Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What To Do?  
User currently offlineFUAirliner From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 538 posts, RR: 3
Posted (7 years 1 month 11 hours ago) and read 2652 times:

Hi everybody,

I got this shot rejected for dirty with a personal message saying where the dust spot is:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...70919_f-wwow_ai_380_ham_091507.jpg

I cloned out the dust spot, reworked the shot from the original with the same workflow, reuploaded it with a comment to the screeners and was surprised to see the improved version rejected for grainy, soft and common:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...70920_f-wwow_ai_380_ham_091507.jpg

Now does it make sense to sharpen and reupload this shot? There are obviously a few screeners within the crew who consider this shot as perfectly acceptable ... On a side note, I would have expected at least a personal comment if previous decisions by screeners are overruled.


Frank


Frank Unterspann - Hamburg, Germany
3 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineStil From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 345 posts, RR: 6
Reply 1, posted (7 years 1 month 10 hours ago) and read 2636 times:

Frank

The main handicap here is "common" IMO. If you have a look to the site overall statitics

http://www.airliners.net/statistics/static.main

You'll se that F-WWOW is by far the aircraft with more pics on database. It means that a pic needs to be of an extra good quality to be accepted. Yours is a pic of a good quality (if it were mine, it will be for sure the star of my collection), but not such a level to rise above the standard required for this aircraft.

On the other hand, maybe the dustspot was the first thing the screener noticed on first rejection and didn't go further on screening process, hence the first rejection.

Stil



....... Gueropppa! ......
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 2, posted (7 years 1 month 10 hours ago) and read 2634 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FUAirliner (Thread starter):
There are obviously a few screeners within the crew who consider this shot as perfectly acceptable

Not necessarily, I think what happened is the first screener rejected the image immediately after he saw the dustspot and did not check for other issues. I have to say this aircraft is far too common and the quality is lacking here.

Cheers
Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineFUAirliner From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 538 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (7 years 1 month 10 hours ago) and read 2629 times:

OK, thanks for your comments, Stil and Tim. I will leave this picture for my personal collection/other databases.

As a suggestion for the screening process, perhaps it is possible to check all reasons that apply at the first time. A rejection for dirty together with a personal comment clearly deliveres the message "Remove the dust spot and it'll be acceptable" to me. Especially with "easy-to-fix" rejections like dirty, soft or level this would be very helpful for us photographers.



Frank Unterspann - Hamburg, Germany
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...
What To Do To Get This To A Net Standards? posted Tue Apr 24 2007 07:55:59 by Flamedude707
Photo Usage Request - What To Do? posted Tue Dec 19 2006 19:58:52 by JakTrax
"Dark" Rejection - What To Do? posted Sun Dec 10 2006 02:07:33 by Walter2222
What To Do With This Picture? posted Sat Oct 14 2006 09:59:01 by WILCO737
File Error - What To Do? posted Tue Jul 25 2006 04:19:51 by OlegShv
Better / Similar Photo - What To Do? posted Tue Jul 4 2006 10:55:41 by ZSOFN
What To Do In CLE And IND? posted Sun Jul 2 2006 07:34:33 by N808NWatMSP
What To Do To Improve...... posted Thu Mar 2 2006 17:38:16 by Ranger703
What To Do? 6 Hour Lay-over At FRA... posted Fri Jan 27 2006 16:37:17 by MarkJBeckwith
First Too Soft - Then Jagged. What To Do? posted Sat Jan 14 2006 12:50:28 by Frippe