Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3077 posts, RR: 53
Reply 2, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2278 times:
Blimey Gary - that is a tough call. I really would love to know in more detail what the screener's view was here that justifies such a rejection.
Using Tamsin's 'aesthetics' argument, the only thing I can think of is that the slope to the ground going down from left to right (currently slightly 'disguised' by having that dividing line between the 2 cuts of grass levelled) could be made more apparent by a bit of CW rotation. That way the downwards slope looks more like a slope. I tried that and the photo still looks acceptable to me - maybe that was what was in their mind.
I agree with Tony that another option is to appeal and also 'appeal' to the Head Screeners' good nature to give you some further guidance if they reject it again.
Gary2880 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (10 years 9 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2263 times:
Thanks Ian, it does look better ill grant you but the grass was unlevel because the grass on the left was making its way up the hill and on the right it was still going along the ground... if you see what i mean...