Bubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1193 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted
Mon Jan 8 2007 22:43:45 UTC (7 years 2 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2688 times:
I feel both shots for N588NW don't look right in terms of colour. And the latest rejected shot appears to be soft that's why the reasons are 'quality' and 'soft.'
For N78506, it seems to me not related with ISO250. The photo looks soft to me, and at the same time I could also find some jaggies. And the colour of this image doesn't look right, either.
Codeshare From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted
Mon Jan 8 2007 23:07:23 UTC (7 years 2 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2669 times:
Quoting LOCsta ( Thread starter): http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...8_Bombardier-ChallengerN448ASb.jpg
Got no idea.
Quoting LOCsta ( Thread starter): http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...big/20070105_NWAirlinesN588NWb.jpg
Kind of overexposed for me. Some grain/noise in the dark areas under the wing. Colour - I think I agree it's sort of like a slide, and the levelling needs a bit CW.
Quoting LOCsta ( Thread starter): http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...104_ContinentalAirlinesN78506b.jpg
Rather sofr for me, the windows especially because of the strong sun.
Quoting LOCsta ( Thread starter): http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20070102_N900ER.jpg
Oh that left winglet... and in general probably the heat haze from the engines.
Interesting question here, I could ask the same about my recent quality rejections.
All these are great, but you have to live up the 'standards' here. Enjoy the photography.
How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
LOCsta From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 306 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted
Tue Jan 9 2007 21:14:30 UTC (7 years 2 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2632 times:
Thanks for the comments guys.
Yeah this was the latest one that inspired my posting for some opinions/suggestions on what the problem could be?
Should I appeal it?
Missed 4 chasing 1