Slamclick said: The PanAm 707 rejection is all the evidence that one could ever ask for that you do not always make rare image exceptions
On the contrary, the cropped picture of the 707 posted by Vzlet is all the evidence needed to demonstrate that many inconsistancies and problems can easily be corrected, even with old images. The original has a large area of wasted space on the right hand side which adds nothing to the image (I might have a different view of this by the way if the wing-tip had been included), and with the revised crop we now have something that works for both the subject AND
Furthermore, we've now learned that there is indeed more image above and below the subject, but that would necessitate a rescan. So the photographer can have it either way - cropped to exclude some of the wing as seen above, or to the original width but with more above and/or below so as to achieve an acceptable height/width ratio.
Clickhappy said: We try to hold uploaders to a certain standard. If you are scanning a picture and preparing it for the web, there is no reason (as an example) that the picture should be unlevel. Or the color be all wrong. Or cropped smaller than it needs to be. The fact that a slide or print might be 30 or 40 years old is irrelevant
Clickhappy is RIGHT ON
. We do lower standards considerably for old and rare subjects, but not so much that a reasonably easily achieved correction (or as in this case, a rescan) could correct an issue. Judging old images is often the most difficult part of the job - balancing the need to get rare subjects onto the database against knowing (or having a very strong suspicion) that with a little more effort or a slightly different approach an even better result could be obtained.