Rejected. Help! — Aviation Photography Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

Rejected. Help!

Airbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 10
Posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 1023 times:

http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=9M-MQE_MH_B734_21Jun03_PEN_DSC01522.jpg

badscan baddark badblurry badmotive Sad

http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=9M-MQE_MH_B734_21Jun03_PEN_DSC01528.jpg

badscan

Any help on improving it?

Note: rejected by screeners-in-training. Should I appeal or reupload improved ones? Thanks for advices and suggestions.

10 replies: All unread, jump to last

PRM From Ghana, joined Apr 2002, 348 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 948 times:

Should I appeal or reupload improved ones? Thanks for advices and suggestions.

If you can improve it, then always do so and re-upload rather than appealing Smile

First one is not sharp - and it does look more like blur, the reflections in the glass are rather distracting, and it is quite dark.

The second one is also not sharp, and there's plenty of noise in the dark area around the rear part of the engine, and again it's pretty dark.

I'd not try again with these two if I was you - I think they are beyond salvation.

Paul

Danny From Poland, joined Apr 2002, 3482 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 917 times:

I would work on first one. Try make it sharper and brighter.
Perhaps a screener should comment on what is badmotive on that picture.

Daniel

Airbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 10
Reply 3, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 889 times:

I too think that I could give it a try on the first one...

I have sharpened it a little and brightened it and might give it another try. I too do not understand badmotive in that first shot.

In fact I do not think it is blur but maybe just not sharp? Because from the big 5mp file i does not look blur at all, or am I wrong?

Airbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 860 times:

One more guys! Sad

http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=9M-MRD_MH_B772_20Jun03_PEN_DSC01490.jpg

Dazed767 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 5447 posts, RR: 53
Reply 5, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 824 times:

I played with the contrast (brightness +30 / contrast +8) then sharpened it.....big difference....don't know if it will make it or not.

Vir380 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2002, 616 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 770 times:

Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi .... please all remember one thing when and if a picture is rejected dont take it the wrong way or personal ... if the picture is rejected it is not because we dont want it on here .. its because its not quite there and with a touch more work it will be there Smile

To be honest the most rejections on here are because we know that the photographer in question can do better with manipulating the image.... most of the time it doesn't take much ... Sometimes it does ... but pretty much 60-70% of rejections can be improved.

With the above shots they as you are aware can be improved... as an idea look at the reject reasons and then look at the images again... that should really give you an idea of what to look at in the improvement , below is how i see it ( although i didnt screen the pics )

1: Dark , not much illumination on the instrument panel ... so with a bit of brightening and a touch more sharpening it should be fine.

2: Dark again , however there is not much motive in the shot ...a bit of a wrong angle , not much to focus on , again very soft .

To be honest i would work on number 1 as you should be able to do something with it.... but forget number 2 ... sorry

regards Tony

Airbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 749 times:

Alrite, thanks! What about number 3 though?

Vir380 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2002, 616 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 726 times:

Sorry cant open number 2 its gone Sad

do you have any web space you can link to ?
id like to see it

Tony

JoakimE From Sweden, joined Nov 2001, 408 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 720 times:

It looks like the last one was appealed and can be seen here, http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/APPEAL_9M-MRD_MH_B772_20Jun03_PEN_DSC01490.jpg

Airbus Lover From Malaysia, joined Apr 2000, 3248 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (9 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 697 times:

Yup I appealed the 3rd one after asking many other photographers..

But any thoughts on improvments to the rejection?

Top Of Page

Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics: