Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Rejected For Quality  
User currently offlineAcontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 30
Posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3602 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

These two were rejected for "quality" (first one also for centered, but that can easily be fixed), but my tyred old eyes seem to be unable to find the quality problems.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...720061010A1611024101006PR_GOTb.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...20060919A0111024220906CC_CSHbb.jpg

I would very much appreciate your guidance here to find the quality problems and see if they can be fixed.


Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
6 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFly747 From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1497 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 3588 times:

Hi Andres,

I believe the quality rejection comes from the common subject, a LAN 737 taking off which probably requires a top notch quality to be accepted. The weather wasn't favourable that day either which contributes to your picture not being crisp.
Not sure about the GOL, the quality looks good to me.

Ivan


User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2046 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week ago) and read 3564 times:

The LAN has massive halos around it.

Not sure about the GOL, I'm on the wrong screen.



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offline9V From China, joined Aug 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (7 years 11 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3541 times:

The LAN looks grainy/dirty probably due to the bad weather.

I could be wrong but on the GOL there appears to be a dark line down the front of the tail or maybe it's just over-sharpened.


User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 4, posted (7 years 11 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3496 times:

GOL looks ok but I'm on my notebook...

The LAN is grainy, low quality and soft in places. Keep that one for the personal collection.


User currently offlineLanas From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 978 posts, RR: 13
Reply 5, posted (7 years 11 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3441 times:

Andres

The LAN picture looks pretty oversharpened and blurry on a couple of places. Also I would place the aircraft a little lower on the frame.
The GOL picture is very nice and it´s an angle that is not very frequently shot at SCL. I see some parts a little jagged, though (inner flap section and fin livery).
Hope it helps.  thumbsup 

Cheers!
Lanas.-



"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens." J.R.R. Tolkien
User currently offlineAcontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 30
Reply 6, posted (7 years 11 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 3414 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Well, many thanks to Ivan, TransIsland, Ian, Martin and Gaston for your feedback - as usual highly appreciated!
Have to be honest, the LAN 737 was the fourth (!) attempt at uploading this picture, previously been rejected for contrast. While I appreciate the quality issues on it, it is just such a difficult and rare picture to get, since rotation at Rwy 17L at SCL is usually way much further away, but this 737 was apparently very lightly loaded and it started take-off roll at the very end of a cold morning, all factors which helped to have it flying just above the tower from this angle. So, I got the message and will not try again, and screeners will probably miss this picture in the queue  Wink !
Now, regarding the Gol, the only thing I can see is some slight grain in the sky, which I can basically do nothing to improve, so I went to another shot from the series to upload. In any case, this is still for me somewhat of a puzzling rejection...  scratchchin 



Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
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...
Rejected For Bad Quality posted Tue May 24 2005 16:10:45 by J32driver
Rejected For Quality posted Tue Nov 21 2006 16:54:07 by Acontador
Would This Be Rejected For Motive? posted Thu Sep 21 2006 20:47:41 by San747
Accident Pic Rejected For "personal" posted Wed Sep 20 2006 23:44:05 by EZYAirbus
Question For Quality/Blurry Rejection .... posted Sat Sep 16 2006 07:37:03 by TriStar501
Rejected For Common, On First Visit? posted Sat Aug 12 2006 08:47:05 by EWS
Rejected For Being "to Close" ;-) posted Fri Aug 11 2006 21:16:13 by Maiznblu_757
Just Had The Rejected For "Blurry" posted Sun Jul 23 2006 22:16:34 by Cosec59
Rejected For Soft... Really? posted Thu Jul 20 2006 14:51:17 by Ptrjong
Argh! - Rejected For Being Common. posted Mon Jul 17 2006 18:49:02 by AirbusA346
Rejected For Quality - Can It Be Fixed? posted Wed Nov 2 2005 03:19:03 by Mr Spaceman
Rejected For Bad Quality posted Tue May 24 2005 16:10:45 by J32driver
Pic Rejected For Contrast posted Sat Jun 13 2009 04:20:02 by Dreamflight
Pix Rejected For Info, Fixed, Reloaded, But... posted Thu Jul 24 2008 19:40:53 by Thevid
Rejected For Level posted Wed Feb 6 2008 10:17:05 by Sfilipowicz
Rejected For Category posted Fri Jan 18 2008 11:25:17 by Paulinbna
Rejected For Level. Really? posted Thu Jan 17 2008 05:19:36 by Sfilipowicz
Rejected For Motive! - Why? I'm Confused. posted Fri Dec 21 2007 07:38:01 by Mr Spaceman
Rejected For Soft And Oversharp? posted Thu Oct 18 2007 23:07:27 by Jspitfire