Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Problems With Getting Photos Accepted On A.net  
User currently onlineItay747 From Israel, joined Aug 2012, 41 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5728 times:

Hello,
A week ago I got all my photos on A.net queue rejected (mainly for dark, low contrast, quality, soft).
I think I am having a problem in editing properly. All photos before editing are great and well exposed.
Also, I am using CS5 photoshop and I have installed a noise reducing patch called: "Noise Ninja". It might be the problem as it's getting the photo less noisy, but soft too. Does anyone know of a good way to reduce noise?

Cheers,

Itay

39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3884 posts, RR: 19
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 5725 times:

You don't need noise reduction on a well exposed 100 ISO image.

Peter 



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2816 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5704 times:

Itay,

It might be worth posting a photo or two so we can take a look at give you some help? It's difficult to help without knowing where you are going wrong.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently onlinemjgbtv From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 722 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 5665 times:

Quoting Itay747 (Thread starter):
rejected (mainly for dark, low contrast, quality, soft)
Quoting Itay747 (Thread starter):
All photos before editing are great and well exposed

Airliners.net standards are high/specific, so it does not take much to get rejections for any of the above reasons. I (and no doubt others) have had photos that looked fine to me/us get rejected for one or more of these.

You said that you had rejections, so you can post links to them for people to take a look at. I believe that they will not be deleted for at least a couple of weeks. Please note that there is a separate forum intended for this.

Marty


User currently offlinespotterke From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5625 times:

I always wondered why they are so picky here..a good picture does not necessarily have to be razor sharp and if a runway is a bit of level...what is so important about it..Nothing imo

User currently onlinebaldwin471 From UK - England, joined Mar 2012, 259 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 5464 times:

Quoting spotterke (Reply 4):

The most frustrating thing is when i get a photo rejected then see photos that are way less detailed and have far less quality that are accepted. Very odd.


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31
Reply 6, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5408 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting baldwin471 (Reply 5):
The most frustrating thing is when i get a photo rejected then see photos that are way less detailed and have far less quality that are accepted.

Really? Please post one of your rejected images that you feel has far more quality than some comparable accepted images. I would be curious to see this, as I'm sure would others. I can post some of your recent ones if you would like.


User currently offlineFYODOR From Russia, joined May 2005, 653 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5339 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 6):
I can post some of your recent ones if you would like.

Could you post mine? Without border rejection indeed - it is obvious, my mistake.  

Regards,

Fyodor


User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2816 posts, RR: 2
Reply 8, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 5335 times:



Quoting baldwin471 (Reply 5):
The most frustrating thing is when i get a photo rejected then see photos that are way less detailed and have far less quality that are accepted. Very odd.
Quoting dlowwa (Reply 6):
Really? Please post one of your rejected images that you feel has far more quality than some comparable accepted images. I would be curious to see this, as I'm sure would others. I can post some of your recent ones if you would like.

baldwin471 isn't the only one who is seeing this regularly, it's something some of us have been banging on about for a while but it seems to be brushed under the carpet when raised. You've been cc'd in to emails recently when a few of us have raised questions about the quality of some acceptances and consistency in screening, some of which were screener photos but it seems these are being ignored. Does the silence speak volumes?

Darren

[Edited 2013-02-20 12:06:53]


Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 5313 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 6):
Really? Please post one of your rejected images that you feel has far more quality than some comparable accepted images

I've been asked this very same question but, as Darren will testify, whenever I've linked below-par images (which incidently I never have to look hard for) I never hear anything back. Either that or I get told, "They're borderline", when clearly that's being polite.

I can't speak for Baldwin471's images but there are certainly many in the database inferior to ones I've had rejected lately. With all due respect it's pointless prompting the community to bring to light questionable images if no action is going to be taken.

I'm currently banned for re-uploading an image without changing it. Fact is there's an almost identical image in the database which suffers slightly more from the 'issue' mine supposedly suffers from. Despite explaining this in the 'comments' section - and even linking the other image - someone still decided to issue the ban. Who loses? Certainly not me. I'm still taking photos by the bucketload.

It's simple though: if people feel they cannot trust the screening process, re-uploading without changing will become more and more common. Truth be told I've done it several times lately, with a good rate of success, and I know many others have too. What does this say about the accuracy of the whole process? Can we 'ban' A.net from the www every time one that was previously rejected slips in second time around? Or does this system only work in one direction?

On a related topic, I have noticed quite a few heat-hazed images make it in lately. I'd have thought heat-haze was far more detrimental than a bit of noise/grain but clearly not.

Finally, it's not all bad, as there is still some very down-to-earth, common sense screening going on. I just think we need to see more of it more often.

Karl


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31
Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5253 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FYODOR (Reply 7):
Could you post mine?

Are you unable to post the links yourself? If so, please start a thread in the Feedback forum, and I will be happy to link to any image you need.

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 8):
baldwin471 isn't the only one who is seeing this regularly,

I think you fail to see the point in this case. His images are quite below what would be considered acceptable, and is a good case to illustrate people being unable to look at their own images objectively.

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 8):
You've been cc'd in to emails recently when a few of us have raised questions about the quality of some acceptances and consistency in screening, some of which were screener photos but it seems these are being ignored.

I have seen only a single email from you, and not received any correspondance from anyone else raising the topic. I'm sorry a couple of you are experiencing discontent about which images are accepted and which are not. Unfortunately, as has been stated numerous times, this is a human process where although we try our best, from time to time mistakes are made, be they actual mistakes, or as above, simply perceived as such.


User currently offlineFYODOR From Russia, joined May 2005, 653 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5247 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 10):
Are you unable to post the links yourself?

Sure I can. But it can be quite a long list - you know. In last autumn once I remember I got 19 rejections from 19 uploads. Could it be that experienced photog made 19 mistakes one by one? I might also kind of photogs whose images are quite below what would be considered acceptable. At least my almost 10 years experience here seems doesn't help me.   Thats why I've asked.

Regards,

Fyodor


User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2816 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5229 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 10):
I think you fail to see the point in this case. His images are quite below what would be considered acceptable, and is a good case to illustrate people being unable to look at their own images objectively.

I do see the point but was speaking more generally than about any particular photo. My acceptance ratio is normally quite high so it's not my photos I'm particualy concerned with, it's when looking at others and helping with other members where I see it.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 10):
Unfortunately, as has been stated numerous times, this is a human process where although we try our best, from time to time mistakes are made, be they actual mistakes, or as above, simply perceived as such.

That is accepted, I don't think any of us would disagree with you. However it's not an odd mistake we're seeing these days, there are numerous acceptances and even batches of photos, like the ones I pointed out and you yourself agreed were noisy in your email. Mistakes happen, that's accepted, but isn't the screening process supposed to minimise that by having more than one screener look at photos if there is any doubt? It's a tough job you all do and is very much appreciated, but there just seems some inconsistency creeping in.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31
Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5217 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FYODOR (Reply 11):
Could it be that experienced photog made 19 mistakes one by one?

I think the problem may be the fact that you are considering a rejection a mistake. An image is rejected simply because it has been judged not to meet one of the multiple criteria there is for this website. Again, I go back to my earlier point: if you are able to divorce yourself from your own images and look at things a little more objectively, you will see that most rejections were warranted, based on the aforementioned set of criteria.

Looking at your recent rejections, I see a few that if you had taken into account a.net's criteria, you would not at all have been surprised by their rejection. If you do have questions or concerns about a specific rejection, please feel free to make use of the Feedback forum.

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 12):
I do see the point but was speaking more generally than about any particular photo. My acceptance ratio is normally quite high so it's not my photos I'm particualy concerned with, it's when looking at others and helping with other members where I see it.

Again, that goes back to my point. You seem to have a handle on what is acceptable for here, and are able to look at your own images objectively. Many others are not able to do this, and for that reason we sometimes hear complaints such as Alex has made above. If people were able to a) accept a.net has specific (yes, sometimes picky) requirements, and b) look at their own images objectively, the vast majority of resentment over rejections would likely disappear.


User currently offlinedendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1648 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 5159 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 9):
I'm currently banned for re-uploading an image without changing it. Fact is there's an almost identical image in the database which suffers slightly more from the 'issue' mine supposedly suffers from.

Karl.
As you admit, you were banned for re-uploading that image and we do not ban the first time that someone does that. You were trying to make a point about the colour (which is admittedly similar to an already accepted Screener image) but you did not even attempt to correct the fact that it was unlevel. The Screener actually had his rejected for that the first time too but corrected and got it accepted at a second attempt. If you had corrected the level you would have been able to say exactly the same, your treatment would have been identical to that of the Screener. You are making it sound otherwise with a half-story.

Share the image (or give your permission for me to do so) and see who amongst your peers thinks it is level !

If you repeatedly re-upload you are simply wasting Screeners time, we are volunteers in the same way that you are, us by screening, you by uploading and if you are caught repeatedly re-uploading you can expect repeated and increasingly long bans!

Quoting baldwin471 (Reply 5):
The most frustrating thing is when i get a photo rejected then see photos that are way less detailed and have far less quality that are accepted. Very odd.

Alex
I did not recognise your name but have looked and am happy to take a few of your rejections and discuss them here, with your permission, rather than the feedback forum and leave others to find ones that are worse that were accepted. I actually rejected the last one and am perfectly happy for my screening to be put to the test here if you are willing to share the image. Just say the word and I will share your last few rejections for open discussion.

All images fit into two categories the easy to screen and the more difficult to screen. Most of Karl and Darren's fit into the easy to screen, a high proportion are Instantly added and so far all of Alex's have been easy to screen too.

Alex, over to you......

Mick Bajcar


User currently offlineviv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 15, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 5099 times:

Over the years many of my uploads have been rejected. All of these rejections were correctly rejected. This simply means that they failed to comply with one or more of the acceptance criteria. Some of them are among my favourite photos.


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlinespotterke From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5067 times:

Quoting viv (Reply 15):
Over the years many of my uploads have been rejected. All of these rejections were correctly rejected. This simply means that they failed to comply with one or more of the acceptance criteria. Some of them are among my favourite photos.

Ok how can you say that these were rejected correctly..? Didn't you had pictures that you have thought of they were good/perfect and still got rejected.Be honest,who can say that a certain picture is good enough for the database...no one !
These are opinions that differ from everyone. I can think it is ok,someone else thinks it's not ok and a 3th person says again it's ok. material plays also a role here.A picture can be very good on my screen,but looks like sh*t on the screeners monitor. i had a lot of pictures rejected of what i thought they were good(sharp,level motive,etc) edited by the rules and still got rejected..Very frustrating.Who is the error then? I still think they are far too picky here...
And don't start now with saying don't upload any pictures then..


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9395 posts, RR: 27
Reply 17, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5045 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting spotterke (Reply 16):
Ok how can you say that these were rejected correctly..?

What do you mean, how can you say that? I can say that most of my rejections were correctly rejected as well. I look at my rejections, and for the most part, I can see why they were rejected.

Quoting spotterke (Reply 16):
material plays also a role here.A picture can be very good on my screen,but looks like sh*t on the screeners monitor. i had a lot of pictures rejected of what i thought they were good(sharp,level motive,etc) edited by the rules and still got rejected..Very frustrating.Who is the error then?

It's a learning process - you learn how to edit on your screen so that they will pass A.net screening. It probably took 100+ acceptances before I felt I had a decent idea of how the images should look on my screen to pass screening.

Quoting spotterke (Reply 16):
I still think they are far too picky here...
And don't start now with saying don't upload any pictures then..

OK, I won't say don't upload. But at the same time, I don't really understand why people get so pissed off over the screening here. There are plenty of other places to upload if you don't want to deal with the standards here. I'm not saying the screening standards are good or bad, but they are what they are. As others have said, it's the house style.

Quoting viv (Reply 15):
This simply means that they failed to comply with one or more of the acceptance criteria. Some of them are among my favourite photos.

  



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinespotterke From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5029 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 17):
Quoting spotterke (Reply 16):Ok how can you say that these were rejected correctly..?
What do you mean, how can you say that? I can say that most of my rejections were correctly rejected as well. I look at my rejections, and for the most part, I can see why they were rejected.

Quoting spotterke (Reply 16):material plays also a role here.A picture can be very good on my screen,but looks like sh*t on the screeners monitor. i had a lot of pictures rejected of what i thought they were good(sharp,level motive,etc) edited by the rules and still got rejected..Very frustrating.Who is the error then?
It's a learning process - you learn how to edit on your screen so that they will pass A.net screening. It probably took 100+ acceptances before I felt I had a decent idea of how the images should look on my screen to pass screening.

Quoting spotterke (Reply 16):I still think they are far too picky here...
And don't start now with saying don't upload any pictures then..
OK, I won't say don't upload. But at the same time, I don't really understand why people get so pissed off over the screening here. There are plenty of other places to upload if you don't want to deal with the standards here. I'm not saying the screening standards are good or bad, but they are what they are. As others have said, it's the house style.

Quoting viv (Reply 15):This simply means that they failed to comply with one or more of the acceptance criteria. Some of them are among my favourite photos.

What i want to say is that i don't understand the need to be so picky. For example why/who bother(s) if a runway is a half degree off level...I mean who cares about such minor detais. When i look at pictures,it's about the planes to me and i realy don't care about the background of the picture.And there are a lot more of such needless rules.. It is a hobby for the most of us,so keep it a hobby and not a competition..


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 9395 posts, RR: 27
Reply 19, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5018 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting spotterke (Reply 18):
What i want to say is that i don't understand the need to be so picky. For example why/who bother(s) if a runway is a half degree off level...I mean who cares about such minor detais.

Me. I much prefer seeing photos that look/feel level than ones that don't. Especially my own photos - I'm a huge critic of my own photographic skills. And while I certainly don't define myself as a photographer by A.net's standards, this website has certainly helped me quite a bit.

Quoting spotterke (Reply 18):
When i look at pictures,it's about the planes to me and i realy don't care about the background of the picture.

A good background can make or break a photo for me. If I see two standard side-on shots of, say, an AA 738, and one has a stunning background and one doesn't, I know which one I'll look at.

Quoting spotterke (Reply 18):
It is a hobby for the most of us,so keep it a hobby and not a competition..

Why would you let a website dictate a hobby for you? That's your business, not A.net's. This is a hobby for me too, and part of that hobby is uploading here. Nothing really competitive about it.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinedendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1648 posts, RR: 62
Reply 20, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5016 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 8):
baldwin471 isn't the only one who is seeing this regularly, it's something some of us have been banging on about for a while but it seems to be brushed under the carpet when raised. You've been cc'd in to emails recently when a few of us have raised questions about the quality of some acceptances and consistency in screening, some of which were screener photos but it seems these are being ignored. Does the silence speak volumes?

Well, I think that sometimes silence does speak volumes but it is good to see that you are CCing Baldwin741 as he has complained of worse images accepted than his rejected ones. I challenge anyone to find worse than these, four of his recent rejections - there are more of a similar standard. My caveat is taken in the last 10 years, accepted in the last five.
I have invited him to agree to the images being shown here but he has not replied either here or to the personal e-mail. However his comments are being taken at face value as criticism of the team and I am now sharing them for you to make your own minds up - his criticism should not be accepted at face value without us being able to respond effectively.



Mick Bajcar


User currently offlinespotterke From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5011 times:

Quoting dendrobatid (Reply 20):
Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 8):baldwin471 isn't the only one who is seeing this regularly, it's something some of us have been banging on about for a while but it seems to be brushed under the carpet when raised. You've been cc'd in to emails recently when a few of us have raised questions about the quality of some acceptances and consistency in screening, some of which were screener photos but it seems these are being ignored. Does the silence speak volumes?
Well, I think that sometimes silence does speak volumes but it is good to see that you are CCing Baldwin741 as he has complained of worse images accepted than his rejected ones. I challenge anyone to find worse than these, four of his recent rejections - there are more of a similar standard. My caveat is taken in the last 10 years, accepted in the last five.
I have invited him to agree to the images being shown here but he has not replied either here or to the personal e-mail. However his comments are being taken at face value as criticism of the team and I am now sharing them for you to make your own minds up - his criticism should not be accepted at face value without us being able to respond effectively.

Wow these look like they were taken with a cell phone...and that's accepted?? Well it looks like there is a lot of nepotism done to me


User currently offlinedendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1648 posts, RR: 62
Reply 22, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5009 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting spotterke (Reply 21):
Wow these look like they were taken with a cell phone...and that's accepted?? Well it looks like there is a lot of nepotism done to me

No, none of those were accepted. They are rejections but he said that worse quality ones had been accepted. Of course, that is not the case but his allegation could not be left unchallenged which is why they have been posted, a rare decision to do so.

Mick.


User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 713 posts, RR: 16
Reply 23, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4999 times:

What a lot of people don't understand is that looking at pictures requires practice and skill just as taking pictures does.

You need to look carefully at thousands of pics before you really begin to understand what makes or breaks a picture. I really believe that many people who complain about pics being rejected which are "just as good" as those in the database simply don't see the difference - they haven't developed that 'critical faculty'.

To make an analogy, there are very few people who "get" modern jazz at first listen - you need to educate your ear. To look at photos critically, you need to educate your eyes.

Of course, at the other extreme, for people who look at 100s or 1000s of images a day, even the smallest imperfections stick out like a sore thumb (like a bum note to an experienced musician).

Is A.net too critical? Well that's another matter - I personally don't agree with some of their acceptance criteria and therefore lose some interesting shots. But it is what it is - if you want to play here, then that comes with the territory.

And of course there's a sort of paradox - people want to upload here rather than elsewhere, and complain it's too hard, completely missing the point that it's these very standards (like them or not) which has made A.net the first choice for many contributors.

The examples Mick has posted are good examples - I'm sorry, these are snapshots, not photographs. And the best photographers in the world start here. What makes a photographer is a willingness to find the flaws in the picture, learn from that and then apply what you learned next time you go out. It never ends. I'm still learning after over 30 years of shooting ... in fact, the whole "next time ..." thing has probably been what has kept me so engrossed in photography all these years.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2816 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (1 year 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4901 times:

Quoting dendrobatid (Reply 20):
Well, I think that sometimes silence does speak volumes but it is good to see that you are CCing Baldwin741 as he has complained of worse images accepted than his rejected ones.


Mick,

Baldwin741 hasn't been part of our discussions, it's Dana that has been cc'd, not other members. I agreed with Baldwin741's statement above, I wasn't agreeing anything about his photos as none have been shared until you provided them. Apologies if you got that impression, but it's a few of the MAN photographers that have been discussing things and raising issues with Dana as we seem to be seeing more and more inconsistent application of the acceptance criteria and some puzzling acceptance when you consider some that have been rejected with less noise or lower contrast for example. Since Dana asked for examples, we've provided some. Many of us have emailed the general screening address and rarely, if ever receive a reply. We appreciate the work load you guys have and that it's done in your spare time and odd mistakes are bound to happen, but when you don't get a reply to anything and you see more than just the odd acdeptance or rejection that is puzzling, it starts to make you wonder. Dana is very helpful in that way and is why a lot of discussion goes his way, simply because he's open to discussion. I've said my peace behind the scenes and thank Dana for taking the time for an open and frank discussion about it.

Darren

[Edited 2013-02-22 00:26:42]


Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
25 viv : Nope. But then, I have never shot a photo that I considered to be perfect.
26 derekf : So then, you've uploaded photos that you knew would be rejected? I would have thought that most of us upload thinking they are all good enough - if yo
27 dazbo5 : Mick, Can I just add to my post previously as I was limited by time this morning, work always gets in the way! Having seen examples of Baldwin741's p
28 JakTrax : I was sure to include this line, and I'm glad I did! Alex, please don't take offence when I say this but if you view your images as equal to or bette
29 ckw : Well for me the perfect photo (not that I've taken one!) is a picture which cannot be changed in any way without diminishing it. To use Karl's exampl
30 Post contains images dendrobatid : Perfection in photography to me can be summed up in two words (nothing to do with aviation) Ansel Adams Though Stephen Dalton works well too I have a
31 ckw : Ansel Adams is a great example - and follows on from Karl's comment nicely (sorry Karl, not meaning to pic on you, but your comment fits so well). If
32 Post contains links and images JakTrax : I'm certainly not going to compare my ability to that of Ansel Adams (whoever he is!) but this sounds a lot like myself. The other day I shot an airc
33 Post contains images mjgbtv : A photo rejection thread 'degrading' into a positive discussion of artistry. What are things coming to??
34 Garyck : I was just thinking the same. Perhaps time to be locked, or get back on track.
35 JakTrax : I think mjgbtv meant that it was actually a pleasant surprise. Nothing to gain by locking this one.
36 Post contains images mjgbtv :
37 Post contains images FYODOR : Karl, you are too crtitcal to the one of the best shots from SXM in local collection
38 Post contains images FYODOR : Dana, we could a bit play with words indeed to be more polite, but if you do your job on standards and you are not fill the standards it mean you've
39 bravosierra : What happened with the screening process if my colleagues suffering starting from mid 2011 from the fall in the acceptance rate from 95-90% to 30-40%?
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...
Need Help On Getting Photos Accepted posted Sun Oct 31 2004 00:32:57 by SmithAir747
My First Accepted Photos Ever On A.NET! posted Thu Oct 10 2002 09:38:11 by Omegous
Need Help Getting Photos Accepted posted Fri Jun 11 2004 21:24:35 by SuperHornet
Getting Photos Accepted. posted Fri Dec 5 2003 03:33:03 by Fireguy274
Compression Problems With Saving Photos posted Sun Jun 9 2002 23:40:09 by CcrlR
Grainy Photos On A.net posted Thu Sep 18 2008 00:27:58 by 772LR
Problems With Lightroom On IMac.... posted Mon May 7 2007 00:03:10 by Beechcraft
Nearly Identical Photos On A.NET posted Wed Jan 3 2007 17:29:33 by MSNYX
Photos On A.net, Taken Through Window. posted Thu Feb 23 2006 19:45:29 by Thom@s
My First Accepted Photo On A.net! posted Fri Feb 17 2006 01:17:31 by TUNisia