JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1785 times:
Quoting Dvincent (Reply 4): but something like that will always be "too bright."
This type of reflection, which I refer to as 'sunflash' or 'sunstreak' and absolutely detest, will always be too bright no matter what, so I don't see why this was rejected. There is no rejection reason stating anything about 'sunflash'. I personally hate any amount anywhere but I've seen plenty of shots here featuring this personal nuisance which are no worse and have highlights no less bright.
Eadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 13
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1740 times:
Quoting Bubbles (Reply 6): I rejected this photo. I think the reflection on fuselage, especially on rear fuselage, is too harsh. The highlight area are too wide and too much detail lost there.
Thanks for owning up. I personally think its a harsh rejection myself but anyway, clearly its not going to make it. I uploaded the shot only because its a rare case to see this type flying in Australia as they are constantly riddled with unserviceabilities. Anyway, another for the scrap heap.