FlightShadow From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 862 posts, RR: 7 Posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1710 times:
I would have understood a motive rejection for that shot - but quality? Admittedly I'm a little biased but can someone help and point out where it lacks sufficient quality?
Boeingfreak From Germany, joined May 2005, 398 posts, RR: 6 Reply 1, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1705 times:
Hello Jeff,
I think your picture unites some smaller flawes that altogether led to a quality rejection.
First thing I can see is that the white parts of the fuselage are a bit overexposed, the sky is a bit grainy and while the wingtip is nice and sharp, the belly looks a bit soft (out of focus).
I can also see a lot of green and purple halos, especially on the lower part of the fuselage.
Another thing that looks awkward to me is your crop, but that's a matter of personal taste.
Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9459 posts, RR: 72 Reply 2, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1705 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
It is overexposed, oversharpened in parts, soft/blurry in parts, and suffers from chromatic aberration.
FlightShadow From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 862 posts, RR: 7 Reply 3, posted (5 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1693 times:
Thanks Florian and Royal for your quick replies.
I was imaging a different aspect of quality rejection, but looking at all those things combined the rejection does now make sense.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 862 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2005, 398 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
