Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Post - Screening Thread Part 2  
User currently offlineModerators From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 505 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 6 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 9644 times:

Following on from Post- Screening Thread #1 (help after rejection) we would appreciate that the topic continue in this thread.

Should you seek another opinion or advice in relation to a rejection we ask that you use this thread, after a full review of notification from the screening team. Other photographers and members are encouraged to assist those who post and are new to the site.

Enjoy the discussion and thank you for your contributions.

Please use moderators@airliners.net to contact us.
275 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
User currently offlineCoxmaster From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 6 months 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 9632 times:

Posted on the other topic, but never got a reply. So here goes again!

Reject reason: category oversharpened

Reject reason: quality centered category dark

I understand everything on both of these, except category. What would be the owner/operator for these two photos? Also, since the Maintenance plane isn't actually legal to fly anymore, does it require anything special? Thanks for the help guys!

User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 65
Reply 2, posted (5 years 6 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 9617 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Category: did you tick PROP?

Alderman Exit
User currently offlineBustin From Spain, joined May 2005, 265 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (5 years 6 months 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 9614 times:

Hi again:
I got this shot rejected by dark. Someone really thinks that this picture is dark and does not meet the standards.

Big version: Width: 1486 Height: 1003 File size: 567kb

On this occasion I think the screener has sought a very poor reason to reject this picture.

I'd like the opinion of other Screeners and also help to improve the picture..


User currently offlineNWA783 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 115 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 9597 times:

Quoting Bustin (Reply 3):
I got this shot rejected by dark. Someone really thinks that this picture is dark and does not meet the standards.

I would have to agree with the Screeners on this one, the plane does seem a bit dark to me. I think it might be because the shadow that is on the near side of the aircraft.

- Josh -

"I'd like to give a pilot report" " Ok go ahead sir" "Its a beautiful day in the neighborhood"
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 65
Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 9590 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yes dark and backlit...correctly rejected. I'd give it up since the light is just not nice no matter what you do with it

Alderman Exit
User currently offlineBustin From Spain, joined May 2005, 265 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 9590 times:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 5):

. What is for you backlit?.

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 5):
the light is just not nice

. This is a new acceptation rules?

I can make sure that only the photos uploaded today you can find photos accepted more dark.

Is possible improved the picture or you no accept pictures with the shadow on next side of the aircraft.

Of course, thanks for you reply.



User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3148 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (5 years 6 months 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 9587 times:

This was rejected for level.
The red-white poles in the background seem to be not strait but alle the buildings appear level to me. What are your views?


User currently offline777MechSys From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 350 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (5 years 6 months 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 9566 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!


Looks like it needs CCW rotation. The overall image has an unlevel feel to it. The buildings are short making it a bit more dificult to use are a refrence.



User currently offlineCoxmaster From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 years 6 months 3 days ago) and read 9549 times:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 2):
Category: did you tick PROP?

I thought i picked Prop. It should still be categorized as private right?

User currently offlineJorge1812 From Germany, joined Apr 2004, 3148 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (5 years 6 months 3 days ago) and read 9542 times:

Quoting 777MechSys (Reply 8):

Thanks! Probably will try to fix it.


User currently offlineDuane From Australia, joined Nov 2006, 2 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (5 years 6 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 9531 times:

Quoting Bustin (Reply 3):

Agree, i think the screeners did get it wrong, the light seems perfect to me, id appeal it,steve

Never let anybody operate on your back.
User currently offlineCoxmaster From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (5 years 6 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 9522 times:

Just got that one rejected also.. Reject reason: colour personal soft. Color im not sure on, any suggestions. Personal/Soft were related.. "needs selective sharpening". Any suggestions on where those spots would be?

User currently offlineWalter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1292 posts, RR: 29
Reply 13, posted (5 years 6 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 9500 times:

I had this one rejected for "centered":


I had centered it with the center of the afterburner section in the middle of the picture, which gives indeed an assymetric feeling, looking at the speed brakes...

Should I center it (i.e. horizontally) such that the speed brakes show a more symmetric view (but then having the afterburner center "out-of-center")?

What do you think?

Thanks and regards,


canon 340d ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l is usm - ...
User currently offlineCodeshare From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (5 years 6 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 9479 times:

I think so yes. What's more it looks like you didn't take the phto directly in the center of the engine but a little bit to the left.


How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
User currently offlinePoints From Netherlands, joined Jul 2006, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (5 years 6 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9474 times:

Coxmaster, I would sharpen the plane, excluding thin parts like horizontal stabilizer, cockpit window, door edges and small text/numbers.

User currently offlineEZEIZA From Argentina, joined Aug 2004, 4963 posts, RR: 25
Reply 16, posted (5 years 6 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9473 times:

Hi everyone,
I knew when uploading that this was risky, but I went on with it because of the two special liveries in the same frame, as well as the first of this a/c in this location (probably one of the very few of AC from here too).
Is there any way this could be saved?? Rejected for quality and distance (I think it cropping it dowb nore


regards  Smile

Carp aunque ganes o pierdas ...
User currently offlineCodeshare From Poland, joined Sep 2002, 1854 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (5 years 6 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 9470 times:

Unforunately looks to me like it was soft from the start and looks level also. And there appers to be heat-haze.


How much A is there is Airliners Net ? 0 or nothing ?
User currently offlineDaleaholic From UK - England, joined Oct 2005, 3204 posts, RR: 13
Reply 18, posted (5 years 6 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 9469 times:

Dark and oversharpened...  mad 

Religion is an illusion of childhood... Outgrown under proper education.
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 65
Reply 19, posted (5 years 6 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 9456 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Daleaholic (Reply 18):
Dark and oversharpened...

tad dark but oversharpening ver apparent on the small titles

Alderman Exit
User currently offline777MechSys From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 350 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 9423 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Coxmaster (Reply 12):
Just got that one rejected also.. Reject reason: colour personal soft. Color im not sure on, any suggestions. Personal/Soft were related.. "needs selective sharpening". Any suggestions on where those spots would be?


Looks like you could use a kick of sharpening. I think parts (engine cowling, nose, wingtip) are on the edge of being oversharp. Don't go crazy with the sharpening but just hit the fuselage and tail.

Color? See below.

Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 743 File size: 342kb

If you get that yellowish tint out of there the white will really pop out.

Looks like some minor issues that you can easily fix and have a great shot in the db.



User currently offlineCoxmaster From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (5 years 6 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 9403 times:

I think i got the color fixed, and i sharpened everything that looked like it needed it. Thoughts?

User currently offlineGliderpilot08 From Canada, joined Jun 2008, 136 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (5 years 6 months 21 hours ago) and read 9364 times:

Quoting Coxmaster (Reply 21):
think i got the color fixed, and i sharpened everything that looked like it needed it. Thoughts?

I can totally see the difference. great job.

One Issue to bring to your attention though (you may already realize it)
the background is unbalanced. There is too much tarmac and not enough sky. The aircraft is the seperation point between the tarmac and the blue sky. There is way too much grey tarmac and very little blue sky; bad unbalance. Try a crop to balance out the amount of tarmac to the amount of sky so everything looks balanced.

Other than that, great picture. Really think it's going to be a part of this web-site soon hopefully.
So all i can see is the balancing problem (that can be fixed by croping), so ther than that, lets get that picture on a.net.


Luke Big grin

Gimli Advisory. Sierra, Oscar, Romeo on right downwind for Rwy 15
User currently offlineCoxmaster From United States of America, joined Sep 2008, 53 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (5 years 6 months 20 hours ago) and read 9357 times:

Thanks for the tip. I changed it a bit and uploaded this morning. Hopefully it'll make it. Still waiting on some feedback from my first two pics in the thread though lol.

Quoting Coxmaster (Reply 1):

All the way up in reply 1!

User currently offlineWalter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1292 posts, RR: 29
Reply 24, posted (5 years 6 months 12 hours ago) and read 9321 times:

Quoting Codeshare (Reply 14):
I think so yes. What's more it looks like you didn't take the phto directly in the center of the engine but a little bit to the left.

Thanks for the feedback!

I had another rejection yesterday:


rejected for quality, motiv, contrast and personal. I did not get the rejection e-mail, which I regret, since I am always interested to read what the screeners think and the advice they give!

I know it is not the best quality (the shot was taken in the rather dark maintenance hangar and time was limited...).

Thanks for any feedback!

Best regards,


canon 340d ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l is usm - ...
25 Post contains links Nikog : This photo was rejected for motiv and level. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...tions/big/20081026_IMG_6161_1b.jpg What is wrong and how i can cor
26 Viv : It is dark, as in backlit.
27 Viv : Needs CCW rotation.
28 Viv : Certainly oversharpened - just look at the registration.
29 Post contains links and images Points : This one (taken oct. 10th) is rejected twice for "motiv" and "double". First time more than a week ago. Second time today, after an appeal. I have to
30 Walter2222 : I have now received the rejection e-mail, with the personal note from the screener. I am glad that I finally got the mail so that I could read the re
31 Post contains links AA 777 : Hey all...Just had this one rejected for bad double http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...1028_DC3_AA_Parked_LGA_MS_0160.jpg and the reason was that
32 Post contains links CaptainStefan : Rejected for motive and grain... Motive- eh, maybe, but I've seen similar shots on the site. Grain- can this be fixed if I simply reduce the image siz
33 Viv : Two great shots, although I prefer the one with the tower in it.
34 Viv : The crop is awkward - a wider lens would have done the job nicely.
35 Ptrjong : The band containing the airport is too narrow, relative to the foreground. The big lamp poles are distracting, and you'd better include the whole ter
36 777MechSys : Reducing the size will improve the quality and grain. The group of people half way down the line really kills the motive. They really detract form th
37 777MechSys : Motive wise they are very similar. Both shots feature the control tower. Both shots feature the same side of the aircraft. Both shots are at an angle
38 Post contains links Carlos : Hi All, I need help with a rejection that I definately can't understand. Maybe a screener can help in this thread. This one has been rejected with the
39 Post contains images Bustin : Hi all: I have this picture rejected with colour reason. I want improve and re-upload but I would like some help to improved the colour. Regards Busti
40 EZEIZA : It was stupid to open another thread just for this, so I'll ask here: how long does it normally take for an appeal to be screened? I have used it once
41 Points : My appeal (reply 29) took +/- one day. Today I received a rejection with a note from the screener. This note made it so much easier for me to accept a
42 Post contains links and images EZEIZA : Finally it got screened but rejected and with no personal note So, what can I do to correct this? The rejection reason is colour, but those were the
43 Post contains links and images PW100 : Hi all, This post is not in anger, just would like to share a little of my disappointment to have this photo rejected: The screener was so kind to app
44 Post contains links and images Sharktt : Hy everyone I need some help with these pictures: Reason: colour personal ?????? It's the second time I upload thisone, and at the first time, the ONL
45 EZEIZA : for what its worth, my unexperienced opinion is that the rejection for double is wrong. Although they were both taken within seconds from eachother,
46 777MechSys : This type of situation is clearly layed out int he rules. "Please do not upload multiple sequential shots of an aircraft during landing, taxiing or t
47 EZEIZA : I understand, but in a case like that IMO (and it's just an opinion, no intent to change rules or pick up fights .. I had the creative thread for tha
48 Post contains links Cptkilroy : http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ections/big/20081031_T6_5989_1.jpg Reject reason: quality, info, contrast, personal, category, oversharpened I
49 777MechSys : I'll start off with the good news. The white balance looks great. Airport lights can be crappy at best. Oversharpening: There are some trouble spots.
50 Sharktt : Could anyone say anything about my two pictures?? : Post 44
51 Codeshare : I'd say the VC-10 is overexposed but colour? I don't know. There is a personal so read the rejection e-mail. Transavia is indeed overexposed and contr
52 Post contains links and images Coxmaster : Rejected for contrast?? This is the first time ive gotten that, and its the 3rd rejection.
53 Post contains links Silver1SWA : This was just rejected for oversharpened. I'm having a hard time identifying the problem, but I am borrowing an unfamiliar monitor right now since min
54 Jetfreak : i think it was correctly rejected; check the edge of the fuselage between the first and the second fuselage! otherwise it's a great photo Regards, Be
55 Coxmaster : Rejected in the appeal this time. Contrast, soft, dark. Any suggestions on what specifically looks soft or dark?
56 Post contains links DerekF : This was rejected for quality, motive, centred and dark http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...101_EGWC_030805_GAPAS_DSC_3381.jpg Quality, I'm not sur
57 Jetfreak : i think it's mainly the motive; quality because of, as you thought, the grain; centered? i think it has got something to do with the motive, as it's
58 Codeshare : Maybe a little, but rather looks soft and a bit too high in the frame. Leading edges in particular are oversharpened. I agree with Florian here, the
59 Post contains links DerekF : Thanks folks. I thought it was an interesting angle against a deep blue sky but never mind. This one got rejected for soft and contrast with a persona
60 Post contains links and images Sovietjet : I'm confused about this one, it got rejected for centered? I left equal space between the top of the tail to the edge and the bottom of the plane to t
61 Gliderpilot08 : My first glance at it was that the aircraft was lower towards the bottom of the picture meaning too much blue sky above the aircraft. To me, "Centere
62 Post contains links and images Charly : is that bad for a rejection ? Regards
63 Post contains links Bustin : Hi: I have this picture rejected with this resaon: Motive no accepted in Airliners.net and double. http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...?filename=20
64 Sovietjet : Maybe because half of the other prop is showing?
65 Codeshare : More like bad cropping. This needs CW rotation. KS/codeshare
66 Gliderpilot08 : Have to agree with that one. Cropped too much on the side. Otherwise, what a great shot. Congrats. By the way, are you the one flying?!
67 Ptrjong : What's the rejection reason(s)? The crop is a bit messy with the cut cabin window on the left and the cut tail and the cut prop blades on the right.
68 Post contains links and images Points : This one was rejected for “Centered - The main subject is not correctly centered in the image.” Anet prefers more concrete at the lower side rath
69 Ptrjong : That is irrelevant, but I agree that the row of lights on the building does add to the picture. Maybe you can include more oncrete, and make the pict
70 Post contains links G-CIVP : Here we go, live by the sword... www.airliners.net/addphotos/middle/ready/N786ANtaalhr120108.jpg www.airliners.net/addphotos/middle/ready/epiamtaalhr1
71 Points : Peter (reply 69), thanks for your reply ! I will appeal.
72 G-CIVP : PW100 - Harm, First, we've actually met; still got your business card. If I recall correctly, if the photo is of the same aircraft on the same day, it
73 Post contains links and images Points : The following i would like to show and "tell" the viewers: D/E-ramp with the Amsterdam “Zuidas” business district in the background. Also visible
74 Post contains links and images DanieL737NG : Would these have a chance of getting accepted ??? Thanks !
75 Bubbles : Because of stairs at front cabin door. Just like the message screener left for you, the plane is still low in frame. Hope this helps! _Hongyin_
76 Post contains links Jspitfire : http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...ename=20081113_C-GATV002_anet2.jpg Rejected for centred, level and dark. Dark I understand, and I could rotate
77 Points : Hongyin, and the other screeners, thank you for trying explaining ! I now think I understand your decisions in relation to the anet rules. My goal was
78 Post contains links and images Bubbles : Well, I would say the balance is off. If possible, please give a little bit more space on left-hand side, and try to use the cabin to balance the who
79 Post contains links SNW : Hi, just wondering if this is salvageable: Rejected: info dark http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r.../20081114_IMG_4630_081104w1024.jpg It doesn't lo
80 Bubbles : Please note that 155894 is the registration and WD-00 is the code. You wrongly put "155894 / WD-00" in registration. And you need to remove blemish in
81 SNW : Thanks Hongyin, Whoops, that would be my inexperience at play, thanks. I do see a dust spot now just under the cloud but above 'MARINES', I can remove
82 Bubbles : I guess maybe my colleague wanted to tick "Dirty" for that blemish, but wrongly checked "Dark" when screening your shot. _Hongyin_[Edited 2008-11-14
83 Post contains links Scoop : Hello! This is my first attempt at submitting a photo. It was rejected: dirty. I'm not so familiar with Photoshop and similar programs... do you think
84 Post contains links TweetDriver : I had this pic rejected today for dark and level. I tried my verybest to level it with the vertical lines closest to the center of the picture but obv
85 Post contains links TweetDriver : Nobody has an idea on my above post? Then I have another question on this dawn shot: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ig/20081116_23_Feb_2008_KC
86 Post contains links Nikog : Hello. I have this photo rejected because oversharpness http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...tions/big/20081117_IMG_5898_2c.jpg I really couldn't se
87 TimdeGroot : " target=_blank>http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...r.JPG There are sensordustspots. But it's also grainy and the fact that it was shot though gla
88 Bubbles : The jaggies are around titles, paint on tail, registration, and red cheatline on fuselage. And your new edition has the same problem. _Hongyin_
89 Scoop : Thank you for the reply Bubbles! Next time I will try to shoot the image by holding the camera out of the cockpit window before touchdown.
90 Post contains links Airlineimages : Hi All I very often get my picture rejected for not being centered, see resent rejections. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20081113_
91 TimdeGroot : Hi peter The aircraft is a bit low in all of those. Moving it up a centimeter or so should make it better
92 Post contains links Airlineimages : Hi TimdeGroot Would these two examples be classed as centered. I have centered the fuselage only. http://www.airlineimages.com/Primera...0%20TF-JXE%20
93 Post contains links and images Chukcha : What is wrong with this motive?
94 JohnKrist : Chukcha, I like your picture but get a feeling that it is the teddy bear that is the man subject. Would you have taken that pic at all if it wasn't th
95 Ruudb : Peter, I don't know if it helps you, but this is the way I centre my pictures, I first level of course, than I crop dont push the enter yet make my pi
96 Chukcha : Well, I didn't put it there. It is the pilot's lucky charm, I suppose; belongs in the aircraft, like anything else in the cockpit... I was actually g
97 Post contains links Paulinbna : This was rejected for contrast. http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...?filename=20081118_N178DZ_1105.jpg Any comments. Do I need more or less Contras
98 Post contains links Paulinbna : Is this one better. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/N178DZ_1_1105.jpg
99 JohnKrist : Way too much, now the whites look blown. I think an ever so slight adjustment of first shot might do it.
100 Post contains links and images TropicalSQ744 : My first upload was rejected because it was too dark. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...big/20081117_HL7740_cabin_rev1.jpg Here's my attempt at m
101 Post contains links and images Kentauta : Hello all, I have got the following pic rejected for level with a personal message "Clockwise rotation needed." I tried looking closer and I feel it r
102 Ruudb : I think you need to get the red/white pole in the background as a vertical. Not look at the horizontals.
103 Kentauta : Thank you. That makes sense. It seems the picture needs very very slight CW rotation if we use the red pole as a reference.
104 R12055p : For Tropical: The seat backs on the image appear to soft. The blur from the movement of people's heads in the background also adds to the softness on
105 Post contains links and images NSMike : Maybe someone can explain to me why this photo: warrants a double rejection. This one, taken on October 21, is in the DB. View Large View MediumPhoto
106 777MechSys : Michael, Let me see if I understand you correctly. You uploaded 2 shots, of the same airplane, on the same day, at the same angle. One, probably the
107 NSMike : I didn't leave a note for the screeners because it was a different date, which I explained in the appeal, I said it wasn't the same date, just the sa
108 Post contains links OSU_av8or : Hey everybody, I just had these rejected for Quality and Soft. Should I sharpen more? If so, how much before it is too much. I applied the USM until I
109 Gliderpilot08 : Funny, in the second picture, I thought Bad Croping of the right wing would have been a rejection reason. Other than that, I cant see all whats wrong
110 Post contains links Alasdair1982 : Rejected for being "blurry" http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20081121_N173UA.jpg
111 NWA783 : Looks like heat haze to me. - Josh -
112 Alasdair1982 : Affecting the 747 though? :S
113 Post contains links Nikog : Hello to all. I have this photo rejected both for quality and softness. http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...?filename=20081122_IMG_8004_1b.jpg What
114 Fly747 : Doesn't look bad at all, resizing to 1024 will definitely help. Ivan
115 Nikog : Ivan, Is this photo soft? If i continue to sharpen i start to see jaggies at line connecting wing and fuselage. Thanks
116 Fly747 : You can create a duplicate layer and sharpen it some more and when the jaggies appear you can simply erase them. Ivan
117 Post contains links TweetDriver : Since nobody except Ruud via mail (thanx Ruud) seemed to have an idea I ask again, to what should I have levelled the pic??? Here a link to what I wo
118 Post contains links Ingo : Hi, I don't really see a difference between the following 2 photos. First accepted: http://www.airliners.net/photo/SkyEu...Airlines/Boeing-737-76N/142
119 Post contains links and images DerekF : I'm struggling to understand the "motive" rejection on this one. I have seen lots of similar images uploaded recently. It was rejected on appeal for m
120 JohnKrist : Judging from those lines it needs a little ccw rotation, and also there is a large dustspot on the upper edge of the image. Well, I kind of agree, bu
121 Post contains links TweetDriver : That dust spot had not been there on the pic uploaded but what did make you think that it needs rotation? I did a slightly bigger blowup of the lines
122 JohnKrist : If you look really close you'll see that the distance between the line and the doors edge grows at the bottom, it aint by much. Personally I think it
123 Post contains links Jetfreak : Hi, my photo was rejected for not being centered. Is it too high in frame? http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...ename=20081124_jetfreak_ur_gaj.jpg T
124 OSU_av8or : Jetfreak, I think it looks a tad high in the frame, but that's just me. nice shot.
125 Jetfreak : ok. thank you very much.
126 Post contains images DerekF : Anybody at all?? The quote box isn't showing the whole image - see reply 119. Is it the lampost, the heads in the foreground?
127 Walter2222 : IMHO, it would look better if the shot would show the people completely (i.e. standing on the ground), not only the heads... In this case, it looks l
128 Post contains links Sfb26180 : Rejected for Soft. Any advice? http://flickr.com/photos/zondar/3058271001/sizes/o/ Thanks on advance. Sebastian Fernandez
129 JohnKrist : Nice shot! applying 90%, 0.3 radius and 3 levels treshold in Unsharp Mask looks a tad better, if you have PS that is
130 Sfb26180 : Thanks John! I will try this in PS, and i will try uploading again. Regards Sebastian Fernandez Bielkiewicz
131 JohnKrist : Post the edited image in this thread so we can have a look
132 Post contains links Sfb26180 : There he goes: http://img139.imageshack.us/my.php?image=ecicreditfv9.jpg
133 DerekF : Thanks for your thoughts Walter - I guess the reason for the motive rejection will remain one of life's mysteries
134 Post contains links Radup70 : Posted by Radup70 (radu.paunescu@ieee.org) Hi, this is the first time I try to upload a picture on airliners.net. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r
135 JohnKrist : Motive=Cut off wingtip in a way that does not look good. Soft, yes it is soft, especially apparent on the titles and the edge between the sky and the
136 Post contains images Bustin : Hi: Today, I have this picture reject with double aircrfat pictures reason. Really, I have other picture of this aircraft (new reg. in airliners.net)
137 JohnKrist : Should not be a double rejection unless "This rejection might also occur if you have similar photos in the upload queue that are still awaiting final
138 Post contains links Flynavy : All things considered, not bad for a first attempt given the other first attempts I've run across here. As for the rejection reasons and you not unde
139 Flynavy : Did you appeal? This rejection seems to go against the established rules regarding doubles. I'd definitely appeal.
140 Post contains links NSMike : Rejected for color: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...eltaConnection_CRJ_N588SW_6813.jpg I don't see a color cast... and I just recalibrated my m
141 Flynavy : Michael, Looks a bit red to me.
142 Post contains images Aviamil : HI, Just had these rejected, any tips on trying to improve them gratefully received. Thanks Marc soft/blurry dark soft/motive
143 Post contains links Points : Hello, This chemtrail picture, correctable according to the screener, http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...in?filename=20081129_chemtrail.jpg is rej
144 Post contains images Bustin : Hi: I have appealed, but again rejected with double reason. Really, I don´t understand. I post the picture again Reject: Accepted: Thanks [Bustin [
145 Post contains links and images Flynavy : Sorry to hear that. These rejections are most definitely going against established rules regarding doubles. Quoting the IGRR: and... That, or a new s
146 Points : Even a nose shot on day 1 and a "side on" on day 2 are considered as double.
147 Flynavy : I take if you've received such a rejection? If that's the case it would appear not all screeners are on the same page on this particular category. I
148 Points : Yes. The soft/blurry rejection: Add sharpening. But i doubt it can be corrected. The soft/motive rejection: the stairs in front of the plane are not
149 Post contains links and images Walter2222 : I am not a screener, but I do have some experience with doubles... Recently, I also had a rejection for double because I had already two shots of tha
150 Flynavy : I understand that it basically comes down to the shot's merit. But I think some more specific guidelines not open to interpretation would benefit eve
151 Walter2222 : Hi Chris, I understand, but the more rigid the rules become, the less room there is for interpretation. In my case, I was very glad that the head scr
152 MarkyMc : Quality was also an issue with the rejected shot - "double" wasn't the sole reason for rejection here if I recall. "One shot taken during landing, an
153 Post contains images GASGH : I am trying to get two of my recent Phoenix photos accepted.... both of these were rejected for "Level" issues. I checked both.... thought I had it ri
154 Post contains links Nikog : Hi to all. I need help with this one http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...tions/big/20081129_IMG_8077_1b.jpg The photo rejected both for quality and
155 JohnKrist : Compression has nothing to do with image size. Compression means you didn't save the image in it's highest possible jpeg quality setting, in PS it's
156 Post contains images JohnKrist : As you can see it's far from level. I have added lines so you can see they are not level. If that was a pool table your pool balls would fly straight
157 Nikog : Thanks, i will check it
158 Post contains images Psych : I have a lot of sympathy here for Russell. Johnny - I could equally say from the same example below that you can see it is leveled correctly: I have m
159 GASGH : Hi Johnny, A.net is quite specific on the subject of "level ground" vs "level airplane". We are specifically told to level the terrain (if indeed it
160 Post contains links and images Flynavy : I recently encountered a rejection at the "other" site stating that this shot below was unlevel. They preferred the shot be level to the obviously do
161 Post contains links Whisperjet : Hi, I had this shot rejected for colour a while ago. Can somebody please give me a hint on how to improve it? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejec
162 JohnKrist : Well, you said you levelled with the bridge panels in the foreground, and my levels are made from them, I didn't check the background verticals at al
163 Post contains links Walter2222 : Hi there, Since most of my rejects are for soft, I am trying to "overdo" it a little bit. Now, I got two rejects for "oversharpened". Have I gone too
164 Post contains images Sjmurphy : Will this pass
165 Flynavy : No, and why are you posting it in the post-screening thread? Did you not take a look at the IGRR link we provided you?
166 Post contains links Neophyte : Hey guys, I need your help with two pictures. This picture was rejected with "colour" What do you think about? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/reje
167 Post contains links Walter2222 : Hi there, I had this one rejected for soft: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...J_20080627_IMG_2163_WVB_1200px.jpg It seems I can't find the correc
168 Post contains links Sfb26180 : Hello Now rejected for Quality and Oversharpen. I give up, i don´t have the necessary for A.net. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ions/big/2008
169 Post contains links Whisperjet : This one was rejected for colour. Any hints on how to improve it? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20081207_EC-JEI.jpg Thanks Stefan
170 Post contains links Haphadon : This one is rejected for quality and oversharppen: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...irforcewarplanekevinnov222008.jpeg This one is rejected for
171 Post contains links Walter2222 : I had this one rejected for motive: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...L_20060721_CRW_5788_WVB_1200px.jpg I thought it was an interesting close-up
172 Post contains links and images Radium15 : Hi All, "Contrast" rejection on this one: The question is - too low or too high? -- Pavel
173 Post contains links Walter2222 : Hi, I had this one rejected for dark: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...L_20080718_IMG_3284_WVB_1200px.jpg I know, the weather was very bad that
174 Lanas : Hi Walter I think that the background is too bright, compared to the foreground. That´s the main problem I believe. Any attempt on brightening up the
175 Post contains links Blackbird1 : Hi all! Just received these rejections: Soft: http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...1210_N925AU_SBD_20062710_2354a.jpg Looks sharp on my monitor, any
176 Whisperjet : Have to agree with you on the first shot. It's close to being oversharpened. The only areas which might need some ahrpening is the cockpit and maybe
177 Post contains images WILCO737 : Hello fellow a.net photographers, I need your help. I got this picture rejected for "level". The screener dropped me a personal note - which I do appr
178 JohnKrist : In my oppinion you should use the taxiway in the background as it seems to follow the tree line in the background. In that case it needs 0.61 CW rota
179 Blackbird1 : Would like to help if I can, WILCO737, but the image does not open on my monitor
180 WILCO737 : But I am not 100% perpendicular to the airplane or taxiway, isn't that a problem of perspective then? I tried it with 0.61 CW and then it looks like
181 JohnKrist : Hmmm, looking closer, that's a concrete fence or? I thought it looked like a taxiway... Well, a fence is not the best reference and I levelled using
182 WILCO737 : Yes, it is a concrete fence. That's my problem, I don't know what to take as reference. With 0.3 it looks as ok as with 0.0 rotation, IMO. Ah well. W
183 Post contains links DJdeRidder : I had this one rejected twice already for not being level: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ig/20081213_20080701_yyyy_9615.jpg I leveled it with
184 Ptrjong : Hi Dirk Jan, The immediate impression when opening the pic is that it needs counterclockwise rotation. Just make the central poles in the fence appro
185 Post contains links and images Cpd : I had this rejected: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...20081212_DSC_3017_A6EHA_081130.jpg quality blurry contrast colour distance common I'll do
186 Post contains links Firefly_cyhz : Hi got this one rejected for level...I used the vertical lines on the hangar to level it as I wasn't straight on to the hangar. Any idea what way I sh
187 Post contains links and images AndrewC75 : I really like this one... rejected for dark. Think there's any chance for it? I think were I to brighten it, the top would start to get grainy and blo
188 Post contains links and images Chuck9941 : rejected for colour and contrast. photo was taken as the sun was starting to set which would really increase the colors being shown. I actually reduc
189 NWA783 : Looks to me like it need a bit of CW rotation - Josh -
190 Post contains links Jobu7282 : http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...81217_BraggC130PresidentDetail.jpg http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...s/big/20081216_GWBushAggieland.jpg
191 Post contains links OSU_av8or : Jobu7282, both look great to me, but then again my current acceptance ratio is abysmal. What were they rejected for? And while I'm here (and since my
192 Post contains links WithaK : I had this one rejected for dark and grainy. The grain is no real problem and can easily be dealt with. The levels on the other hand I am having a lot
193 Jobu7282 : The first one for oversharpening and the other for Over Sharpening and I think Contrast
194 OSU_av8or : Jobu, The VH-60 might be a tad on the dark side, and maybe ever so-slightly oversharpened . I think I can see a bit of oversharpening on the C-130 aro
195 Jobu7282 : What ISO do you shot with? On the second photo I see oversharpeing on the Trailing edge of the wings. Also, when you crop are you selecting the DPI or
196 Post contains links and images Aznwings777 : This photo was rejected for level, but when I zoom in on the photo and line up the buldings with the edge of the frame, it looks level. Maybe it needs
197 OSU_av8or : Jobu, I shot both years ago with my C-740. Couldn't tell you the settings it has been so long. I get the oversharpening, but the quality reject has go
198 Post contains links and images HAL : This one was rejected for color and level. The color I can understand because the day was pretty hazy (volcanic vog). I can go in and correct for it,
199 JohnKrist : Looking at the lightposts/telephone poles they are all leaning to the right. Use them as reference for level. Do a replace colour on the whites on th
200 Post contains links Jorge1812 : Hi. This was rejected for motiv, what's wrong with the motiv? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0081219_D-ABUE_763_DE_141108_6.jpg Thanks! georg
201 Post contains links OSU_av8or : This was rejected for Quality and Soft. I can sharpen a bit for the soft, but what is up with the quality rejection? It's not grainy, is the jet exhau
202 Post contains links and images Gabriel3630 : Hello, Is that better? Rejection: Contrast and Soft. Old: New: Thanks. Gabriel Nogueira.
203 Post contains links CFTOA : Greetings Looking for some feedback on this particular picture.. http://img257.imageshack.us/img257/9459/45454te2.jpg is it too soft? Any help is appr
204 Jetfreak : now it's oversharpened . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ yes, it's too soft, especially in the wings area. sharpen it a bit and it will be perfect. Regard
205 Cpd : I honestly haven't got a clue - maybe they just don't think it works as a picture and just don't like it. If that's the case - then it's a throw away
206 Post contains links and images Jobu7282 : AznWings777 I agree that it need some COunter Clockwise rotation. It seems to be dipping to the right. This one got Re-Rejected for Color Any thoughts
207 Post contains links and images Chuck9941 : Hi, feedback please. I've been getting nothing but soft rejections lately after having a bout of oversharpened rejections. These were rejected for 'so
208 Post contains links and images KaiGywer : Level and info. The plane is no longer registered, so I didn't enter a registration, however, I did enter the cn.
209 Chuck9941 : Looks like CW rotation is needed. The verticals look off.
210 Post contains links OSU_av8or : This was previously rejected for Dark, which I corrected and resubmitted. Now a BLURRY rejection. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r.../big/20081223
211 Post contains links and images Plainplane : Hello, today I had a photo rejected for quality, soft, and dark. Quality I believe shouldn't be an issue since this was a RAW image taken at ISO 80 wi
212 OSU_av8or : Plainplane, Nice photo. I love how well you can see the cockpit. As for the rejections, I honestly don't know. It looks like a perfectly acceptable pi
213 Plainplane : Thanks! I am not good at editing at all. In fact the photo I have in the database was edited by a good friend. I originally thought I would get a moti
214 Post contains links Walter2222 : Hi All, This one rejected for quality and soft: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...W_20080409_IMG_0574_WVB_1200px.jpg Can it be improved (quality
215 Post contains links CFTOA : I have resharpened this image: http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/8208/gceo15fe8.jpg Is it acceptable now? or does it require less sharpening? Cheers
216 Plainplane : I submitted an appeal for my photo.
217 OSU_av8or : CFTOA Looks like a bit of oversharpening on some of the lettering to me, so just a touch less in some areas.
218 Post contains links Neophyte : Hey folks, I need help with this picture: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ons/big/20081227_HAM91008EPIAG.jpg rejected for "contrast" any advice
219 Plainplane : Appeal rejected for same 3 reasons as noted prior.
220 OSU_av8or : If you don't want to give up on that shot I'd be happy to help you with some editing. If you are interested, please email me. Anyway, great shot, tha
221 Post contains links and images 757MDE : Hello! This one has been rejected over color. I know it has a strong blue cast (and also needs sharpening, and maybe other things that you may suggest
222 Post contains links Cptkilroy : http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...tions/big/20081223_CY_N518FX_1.jpg rejected for soft. attempted fix. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/rea
223 Post contains links San747 : I just had 6 rejections... that's always tough, but I did notice each one had "grainy," which frankly baffles me. Can anyone point out where the exces
224 Post contains links and images DiamondFlyer : Two rejections that I've got questions about here. First, I got a centered rejection. I assume that I should move the aircraft slightly up in the fram
225 OSU_av8or : DiamondFlyer: I played with the contrast a bit and got a bit of a lighter shot on the Lear. Work with it some and repost here or the prescreening thre
226 Post contains links and images DiamondFlyer : I played around with it, with the help of my brother, who has a few shots on here. And here is what we came up with. Any better? I sent it in, but I'm
227 OSU_av8or : Much better.
228 Plainplane : Yes, that is very kind of you. How may I email you?
229 OSU_av8or : click the username and then "contact."
230 Plainplane : Ok I have sent you an email.
231 Post contains links and images Jogales : This one was rejected for color and contrast. I recently recalibrated my monitor, so I'm wondering if that might have something to do with it. Josh
232 Fergulmcc : Only slightly, bit harsh on the rejection for that!! Nope, it looks off to me as well, rejection is correct. The plane looks off. I think with that s
233 Post contains links and images Jawed : This image received a "color" rejection: "There is a problem with the colours in these photo(s). This may be due to one of two reasons: either there i
234 Fergulmcc : Did you use color saturation when processing? The reds and purple look over saturated a bit. Use you eye droper in hue/saturation and click on the co
235 Post contains images Psych : Hello All. I had the following photo rejected for being oversharpened (click on photo to see it at full size, otherwise it will look wrong). That reje
236 Post contains links MarcelSchmidt : Hey folks, I got following picture rejected for "motiv": http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...hrztjztrsTXLam03102007042.jpeg.jpg My question for sur
237 Fergulmcc : For me . . . . and this is just my opinion, I don't like the tail being cut off, and that's what would make me feel you got the motive rejection, cou
238 Post contains links Samuel32 : I (almost) give up! This was rejected for level a few days ago: http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/7639/img1452j5005jl5.jpg So correct it using the ve
239 Post contains images Fergulmcc : In this case the screener would be right. If you have taken this shot with a 10mm lens then you cannot rely on the verticals as they will be distorte
240 DiamondFlyer : Alright, so it got brightened up, but now its soft. This must be some sort of never ending game. I'll go back and sharpen it up a bit, I suppose. -Di
241 Walter2222 : Hi Paul, I cannot open/see the larger picture (not on my laptop, nor on my editing screen...). I am not sure whether it is just me or is it a bug tha
242 Fergulmcc : Have a look at m y profile, its in there. fergul
243 Walter2222 : Hi Fergul, I tried... but I have the same problems (bug?): I cannot open the photo (it shows as a square black dot...), I can open the photo of all y
244 Post contains links Fergulmcc : send me an e-mail at fergul100@yahoo.ie and I'll send it onto you, sorry for the hassel. Have a good one too! Fergul [sun}
245 Walter2222 : Hi Fergul, no need to send the photo to me, I think it would be better for Sam (reply 238), I think we share the same opinion about the levelling Now
246 Post contains links Cptkilroy : http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...tions/big/20081230_CY_N403LM_2.jpg rejected for dark, as well as info, i got the info rejection taken care of,
247 Post contains links McG1967 : http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ons/big/20090101_IMG_3821-Edit.jpg Level and Grainy rejection. I am currently only able to view on a laptop whi
248 Post contains links Air4cfun : Fresh from the reject pile. Reject Reason: Dark. If I lighten it up the highlights on the F-16 washout some of the detail of the panels. How do I work
249 MarcelSchmidt : Hey Fergul, thanks for your input! That might be possible. But that's the sole reason? Seriously I can't get it. I mean there are people who might li
250 Post contains links and images WithaK : I had this shot rejected for oversharpened but are having problems spotting where this occurs. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers Kris
251 Psych : Hi Kris. I have been disappointed not to receive any feedback on my request for clarification about my oversharpening issue on the Monarch photo 15 po
252 Fergulmcc : You're welcome! With the exception of a few, there are a number of people who I have commented on their rejections and pre-screening shots who haven'
253 WithaK : Thanks for pointing that out for me Paul. I've done another edit and uploaded it. Here's to hoping all goes well. Kris
254 Post contains links and images Varig767 : Hello all, I was a bit disappointed to receive the following picture rejected, as it is in my opinion one of the best pictures I ever shot. It was rej
255 Post contains links and images DiamondFlyer : This one has been rejected a couple of times. First for grainy, soft and dark, then for just dark, and the third time was rejected for soft and dark.
256 Fergulmcc : Have a look at the other three images, compare them to yours and you will see the difference. Based on them the rejection would be right, harsh as it
257 Post contains links and images Varig767 : Hello Fergul, Thank you for your reply. I opened the rejected picture in PS and I think I corrected the colour issue. But the center-rejection??? I ca
258 Post contains links and images TupolevTu154 : I cringe every time I get a rejection, and I've just had four out of 6 so far today mostly due to contrast and colour (It was hazy) Here's one in part
259 Post contains links and images EZEIZA : Rejected for Soft, Level and contrast No biggie there for soft, but I would appreciate explanations on the contrast (the whites are not whites apparen
260 Fergulmcc : Looks better but it is too high in the frame! In PS, click on Image-adjustments-hue/saturation, select reds from the drop down menu use your eye drop
261 TupolevTu154 : I'm going to be totally honest and say that In the two years I have been uploading here I have never used that method before. It solves all my proble
262 Walter2222 : Hi Paul, I can understand your disappointment, but maybe it has to do something with the fact that others - like me - cannot open the picture (as I p
263 Post contains links and images Plainplane : Here is an unusual rejection from a few months ago. First it was rejected for soft, then I reuploaded it at a later date and it was rejected for sharp
264 Fergulmcc : You're welcome, but use it lightly, You only need fine adjustments to get your photo right, the reverse can also be done in that if its lacking in co
265 Fergulmcc : I'm surprised it didn't get rejected for not level as well. Fergul
266 TupolevTu154 : I usually +10 saturation on photos as PS tends to save photos more under-saturated than I have edited them anyway. Thanks again
267 Fergulmcc : No Hassel! Take care Fergul
268 Post contains links and images EZEIZA : Ok, so I've been doing some homework on the shot, and this is what I came up with. And the more I look into it, the more convinced I am that the leve
269 Fergulmcc : Personally i didn't think there was anything much wrong with the original, if anything, lacking a small bit in color saturation. Fergul
270 EZEIZA : Thanks Fergul problem is, I think I'm more frustrated now than before. Three rejecjtion reasons, even after the appeal, but the pic seems fine (or at
271 Plainplane : Well, it didn't. Even more confusing now.
272 ThierryD : needs ccw rotation to have the thrust levers horizontal. Thierry
273 Post contains links and images DeltaAVL : Alright ya'll, it's been a while and I've got a few. Any advice is appreciated - I've been out of the game for about a year and am a bit rusty. #1. Re
274 Fergulmcc : Soft it aint! Maybe your depth of field is the issue. When shooting so close you need a high Aperture to ensure most is in focus, around f16 or above
275 Post contains links Moderators : Part 3 is open now, can be found here: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...tion_photography/read.main/324577/ Thanks
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...
Post- Screening Thread #1 (help after rejection) posted Fri Sep 12 2008 01:11:15 by WILCO737
Pre- Screening Thread No. 4 posted Sun Sep 7 2008 05:27:50 by WILCO737
Pre-Screening Thread No. 3 posted Mon Aug 25 2008 22:29:52 by Flynavy
Post-screening Questions posted Fri Jul 18 2008 22:11:21 by Qswags
The Ultimate Pre-Screen Thread Part I posted Mon Mar 3 2008 19:19:04 by Jorge1812
Another Pre-screening Thread.. posted Sun Oct 15 2006 20:28:43 by SA006
Post Screening Advice posted Sun Oct 1 2006 15:57:04 by Lumix
Pre- And Post-screening Help Requested posted Thu Aug 10 2006 22:55:15 by Walter2222
Rejection Thread, Part Mmlvi posted Sun Apr 24 2005 00:02:30 by Senorcarnival
Post Your Latest Photo Part 2 posted Fri Apr 7 2006 17:36:36 by NIKV69