Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Strange Rejection Reason  
User currently offlinePaulinbna From United States of America, joined Feb 2003, 1114 posts, RR: 5
Posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2741 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This is a new one for me.

Rejected for added text or graphics.

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...?filename=20080304_N757SS_2909.jpg

1. I did not add anything.
2 I don't see anything that could be confused with this.


Canon 50D user; 100-400 MM L IS 10-22 MM, 60MM Macro
8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2728 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Most likely a mistake since the color rejection is adjacent to the copyright one. It's too orange, and also a tad grainy.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineSulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2037 posts, RR: 32
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2703 times:

I don't know about the grain (can't see it on this monitorf) but it does look like the colour temperature is in the low Kelvin range; hence the orange cast from the sodium lighting. If you've got a raw original, it's an easy fix. You could go for the ultra-high kelvin look popular here, where the sky is a deep blue, and the lights a kind of urine-yellow, but I'd leave a bit of red in there as that is probably how it actually looked.

Cheers


James



It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4858 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2684 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 1):
and also a tad grainy



Quoting Sulman (Reply 2):
I don't know about the grain (can't see it on this monitorf)

I'm not seeing the grain either.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2671 times:



Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 3):
Quoting Sulman (Reply 2):I don't know about the grain (can't see it on this monitorf)
I'm not seeing the grain either.

Everything above the fuselage is terribly grainy.


User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4858 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2665 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting JeffM (Reply 4):
Everything above the fuselage is terribly grainy.

Hmm...must be a monitor thing. I'm not seeing it here on this monitor at work.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlinePaulinbna From United States of America, joined Feb 2003, 1114 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2632 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I think what grain you are seeing is that fact that there was a heavy mist in the air that night.

Quoting Sulman (Reply 2):
but it does look like the colour temperature is in the low Kelvin range; hence the orange cast from the sodium lighting

The problem is that the front half had white light shinning on it the back half had a sodium light shinning on it. Which part of the aircraft do I make white?



Canon 50D user; 100-400 MM L IS 10-22 MM, 60MM Macro
User currently offlineCallMeCapt From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2533 times:

Haven't been around in a while but this photo grabbed me and I'm going to throw my 2c worth.
Not sure whether screening criteria have changed regarding this suggestion.
Fix your cropping to encompass the aircraft only and not the wing area extending past the rear of the fuselage. The crop you have done leaves a kind of unbalanced look.
example.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Qantas/Boeing-747-438/0870430/L/
Regards
Goran



Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9664 posts, RR: 68
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 2498 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

And it also needs quite a bit of CW rotation to be level.

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...
Only One Rejection Reason? posted Sun Dec 30 2007 12:10:15 by Wrxflyer
Motiv Rejection. Reason? posted Fri Jul 27 2007 22:40:30 by Preelude
Strange Rejection? posted Wed Mar 28 2007 02:28:48 by JakTrax
Confusion Over A Rejection Reason posted Mon Dec 18 2006 11:28:47 by EZYAirbus
Not Had This Rejection Reason Before posted Mon Jun 5 2006 22:02:59 by 9VSPO
Another Strange Rejection posted Mon May 22 2006 18:47:02 by Aero145
Two Strange Rejection Reasons?!? posted Wed Dec 15 2004 12:13:01 by Beechcraft
Strange Rejection posted Fri Feb 6 2004 21:54:55 by Janne
Rejection Reason posted Fri Oct 31 2003 22:21:30 by JZ
Wrong Rejection Reason? posted Tue Apr 16 2002 23:42:26 by EWRvirgin