When I submitted these two, I had some doubts about Number 2, but I thought Number 1 one was pretty "safe" (shows how much I know!!!). Can anyone guess why it was Number 1 that was rejected? It's similar to the other one and, in many ways, the better picture in my opinion (better colors, you can see more of the engine, etc.).
Thanks in advance,
Tony
PS Yes, it only got motiv.
PPS No, they are not double (different date, different flight, different plane).
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
Maiznblu_757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2002, 5112 posts, RR: 51 Reply 1, posted (5 years 9 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 1839 times:
Tony,
Neither of these photos work for me.
Quoting SNATH (Thread starter): Can anyone guess why it was Number 1 that was rejected?
This is only a guess, the one accepted shows a village and the one rejected does not?
SNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3234 posts, RR: 24 Reply 5, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 1725 times:
Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 4): I looked at both pics and the second one is just a better crop and nicer to look at.
Clearly, we have our own tastes! I actually like number 1 more, as it shows more of the engine.
Quoting Eadster (Reply 2): Your rejected one, the engine is distracting.
Quoting Tommy Mogren (Reply 3): I thought aircraft and their parts were the focus on this website....
I agree with Tommy: in this case, in my opinion, more plane is good. I really have a hard time understanding what's the best motiv for windows shots: sometimes screeners complain that I include too little plane, sometimes they complain that I include too much plane. Go figure...
Regards,
Tony
[Edited 2007-08-27 15:24:55]
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
AAGOLD From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 542 posts, RR: 51 Reply 7, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1634 times:
In my opinion the first photo was rejected because you have two pieces of the aircraft jutting out of different points of the image (and the two pieces are actually connected, but not connected in your photo). The engine is at the bottom and the wing above it with landscape inbetween. The accepted photo shows the engine connected to the wing and it just flows better and frames the suject with a more pleasant framing.
Shutterbug From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 8, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1616 times:
Quoting SNATH (Reply 5): sometimes screeners complain that I include too little plane, sometimes they complain that I include too much plane. Go figure...
This again, shows that at the end, like everything, it's a matter of personal taste.
I wonder what would the comments had been had they accepted number 1 and rejected number 2.
SNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3234 posts, RR: 24 Reply 9, posted (5 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1588 times:
Quoting AAGOLD (Reply 7): In my opinion the first photo was rejected because you have two pieces of the aircraft jutting out of different points of the image (and the two pieces are actually connected, but not connected in your photo). The engine is at the bottom and the wing above it with landscape inbetween. The accepted photo shows the engine connected to the wing and it just flows better and frames the suject with a more pleasant framing.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3234 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Dec 2000, 911 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
