jaypack44 From United States of America, joined Dec 2012, 54 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2379 times:
Hi all, I recently had this photo rejected for "motive," because the fence was too distracting, and a tighter crop was recommended.
While I disagree, I can see how it could be perceived as such. However, the re-cropping recommendation got me wondering; would something with an aspect ratio other than 3:2 or 4:3 be acceptable, i.e. 16:9 (which I think would be a better crop for this photo, anyway)? The rejection guidelines are very clear about the fact that 3:2 and 4:3 are acceptable, but I find them a bit confusing with regard to other aspect ratios. To add to the confusion, I'm pretty sure I've seen 16:9 images here before, but of course, I'm unable to find any of them to illustrate my point, at the moment.
So, to make my question simple, would a 16:9 cropped image be acceptable, and if so, would doing so make the above image acceptable?
acontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 30
Reply 3, posted (1 year 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 2313 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
I haven't seen this one before, but you could try cropping either just after the second engine on the left side, or even after the first one, that will make the fence look much less obtrusive - if the quality is there in the original
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
LH526 From Germany, joined Aug 2000, 2380 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (1 year 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2182 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW FORUM MODERATOR
I have tons of old 6x6 and 6x7,5 MF-slides of the B707 and DC-8 era and got them rejected some years back for "aspect ratio" ... I really wonder why A.net is not more tolerable here and sticks to these hard rules instead of deciding on a case-by-case basis.
Trittst im Morgenrot daher, seh ich dich im Strahlenmeer ...