Sluger020889 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 456 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1632 times:
Hey Tony. I'm seeing some jaggies around the titles, the red cheat line and the number one engine. As for soft, my guess is the bottum of the fuselage and the number two engine. Good shot though, I wasn't lucky enough to see any of that when I was in LA.
I would love to fly a cargo plane full of rubber dog shit out of Hong Kong!
Lanas From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 978 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1627 times:
No, don´t appeal. Image is way too oversharpened. Forward part of the fuselage looks overexposed, too.
The soft and oversharpened rejection comes from the fact that the image might have been too soft and you tried to compensate that with some aggresive sharpening.
I´m afraid you should try again from scratch, this time.
"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens." J.R.R. Tolkien