Jalap From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 355 posts, RR: 1 Posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2410 times:
I'm a bit disappointed with 2 rejections today (slidescans, like always in my cases):
The first is a good old centering rejection, I was afraid this might happen but was hoping to get it through, partly because there only are 4 shots in the DB now. I just like the shot a lot, it's one of the best liveries on a plane ever and let's face it, the sky here is more interesting than the grass:
I'm tempted to appeal but it'll be hopeless with the current standards, I'm afraid. Anybody has an opinion on this?
The second had 3 rejection reasons: overexposed and contrast I can understand, I've had a hard time getting this scan - which was in fact a bit underexposed - more or less okay. I agree that I settled with this result too soon. But there also was a quality rejection and that's a bit surprising for it seems to imply that it's just not an interesting composition while I think that this shot kind of honours the typical nose of the DC8 in a nice way:
Worth a new try to get a better edit or should I just not bother with this one anymore?
Any opinions or advice would be very much appreciated
Whisperjet From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 569 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2398 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
it was me who rejected the two pictures.
I really like the first picture, the plane has a great livery and the quality is acceptable too. However, the plane is much too low in frame to be accepted here. We highly appreciate your efforts to show us some old stuff but we also have to keep in mind that screening must be as consistent as possible.
As you seem to understand why the DC-8 was rejected for contrast and overexposed I will explain why I also added quality as a third rejection. The motive of you picture is fine, the nose of the DC-8 looks special and that justifies such a front view. The quality rejection has nothing to to with the composition or the motive, I just added it because I think that the overall quality of the scan is not good enough. The quality might be good enough for a sideon of a nowadays rare plane/airline but a closeup of a DC-8 similar to yours is not too hard to get even today.
Jalap From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 355 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2362 times:
Thank you very much for this reply Stefan, it's highly appreciated!
Now I've got hopes again for the DC8 and I'll try to get a better edit done soon, although it'll be very hard to turn this good-looking slide into a good-looking digital image because of the light conditions... .
For the Fokker, well, it'll look good on myaviation, I could attempt to do a different crop like I've succesfully done with several other shots but you just can't do that every time you have a centering issue and still state everywhere that you hate shots with parts of the plane cut off