but I think if you sharpen it a bit more and reupload from the original it should be okay?