JFKTOWERFAN From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, RR: 17 Posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2856 times:
Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9459 posts, RR: 72 Reply 1, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2828 times:
Moose From United States of America, joined Jan 2003, 53 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2823 times:
Well, I'm no pro but I like both shots. Especially with the tower. Good job my friend!
Bruce From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5027 posts, RR: 17 Reply 3, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2610 times:
When looking at the large version I can sort of understand where the "baddistance" came from. The Airliners.net screeners tend to like the plane to fill the majority of the frame.
As far as how to fix it or avoid it, just shoot tighter - more zoom - as tight as you possibly can without cutting aything but a wing tip off. Also, you could try cropping. Is that large version the same size as the original from the camera? What size is it? (1440x960? 1024x768?) YOu could try simply cropping it and re-submit. In many cases these "baddistance" rejections can easily be fixed with cropping, from my experience.
My D30 shoots are 2160 x 1440 size, so I know that i have a little room to play with cropping if I need to. And to rotate a little if needed and then crop and still have to down-size to get it in at 1200x800.
As a side note, I have considerable experience with rejections here. I can say that probably a large percentage of rejections that people talk about on here can be fixed with proper editing in a good photo editing program. many people dont like to crop for some reason - but you do what you gotta do to fit the airliners.net style. Other than cropping, let me show you an example. I had this one photo that I liked very much and tried to get it uploaded back in September but it would not make it. i put it up on the other site. have a look: http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5150
Dont mind the jagged compression - that was caused by the site. But the color and darkness - notice that. Now, in the time since then I have learned new techniques in photoshop. I applied new actions to the original, and uploaded it again HERE and now see the result:
Notice how I cropped it. The new version, plane is a little bigger. And, overall sharpness and levels much improved. So, many of people's rejections can be saved with good photo editing techniques. I do plan on re-uploading the one on the other site to a newer version BTW.
bruce
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
JFKTOWERFAN From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, RR: 17 Reply 4, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 2590 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
Bruce thanks for your input. On my pics I do zoom in more when I can, However my feeling on these two is that zoom/cropping would take away from the overall picture....Meaning that the first one has a nice shot of the tower in the back....I guess I could try to get it a little closer while keeping the tower and removing the fence, and the second kinda shows the feeling of the day, you can see the steam from the powerplant in the distance...It was damn cold out!
Bruce From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5027 posts, RR: 17 Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 2466 times:
I downloaded that photo and it's 1024 px wide - what was the original size? If it was 1024 then cropping might make it too small for the database - you should have at least 1024 when uploading.
bruce
Bruce Leibowitz - Jackson, MS (KJAN) - Canon 50D/100-400L IS lens
Avroarrow From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 1041 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2417 times:
I kind of know how you feel. I had this one thrown out too: http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=YYZ020203e1.jpg
I honestly thought that the colours resulting from the low light would have been the reason, but I got "baddistance" instead. I didn't re-crop for much the same reason as yourself. Oh well, live and learn. I do like your rejected photos though.
Give me a mile of road and I can take you a mile. Give me a mile of runway and I can show you the world.
JFKTOWERFAN From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, RR: 17 Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2321 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
Well the original from my slide scanner is huge...50 some MB's so I can make it what I want really....I guess I will scan it again...Along with some of the other rejects...Crop a little more and hope for the best.
If any of the screeners read this I would really appreciate your input on this situation...For me and for a lot of the rest of us!
Does this just come down to screener preference? I saw these two pics (this is not in anyway meant to disrespect the photographers or screeners) so what is the difference?
Kingwide From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2001, 838 posts, RR: 21 Reply 8, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 2264 times:
I have to say I think badDistance is justified.
In shot 1 you have the tower and the rotating a/c in front of it. There's a lot of space to the left and right but there's nothing actually *in* the space so the more open composition doesn't really seem justified. Perhaps a composition with the plane and tower a bit further to the right, giving the plane some space to fly into might look better [rule of thirds etc.] but there just doesn't seem to be much of interest in the background to carry that off.
Likewise shot 2 is the same, doesn't seem to be any reason to zoom back so just fill the frame instead.
JFKTOWERFAN From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, RR: 17 Reply 9, posted (10 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 2243 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
Well I am going to go back rework them and see if I can get them rejected for badsoft or badmotiv(please note: sarcasm). Again thanks for the help!
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1100 posts, 
From Canada, joined Sep 2001, 1041 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2001, 838 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
){kind=link}