Derekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 866 posts, RR: 0 Posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1430 times:
Normally I don't have a problem seeing what the screeners meant when I get photos rejected (doesn't mean I necessarily agree though!) and I have a good idea what to do to fix it - badgrainy, badlevel or whatever. Recently I have had a spate of "badquality" and I'm stuck really. I don't know why the photo was rejected and therefore don't know what to do to fix it.
The badquality rejection is not hugely helpful I don't think and maybe it should be associated with a badpersonal message to help pin-point the problem otherwise we all end up wasting each other's time. Any thoughts?
Granite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5550 posts, RR: 65 Reply 2, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1393 times:
Another screener chips in:
1. Badquality. Dirty, oversharpened (too much radius) and jagged.
2. Soft and definitely angle problem.
3. Soft and possible angle problem but not too much.
4. Slightly jagged but not a problem for me. Sharpening problem, too much radius selected I think.
Never go above 0.2 of a radius setting.
A badquality rejection emcompasses quite a few things. A rejection reason like this should prompt the photographer to look at the processing again and start afresh.
DerekF From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 866 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1376 times:
Thanks for the replies.
If the reason though is against the sun or contrast isn't that a badcontrast rejection? If it is dirty then isn't that baddirty and if it is soft is it not badsoft?.
This is the point I'm making. If I knew it was soft or dirty I would know what to look for rather just "badquality" which gives me no clues.
Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 1): I would suggest borrowing a friend computer to have a better look, it should be clear.
Do you mean one with a CRT monitor? - if so I don't know anyone that still has a CRT monitor anymore - gone the way of floppy drives and 486 processors round here
DerekF From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 866 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (8 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1344 times:
I'm afraid that size, weight, cost and power consumption outweighs any potential airliners.net rejections. For the future though, an increasing number of visitors to the site will be viewing on a laptop or TFT monitor. In fact I noticed in the most recent Dabs catalogue I got in the post had no CRT monitors in it at all.
I probably tend to oversharpen as before I had lots of "badsoft" rejections. Doesn't always work though.