Bigphilnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4073 posts, RR: 56 Posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1805 times:
I got email notification about the upload status of one of my photos.
This shot had been rejected months ago for badcameranagle, and I've since fixed it and reuploaded.
This time I got it back, rejected, with the only rejection reason being "badpersonal" with the message "sweet shot home slice", and no other explanation for rejection.
I'm just curious as to why this was rejected because I'd like to fix it. I was going to email the screeners but I heard others were having similar trouble and I wanted to gauge public experiences.
Was the screener being sarcastic with me in his rejection? Did he mean to accept it and in an effort to supply a personal message rejected it with badpersonal only? did he reject and forgot to click on the other reason?
Bigphilnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4073 posts, RR: 56 Reply 2, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1757 times:
The badcameraangle that I got months ago was referencing a crooked skyline that I needed to rotate.
I don't think it was the angle of view of the plane, as I had no problems with these shots:
Cancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 13 Reply 3, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1746 times:
to me, the plane looks a bit soft. then again, i'm on a shitty computer right now. i'll be able to look it over later on on a better monitor. then again, this is the same kind of work that i come up with. :-P all in all, it's a swet shot!
"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
Ryangooner From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 969 posts, RR: 25 Reply 4, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1731 times:
I like the shot myself and i love that angle......
but in contrast to your CRJ-700 shot there, the rejected one looks a tad soft on the tail and a the tiniest of bit on the reg.
maybe this is the reason check the markings on the tail - what do you think?
F4wso From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 974 posts, RR: 13 Reply 5, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1688 times:
I took the softness on the tail and registration as being in the exhaust plume.
Gary
Cottage Grove, MN
Seeking an honest week's pay for an honest day's work
DLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 6, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1624 times:
I really think what's going on here is the screener wanted to accept it and give you a personal message, so he clicked the box labelled "personal." Unfortunately "Personal" is a rejection.
Probably should have been added I think, cause it's an excellent shot.
Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9444 posts, RR: 72 Reply 7, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1607 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Dude, its my fault.
I sent you an IM, explaining what happened, but I will explain it to the forum, too.
The shot had two screeners approval (HQ). I was the third HQ, which I did, but I also sent you a message in the approval email, and for some reason it rejected the shot as badpersonalmessage (I think).
My intent was to tell you what a good shot it was, the result was an unwarranted rejection. I apologize for that. Please reupload the shot and we can get it added to the database.
Bigphilnyc From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4073 posts, RR: 56 Reply 8, posted (8 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1590 times:
It's all good, Royal. I was jsut confused. I really liked that shot and was eager to do whatever I needed to fix it to get it in the d/b.
You folks have been doing great lately with getting so many shots screened. Keep up the good work!
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 4073 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 969 posts, 
From Argentina, joined Feb 2002, 550 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
