Mirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3120 posts, RR: 16 Posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 1 day ago) and read 2489 times:
"Don't forget to visit our Aviation Photography forum, where you can discuss photo equipment and technics with other photographers as well as ask them for constructive critique on your photos."
I had this photo rejected for low quality. In fact it's not the best but it was at 600mm wich will give me always a grainy photo and a very reduced depth of field. Anyone has ideas about what can I do to improve this photo?
Shawn Patrick From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2588 posts, RR: 18 Reply 1, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2426 times:
If it was rejected for badscan, it was probably because they didn't want to tell you it was baddistance, and badestetic. Even if you manage to fix the quality issues, I still don't think it would make it in, IMO. I wouldn't really waste time to try to fix it.
Mirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3120 posts, RR: 16 Reply 2, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 2392 times:
Thanks Shawn, I'm mentally getting used to the idea of loosing this one. It's something very different from my usual photos so I'm very influenced to like it.
Mirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3120 posts, RR: 16 Reply 4, posted (10 years 7 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 2335 times:
Belive it or not Jan, I was going to write exactly that "Whoop whoop Pull up Pull up!!!!" on the comments field but I decided not to because some people take the photographer comments very seriously.
Anyway, I really would like to have this one accepted, any screener ideas to improve it? I don't want to waste your time guys.
Sponsor Message: 
From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3120 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2588 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Dec 2000, 2043 posts, 
but I decided not to because some people take the photographer comments very seriously.
From Mexico, joined Mar 2000, 5128 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
