Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
This Must Have Been A Mistake...  
User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3649 times:

I have a suspision that this rejection reason was erroniously applied...maybe the wrong box was checked?

How can you reject this photo for "motive"...
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r..._3299_2006_02_16_BOS_N925UA.jpg???

I'll just assume that this was a mistake. Can I get the real rejection reason from the screener?

Also, this one was rejected for soft:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...IMG_3281_2006_02_16_BOS_N505AU.jpg

This was one of the many times where a personal message from the screener would have helped a lot. Was it soft in some areas, or the whole image? Image sharpening is one area that I have a lot of trouble with despite using suggested workflows. Any help would be appreciated.
Thanks.

26 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTom3 From Luxembourg, joined Apr 2004, 240 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3642 times:

Hello

For the first one I think it's Bad Motive because the tail is cut off !

And for the second , a little more sharpen and then it should be ok IMO !


Cheers


Tom



Tom Mousel - Lap
User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3628 times:

Quoting Tom3 (Reply 1):
For the first one I think it's Bad Motive because the tail is cut off !

Thanks for the input, but I hardly think that is the case. I don't think I need to post examples to show that this "motive" has many other accepted examples in the database. Had to be a mistake. I will appeal this one, unless anyone has any other suggestions.

As for the second one, it was processed using the same workflow as all the others that were accepted. So why would it be rejected for soft? Was it soft just in some areas?


User currently offlineSulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2037 posts, RR: 32
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3628 times:

Joseph,

It's a great shot (nice lighting) but these things are subjective - I've had similar angles rejected. Appeal by all means but don't sweat it.


Cheers


James



It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
User currently offlineAirKas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 4008 posts, RR: 55
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 3625 times:

Quoting Tom3 (Reply 1):
For the first one I think it's Bad Motive because the tail is cut off !

Well, I agree that it looks rather weird with the tail cut off like that.


User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3606 times:

Quoting Sulman (Reply 3):
these things are subjective

I just don't understand how a particular crop could be so widely accepted, then suddenly rejected for motive. I mean, what's fair is fair, and this certainly is not.


User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2072 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3552 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 5):
I just don't understand how a particular crop could be so widely accepted, then suddenly rejected for motive. I mean, what's fair is fair, and this certainly is not.

I don't think that this kind of crop is widely accepted here on A.net; at least I don't recall having seen shots here in the near past where entire parts of the tail were cut off.
You might mistake the crop with crops that have stabilizers cut off but on your shot the entire rear part of the aircraft is gone and that's quite clearly stated as badmotive here on A.net.
If possible re-upload the shot with the tail in and it should work out ok.

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineLindy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3550 times:

Evidently you didn't read the Airliners.net Upload Page rules. You can find it here: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/

One of the points states:
- Upload shots showing the whole aircraft with no part covered or cropped out.

Take it easy, its not end of the world.

Rafal


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3959 posts, RR: 18
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3544 times:

You cut only 10% off the aircraft and that doesn't look good at all in my opinion. We shouldn't declare our pictures equal to others so easily.

Peter



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineAdamwright From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3532 times:

The bar has definately been raised. The screeners are getting more picky.

Can anyone help me with this rejection? Rejected for "BLURRY"

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...s/big/20060303_Picture182edit1.jpg

Thanks,
Adam


User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 29
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3475 times:

Quoting Adamwright (Reply 9):

Can anyone help me with this rejection? Rejected for "BLURRY"

Looks like motion blur, especially noticeable around the engine. Probably nothing to do about it, unfortunately.

Quoting Lindy (Reply 7):

One of the points states:
- Upload shots showing the whole aircraft with no part covered or cropped out.

There's plenty of shots on here with something cropped off, so that's not a steadfast rule, which leads to this confusion.

Harry



Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 3467 times:

Quoting Lindy (Reply 7):
Upload shots showing the whole aircraft with no part covered or cropped out.

Give me a break!   This is just another case of selective application of the "rules". Many pictures with portions of the aircraft cropped out were accepted in the past and on an ongoing basis...Sorry, but your reply is a cop-out.

Quoting Newark777 (Reply 10):
There's plenty of shots on here with something cropped off, so that's not a steadfast rule, which leads to this confusion.

 checkmark 



Quoting Lindy (Reply 7):
Take it easy, its not end of the world.

Thanks for the condescending commentary. I hardly see it as the "end of the world". Just pointing out another batant example of screening inconsistency on this site.

[Edited 2006-03-03 18:34:36]

User currently offlineEdoca From Belgium, joined Mar 2005, 688 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 3430 times:

I disagree that it is blatant screening inconsistency. In my opinion, this crop is not esthetically pleasing. Other crops are (in general) better. That I guess was also what the screener thought. There is no inconsistency in that. Just think by yourself - would this pic be better if I had not cropped it? If the answer is no, by all means appeal, if it's yes, try to rework it... Just my 2 cents...

User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5715 posts, RR: 44
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3374 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi,

I would have gone with grainy as well but as no one else picked up on that the problem may be with my monitor.
Motiv, I am going to agree it is not an especially pleasing crop, should have cropped more or less of the tail.
I was going to link other photos to illustrate but you 2nd one is a decent example of a crop that works better.

C



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineDendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1671 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3359 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 11):
Give me a break! This is just another case of selective application of the "rules". Many pictures with portions of the aircraft cropped out were accepted in the past and on an ongoing basis...Sorry, but your reply is a cop-out.

I can't remember exactly where it was in the rules but there is something about well motivated crops being acceptable and that is my way of doing things. I like tight crops and a good many of mine have bits missing. I crop at the taking stage rather than on the computer. Hopefully they are well motivated and as others have said, your example here looks awkward. I would have to say that I consider it bad motive too.

Mick Bajcar


User currently offline9VSPO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3355 times:

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 14):
I crop at the taking stage rather than on the computer.

 checkmark  Me too.......well I try lol. Big grin


User currently offlineLindy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3341 times:

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 11):
Thanks for the condescending commentary. I hardly see it as the "end of the world". Just pointing out another batant example of screening inconsistency on this site.

I just had 2 pictures rejected  Smile LOL in this very moment. I didn't get rejection email yet so I don't know the reasons.

Just laugh about it. I had many pictures rejected for bad crop  Smile

Rafal

PS - On this forum I'm not speaking for airliners.net, just for myself like regular users (so please don't think that a.net don't care about you)  Smile


User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3320 times:

Lindy, sorry if i took your comment the wrong way...
Will try a different crop, thanks for all who gave input.


User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3312 times:

Is this crop any better?

...
http://img331.imageshack.us/img331/4765/img329920060216bosn925ua20ai.jpg

Thanks, JD


User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2464 posts, RR: 44
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3304 times:

JD that looks a lot better in my opinion.
Good luck with it its a lovely shot.
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineMorvious From Netherlands, joined Feb 2005, 707 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3282 times:

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 18):
Is this crop any better?

IMO it does look better, but it still isn't perfect.. (In my oppinion that is)

A crop closer to the left engine could look better..
Now it looks bad centered!

Stefan van Hierden



have a good day, Stefan van Hierden
User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3276 times:

JD,

If it were me uploading I would crop it like this:-

http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/791/7375226no.jpg

Also, not sure if it is me or my monitor but the image looks like it could do with a small kick of contrast, I have added a touch to my link

Cheers

Ben


User currently offlineLindy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3271 times:

Quoting Flyfisher1976 (Reply 17):
Lindy, sorry if i took your comment the wrong way...

No problem here  Smile

Rafal


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3959 posts, RR: 18
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3271 times:

I agree with Stefan and Ben. Horizontally center the fuselage for this shot, ignoring the wings and engines.


The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineFlyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3239 times:

Quoting LGW (Reply 21):
JD,

If it were me uploading I would crop it like this:-

This crop does look more balanced. Thanks, I'll probably give this one a try.


25 Post contains links and images Psyops : I played with this crop forever before settling this version. I think having the whole vertical stab in makes it more pleasing, also less space in fro
26 Eadster : It's a great shot with the new crop there but I have the feeling that it'll go for having too much noise. Not your monitor Chris, there's a fair bit t
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Wouldn't This Have Been A Bad Double? posted Thu Mar 30 2006 00:25:19 by Jorge1812
Should This Have Been Rejected? posted Sun Nov 30 2003 20:40:46 by RayPettit
Should This Have Been Rejected? posted Tue Nov 25 2003 04:51:35 by AvroArrow
Rejected: BadPole! Would This Have Been Accepted? posted Fri Jul 18 2003 23:36:52 by PW100
This Shot Have A Chance? posted Fri Jul 14 2006 02:21:32 by 777-200
Will This Photo Have A Chance Here On Anet? posted Wed Jun 28 2006 17:12:38 by AIRBUSRIDER
Does This Photo Have A Chance Here On Anet? posted Fri May 26 2006 17:11:00 by AIRBUSRIDER
Does This Pic Have A Chance In Hell Of Getting In? posted Wed May 24 2006 06:10:47 by CYEGsTankers
Does This Shot Have A Chance To Get Uploaded? posted Sat May 13 2006 18:57:17 by Airimages
Does This Photo Have A Chance? posted Wed Apr 12 2006 16:44:33 by AIRBUSRIDER