INNflight From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3754 posts, RR: 67 Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2253 times:
Normally I do not keep my a.net screening emails longer than 1-2 months... And I had almost no rejections during the last weeks, so nothing to show you guys
Fireguy274 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 299 posts, RR: 10 Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2242 times:
Sulman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2028 posts, RR: 43 Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2239 times:
Rejected for badscan, badcontrast.
Frankly these screeners infuriate me. I have over 450 similar in the queue that I spent hours uploading straight from the card of my £5000 DSLR. The 862 BA A319's that I'm presently uploading had better bloody be accepted, or there will be hell to pay.
AviatorTJ From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1837 posts, RR: 9 Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2166 times:
Mia777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2002, 1165 posts, RR: 8 Reply 14, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2033 times:
Dazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5387 posts, RR: 56 Reply 15, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2010 times:
T.J........that's a great photo, what was the problem??
Joe pries From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1957 posts, RR: 58 Reply 16, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1996 times:
Justin, i was thinking the same thing- what went wrong with that one? that is a beautiful shot.
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 56 Reply 17, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1988 times:
I'll third that as well. One of the best angles of an MD-8x I have seen to date.
Sleekjet From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2043 posts, RR: 29 Reply 18, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1979 times:
Concord977 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1257 posts, RR: 38 Reply 19, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1957 times:
I understand why a couple of these didn't make it - but the 880 shots really should have been on a.net - even with marginal quality.
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 56 Reply 20, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1946 times:
"..but the 880 shots really should have been on a.net - even with marginal quality..."
Futterman From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 1301 posts, RR: 52 Reply 21, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1946 times:
Curt: This has baffled me ever since I saw your first rejections...why do you upload at 1600 wide? You would get much, MUCH better quality if you uploaded at regular 1024, especially if you added in a little hint of USM.
If you did that, your 880 shots, CO takeoff shot from DCA (personal favorite), and I'd assume most or all of your rejections or MyAviation photos would make it onto A.net.
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 56 Reply 22, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1931 times:
Concord977 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1257 posts, RR: 38 Reply 23, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1907 times:
JeffM,
I just believe strongly that there is enough historical significance to these two aircraft (which most people thought had been destroyed), that the aircraft would've been worth seeing - even if they did not measure up to current a.net standards.
Futterman,
I asked you in another thread for some help in understanding your advice on the 1600 vs. 1024 thing. I never saw a reply.
Concord977 From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1257 posts, RR: 38 Reply 24, posted (7 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 1902 times:
Futterman,
Copied over from the other thread:
Josh & Brian . . .
I will take your advice on the sizing, but I must admit that I don't quite understand it.
Why would an image sized to 1024 display HIGHER resolution than one sized to 1600? It seems that there would be fewer pixels with which to display the details, such as reg. numbers, door outlines, etc.
Signed:
Though-I-had-this-figured-out-until-now . . .
Proudly, A.net's most unviewed profile.
25 Bigphilnyc: I agree with Futterman, and I'll explain, as the boy is probably sleeping. Look at a newspaper picture. it looks decent, but once you get REALLY close
26 Concord977: Phil, Thanks for the advice. I will indeed try it. This has been a big day for me: I have received and installed Photoshop (I was using PhotoPaint bef
29 Andrewuber: For those of you still scratching your heads about why 1024 is better than 1600 - 90% of people's desktops are in 1024 resoultion. When they click "Se
31 Q330: Since I haven't had any photos accepted to A.net yet, I suppose this is my best photo overall (from my very limited collection). http://myaviation.net
32 Olympus69: how do I get a myav. thumbnail to show up in a post? Use this - myaid:xxxxx with left/right arrow thingies front and back. (xxxxx=id number) If I use
33 Q330: Olympus 69, That didn't work for me. Should it look like this (but without the spaces)? < m y a i d : 9 6 5 2 1> -Q
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2043 posts, 
From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5514 posts, 
From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3754 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2028 posts, 
Good looking photo, well composed Sulman...
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Canada, joined Dec 2001, 2364 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Oct 2002, 645 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
){kind=link}