Topic Author
Posts: 625
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2001 8:39 am

How Can These Be Improved?

Thu Nov 15, 2001 12:18 am

I'd appreciate comments on the photos that were recently rejected for the stated reasons.

This one cited for low aesthetic qualities (actually I think it's a rather interesting photo - not many like it on - nearly black&white if not for the logo. Here's the story: the aircraft was in a hangar undergoing maintenance with only the tail sticking out - this was early evening. I just couldn't resist taking a photo of this a/c under the lighting conditions):

And this one cited for low quality (seems sharp to me  Confused Sad

I've been really trying hard to shoot better photos, different angles and my acceptance rate has not only increased but so has the quality of my photos.

Just a few months ago it was only a dream for me to get photos on If there is one thing that helped, that was the comments and suggestions from you folks here in the forum.


Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: How Can These Be Improved?

Thu Nov 15, 2001 1:23 am

You cant do anything about the aestetic reason. Just accept it.
The second one is a little bit on the dark side i think.
Posts: 9973
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2001 10:12 pm

RE: How Can These Be Improved?

Thu Nov 15, 2001 1:40 am

I've given up wondering about rejections. Johan likes a shot or not. If not, it is "poor quality" usually, "aesthetics" sometimes. I guess the latter reason is if the shot is a type he doesn't like (composition, mainly), the former something else.
I wish I were flying

RE: How Can These Be Improved?

Thu Nov 15, 2001 1:41 am

Hi Stephan,

Just checking the lists, both these pics were passed by a screener, and rejected by Johan.

The tail closeup is pretty easy. Johan has said before (I don't have the time to look for the thread - it was about a month or two ago) where he does not like "unmotivated" tail or nose closeups. By unmotivated, he means that there is nothing special about the picture, such as a particular item of interest you wanted to zoom in on, or details of certain markings (for instance, a nose closeup of a Thai royal barge plane would reveal fantastic detail, or a closeup of the tail of the fast-disappearing BA World Images.) So for such closeups of a plane with a standard color scheme, he will let very few by, even of superb quality.

The second one is less obvious. While not pin-sharp, I don't think that sharpness is an issue. I think perhaps Johan thought the picture needed more "punch". Try increasing the saturation a little bit, and get the tail to look more blue-black than grey by playing with the autolevels.

Hope this helps,


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: trevisan26 and 11 guests

Popular Searches On

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos