j.mo
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:29 am

Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 12:48 am

I know this is a recurring theme but I am confused.
This was rejected for "baddistance." Could anyone tell me why. There are photos on here where there is no airplane at all and this is too far away?

I think the Northwest 727 looks appropriate with the smoke trailing it.
No wonder people get so frustrated trying to upload photos. Is this photo really too far away?

http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=N204US.jpg


Jeremy
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 12:52 am

Nice shot. I had similiar of Tu 134 some time ago. Unfortunately these gets always rejected
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 12:59 am

No amount of opinion for or against from contributors here will change what has happened. The process if you disagree with a screening decision is to appeal.

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 1:08 am

Jeremy, im not a screener but whoever rejected this shot did the right thing, it should not be added- if you had some nice scenery with the 72 on finals, yeah but a tiny airplane with blue sky is unappealing. if you crop the heck out of it and it stays sharp itll get accpeted for sure (otherwise im missing something)

Joe
 
EGGD
Posts: 11880
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:01 am

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 1:20 am

Joe - you mean like this? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/G-HLAOapp2.jpg

I quite like it, PP.net viewers liked it. I wonder if it'll get rejected?
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 1:22 am

Sorry Dan, that one's going to get rejected too. The airplane isn't sharp enough. AND, if the file name is anything to go by, you've got badinfo too as the registration is probably wrong.

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
EGGD
Posts: 11880
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:01 am

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 1:33 am

The registration is G-HLAD, I just mis-read it when It came to modifying it but I uploaded as G-HLAD (as otherwise I wouldn't know the airbus engine/etc code).

bbbbbbbbllllllllinnnnnnng
I can make it sharper.
 
JeffM
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 3:32 am

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 2:27 am

I know what you mean Jeremy, I like the shot, but it just lacks something. I have had a few rejected for "badcenter" that I liked.
http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=AF1a1024jpg.jpg
While I agree it is not centered as some would like it, and a small piece of the tail is missing, it does not bother me. I have seen countless others in the database with the same shortcomings.

I am not one for appealing a photo. I will take the screener's advice and see if I can make some improvements. If not, then they are just for me to enjoy.

Good luck

v/r
Jeff Miller
 
joe pries
Posts: 1922
Joined: Sat May 13, 2000 1:04 am

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 2:34 am

Dan,
thats certainly more interesting but im a big fan of full frame shots, unless the background is like Rolf Wallners shot of the Khazakstan IL86- what a stunner!

Joe
 
ckw
Posts: 4586
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 12:26 am

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 4:43 am

Nothing wrong with trailing smoke - I like it BUT there is also a lot of plain empty all around the subject, which is just not contributing to the picture.

Yes, I'm sure you can find similar or worse example already in the database - but many factors can mitigate would would normally be grounds for rejection ... rarity of the shot, location, date etc. and of course, standards have risen over time. I'd bet very few pictures submitted prior to 2001 would get accepted today.

Cheers,

Colin
Colin K. Work, Pixstel
 
mikephotos
Posts: 2887
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2000 12:52 am

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 5:30 am

Jeremy,

Hope you don't mind me doing this but as everyone said just a bit of cropping and I think the photo would have been accepted. Take a look. I feel the AFTER is much better and the quality of the original image should allow the cropped image to still be high quality.



If the pic doesn't load, try this link:
http://www.rockawayreef.netfirms.com/beforeafter.jpg

Michael
 
Skymonster
Posts: 3428
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2001 7:53 pm

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 7:14 am

Michael, Jeremy,

Well yes, if the full size image maintains or ideally increases the quality of the rejected photo, it may get in. However, the rejected photograph already has quite a bit of noise in the sky, and it also has some jaggies on the cheat especially in the fairly obvious nose area. If its from a print/neg/slide a higher res rescan and then a closer crop may solve that problem, but to be honest if just a recrop of the pic already shown was done, I'd be quite surprised if the original scan / digital image could be cropped as closely as you suggest and still retain the quality this site looks for.

Just my thoughts though...

Andy
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots
 
j.mo
Posts: 652
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:29 am

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 8:44 am

Michael,
Thanks. That looks good. I was going for the look of "solitude" I saw in this image. The mountains around here may have helped.

I had two others rejected for "baddistance." Both of those the tail number can be read. One is in the appeals process, and the other I would link to but the file name was the same as a rejection back in March and the wrong picture shows up.

Maybe I will stick to uploading the unimaginative side shots. Thanks for your inputs.

Jeremy
 
serge
Posts: 1903
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2001 2:01 pm

RE: Questionable Rejections?

Sat Oct 05, 2002 12:07 pm

I just had this one kicked down at first for badcameraangle, so I corrected it .05 CW (not joking) and it got kicked down for badscan the second time around : Smile

http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=N3116N_ISN_sept02_v2.jpg

I'm going to go crazy soon..... Nuts bahahahhahhaahah. Out of one of my latest batch I only got one in the d/b, it just makes you wonder if its worth all the effort. But don't worry, I'm a sucker so I will be here for many moons to come.

grrrrr.... once I get enough money for a minolta dual scan, that will be the day  Acting devilish...

...Serge

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: glen and 7 guests