KingWide From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2001, 838 posts, RR: 18
Reply 4, posted (13 years 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2195 times:
Hmmm. They look perhaps a bit the wrong side of sharp to me. Perhaps a bit of extra USM would do it. I think it's a bit harsh. Perhaps you were caught in the same rejecton blizzard that led to this one of mine being rejected
Fly-K From Germany, joined May 2000, 3171 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (13 years 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2193 times:
A lot of new photos are being added today, who's handling them, Johan or the screeners?
I'm confused again, 16 of my photos passed the first screening this morning, but I would have thought more photos are added directly nowadays.
Peter, on your photos, as Wietse suggested, sharpness on the first one, and overall, they probably didn't treat them as favourably because of the low sun.
Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been...
EGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 34
Reply 12, posted (13 years 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2089 times:
Lewis - As far as I know, you don't need any permission. I had a picture accepted with many (some visible) people in it, and was given a (stupid) warning saying something like: 'Airliners.net needs permission to show people in photos, and photographs like these would normally get rejected, but you do not need permission for this type of shot!!', I mean, wtF!
I agree that they need a little bit of USM, apart from that they are fine, especially the third