Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Help On An Insane Rejection :)  
User currently offline797 From Venezuela, joined Aug 2005, 1894 posts, RR: 27
Posted (7 years 7 months 12 hours ago) and read 3432 times:

Hey guys,

I just got the rejection email 11 days after upload time. The shot I'm about to show you I think it has been my best one so far and got insanely rejected. Of course, this is a beginner's opinion, but my eyes don't lie. I'd like to hear you experts on this so I can learn a bit more

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/....main?filename=20070123_UAA320.jpg

This photo was rejected because:

These photo(s) appear to have been either overexposed (too bright) or
underexposed (too dark). This may be caused by incorrect exposure settings
for your camera or scanner.

These photo(s) are slightly or severely out of focus, giving them a blurry
or unsharp appearance.

The main subject of these photo(s) is not correctly centered in the image.
In some cases this problem can be corrected.

On the other hand, I'd like to know if this photo was rejected correctly.

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...70123_N200WN-07012007-208-EJPP.jpg

This one was simply rejected because:

These photo(s) appear to have been either overexposed (too bright) or
underexposed (too dark).

Oh well, I'm a bit angry and frustrated and would like to hear from you!

Thanks in advance bros!

Cheers

Enrique


Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous!
17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineFiveholer From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 1013 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 12 hours ago) and read 3421 times:

Neat shot the first one. Only part I will agree on is the overexposure part. It's obvious what you were going for with the contrail shooting out of the nose. hence, the odd centering. Anyway...the second shot. Yes, overexposed and unlevel.

Danny



Bring back Bethune!
User currently offlineKukkudrill From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 12 hours ago) and read 3421 times:

No. 1 looks overexposed. The white upper fuselage is burnt out. The rear fuselage does look blurry to me I'm afraid. I disagree with the centering rejection as I think you had the motive for it, but it's academic given the other problems.

No. 2 is also overexposed.



Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
User currently offlineBubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1193 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 12 hours ago) and read 3415 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hello Enrique

Don't be angry! I think both shots were rejected properly.

The first one is overexposed. Please take a look at the upper fuselage. The white paint is totally blown out. And some jaggies could be identified on this image which indicates maybe you were trying to give a little bit more sharpening to a slightly blurry photo.

The second one is surely overexposed.

_Hongyin_


User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 12 hours ago) and read 3401 times:

Enrique,

shot 1 : the whole fuselage is bright white. Too bright...It is also slightly out of focus, not that much, but doesn't meet A.net standards in this sense (that truly are very stricts). The latter rejection reason is the most fixable one.

shot 2 : the image is too bright. I must close my eyes because it has a whitish/bright appearance. Too much contrast in my opinion.

Keep trying.

As always, just my twocents 

Regards



Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2044 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 12 hours ago) and read 3396 times:

1. Reasons 1 & 2 are valid, though 2 may be a tad harsh. As far as centering goes... horizontal is ok, given the contrail, but it's too low in the frame. (Still, I love the shot!)

2. Yes, overexposed. Also a bit jagged & oversaturated, maybe?



I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 11 hours ago) and read 3372 times:

As has been said so many times above, both rejections are valid.

It's your call, but calling rejection reasons "insane" probably doesn't help your cause.

B


User currently offlineHalcyon From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 10 hours ago) and read 3351 times:

Quoting 797 (Thread starter):

Well, if seems that your main problem is exposure. I noticed that they are both (at least to my terrible art-eye) creative and look good, though, so don't give up. I'd love to see shots like the first one in the database often. Just work on the exposure a bit and you'll probably have it.

Take care,
Lucas


User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 9 hours ago) and read 3323 times:

Your eyes do lie. The rejections are valid.

Quoting 797 (Thread starter):
this is a beginner's opinion

..that was obvious.


User currently offline797 From Venezuela, joined Aug 2005, 1894 posts, RR: 27
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 7 hours ago) and read 3297 times:

Hehe, well thanks you guys. I am a beginner indeed and am always looking to learn a bit more on this complex photogtaphy world. I became blind because I liked my first shot so bad and that lead for me not to see the over exposed part.

Anyhow, I will certainly keep trying. This is my/our hobby and for sure it's amazing.

Thanks for the help you guys.

Best Regs,

Enrique



Flying isn't dangerous. Crashing is what's dangerous!
User currently offlinePhxplanes From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 436 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 4 hours ago) and read 3253 times:

I love that first shot, great catch.

User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3186 times:

The first shot, if the underside of the aircraft was THE ONLY thing to judge on, great shot! Everything else above it is eh.. and the blur of the a/c leaving the contrail is not going to cut it.

The second shot looks grainy, jagged and a touch blurry in places.


User currently offlineAviopic From Netherlands, joined Mar 2004, 2681 posts, RR: 42
Reply 12, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3172 times:

I think your eyes are fine.
Just calibrate your monitor Enrique and I think you are ok.



The truth lives in one’s mind, it doesn’t really exist
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 21
Reply 13, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3093 times:

Strange, Willem, the Southwest picture doesn't seem overexposed here...



Regards,
One guy that needs to calibrate his monitor (that is, me)


User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9623 posts, RR: 68
Reply 14, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3026 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

The WN shot doesn't appear overexposed in the traditonal sense of the word, blown out whites, but it is clearly much brighter than it needs to be, and hence overexposed.

User currently offlineNASCARAirforce From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3178 posts, RR: 4
Reply 15, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3007 times:

797...

Great shots by the way, but not great enough for the standards of this board...

Coming from a guy myself who is used to getting photos rejected, and yet to get one accepted I am used to these types of rejections...

Though the first shot is neat - unfortunately your motive was to get that vapor trail with the A320. The aircraft with the vapor trail is blurred - unfortunately you cannot fix that.

The white areas of the United jet is very overexposed - happens to me a lot too. Can happen with white planes. Might be fixable though in photoshop.

The Southwest photo is fixable - make some color adjustments to make the Southwest colors look more natural, seems the blue is too bright. There is slight overexposure, but not as much as the United. I think if you work on the Southwest jet a bit you could make it, but unfortunately the United shot is too far gone.


User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 21
Reply 16, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3004 times:

Hi,

Edited the latter picture up from scratch.

http://img265.imageshack.us/img265/6575/n200wn07012007208ejpp15js.jpg

I think the exposure is better now, but I'm not sure about noise and saturation.

Comments?

David


User currently offlineTedTAce From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2967 times:

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 16):
I think the exposure is better now

It's starting to 'pop', but the pylon for the nacelle is still to bright and the white from 'under' the slats is a touch hot too. There are a lot of jaggies, while not dramatic, they are noticable. I hope you get help with this one 'cause it's a really decent motive as far as I am concerned.


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...
Need Help With An Angle Rejection posted Fri Jan 13 2006 15:39:30 by UnattendedBag
Help With An Overview Rejection Please. posted Sun Jun 19 2005 05:11:33 by Fiveholer
Help On Colour Rejection Please! posted Sun May 7 2006 00:46:07 by ZSOFN
Help On A Quality Rejection! posted Thu Feb 9 2006 00:11:17 by Bubbles
Help On Rejection. posted Tue Jan 10 2006 11:57:58 by Manc
Help On This Rejection posted Sat Nov 19 2005 00:40:04 by Work4bmi
Opinions On An Upload And More Reg. Help. :) posted Wed Nov 16 2005 18:12:13 by Fiveholer
Help On Badexposure Rejection. posted Mon Jul 25 2005 13:16:21 by Malandan
Help On This Rejection posted Thu Apr 7 2005 19:10:54 by FL350
Rejection Help On First 300D Photos posted Mon Mar 22 2004 14:12:56 by LHSebi