Can't really validate the reasons for your pic one and two at the moment as I'm staring at a small laptop screen. Photo three (AlaskaAir.com) needs a slight rotation counter clockwise, pretty much sorted in the second link you posted to it.
5280AGL said: What I don't understand is how photos like that one get rejected yet ones like these get accepted?
Ghost77 said:I´m with you 5280AGL, how come pictures like this get accepted... same aircraft, same REGO, and not showing anything spectacular....
Firstly to both of you, its very bad form to criticise other people's pictures on this forum, in fact its against the rules. I suggest that you are unlikely to get helpful responses if you attack other people's pictures.
Secondly, I can say that I was the third screener to HQ PolishAir42's pics that have been brought to attention in this forum. Bottom line is that they meet the quality criteria of the site, and two screeners before me had already judged them similarly so.
Shawn Patrick said: I think it's becoming political, you know accept photos from the well established photographers and only accept from small-time dudes like me if the photo is REALLY REALLY good
Shawn, PolishAir42 had his first pic accepted onto the site on 12th April this year (just over three months ago), so despite his pictures being commented on adversely here, how he could be regarded as "well established" is beyond me, other than the fact that he kept on trying and has achieved a result.
As for the process being political...
Meet the criteria, you get in, don't meet it, you don't. Instead of criticising other folks pictures, we should all get out more and strive to get quality results that are accepted.