PUnmuth@VIE
Topic Author
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Fri Apr 20, 2007 8:44 pm

Some motive rejections which i don't understand.
Motiv


Motiv, distance (It was marked as airport overview and the closest plane was listed as it is requested by a.net)

Yes its off angle also but i am talking only about motiv and distance here.

Motiv

Screeners remark was: "pls include whole tail "
An appeal asking which part is missing brought no feedback.
What is missing?

Motiv:



Terminal inside views are motive now? Appeal asking if that was the case brought no feedback.

And those 2

No idea why the first is soft and the second has quality blurry oversharpened

Any ideas or feedback would be appreciated
-
 
boeingfreak
Posts: 381
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 7:07 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:04 pm

Hello Peter,

#1: the upper side of the engine is slightly cut off, this is what caused the motiv rejection I think
#2: no idea, looks very nice
#3: no idea
#4: I had a similar looking picture of MUC's visitor's terrace rejceted for motiv about half a year ago or so.
#5: Looks quite dark, the BMW advertisement in the right upper corner distracts from the check in counters + lots of people messing up the picture
#6: Killed by heat haze, cockpit windows look soft + green halo around the nose
#7: Heat haze, jaggies around the engine and the LH tail logo + titles look jagged, nose looks blurry and soft + halos around the nose

Damned, your shots really look like the ones I took this day, didn't know that you were standing only a meter away from me till I saw your shots...  Wink

Hope this helps,
Florian  wave 
 
eadster
Posts: 2125
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:31 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_g

Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:29 pm

[Rant]

Peter, its one of those mysteries that may never be resolved. I had a rejection of a war wreck recently. It clearly shows the remains of the WWII Thunderbolt wing, but it went for motive.

Secondly, I'm still finding that I get shots rejected for one reason, that is fixable, then having those shots rejected again for totally different reasons.

[/Rant]
 
User avatar
ptrjong
Posts: 4109
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:38 am

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:40 pm

Peter, my humble opinions:

#1: due to lighting not giving a lot of detail despite being a close-up; also needs a little breathing space on top/bottom
#2: not a real overview, not too much of interest in the shot
#3: forward base of fin missing; looks awkward
#4: focusses on a viewing area which probably is not a permissible subject
#5: I'm glad I don't see many check-in counter rather than true terminal overview shots making it into the database, and this one doesn't look that sparkling: whiteness/emptiness on top/right; people cut on bottom

Regards,

Peter 

[Edited 2007-04-20 14:43:29]
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
 
LIPH
Posts: 841
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_g

Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:55 pm

Quoting Eadster (Reply 2):
Peter, its one of those mysteries that may never be resolved. I had a rejection of a war wreck recently. It clearly shows the remains of the WWII Thunderbolt wing, but it went for motive.

Secondly, I'm still finding that I get shots rejected for one reason, that is fixable, then having those shots rejected again for totally different reasons.



It's a sad thing...I have to admit it...
A woman's mind it's easier to understand than certain rejections...  Wink
I think that the more the time goes by the more we'll see rejections and shots accepted more for personal screener's taste rather than for any clear, definite, fixable reason...I read many posts in which it was said that standards will raise with time...but I guess those standards will be much more based on the screeners personal opinion on the shots...Standards cannot raise without end. So basically when a "cristal clear" picture will be the regular standard for A.net maybe the motive issue will become much more and more important. And that has something to do with screeners pesronal tastes rather than any quality issue.

Ciao

[Edited 2007-04-20 15:03:58]

[Edited 2007-04-20 15:04:26]
Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1645
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Fri Apr 20, 2007 10:42 pm

Quoting LIPH (Reply 4):
A woman's mind it's easier to understand than certain rejections...

LIPH
Now come on, that is being really absurd. You are old enough to know better than that !!! Big grin

Peter
No 1, Totally agree with Ptrjong on that. I would add that there is no detail towards the top of the intake and a bit more light was needed in that area, a touch of fill in flash perhaps ? Very difficult to do with a fish eye though !
No.2 Four aircraft almost in a dance, but I find the foreground and, in particular the flags very eyecatching and distracting. It does not really amount to much of an airport overview to me either.
No.3 Totally agree with Ptrjong, nothing more to add !
No.4 A nice photograph but neither shows enough of the airport or of the building.
No 5 Agree with Ptrjong again (this is getting to be a habit). The building is not an architectural masterpiece and I find my eyes wandering around it with no focal point. The cropped feet are again very distracting
Nos 6 and 7, agree with Ptrjong again. Subtle, very slight blur can often look like simple softness and it is only when sharpened to the point of no return that it becomes obvious that that slight blur is the cause of softness. I think that is the case here

I have not seen any of these images before !!!!
Mick Bajcar
 
User avatar
ptrjong
Posts: 4109
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:38 am

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Fri Apr 20, 2007 10:49 pm

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 5):
Agree with Ptrjong again (this is getting to be a habit).

It seems so, Mick... I didn't even comment on #6 and #7... I guess you're agreeing with Florian Wink

Peter
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
 
LIPH
Posts: 841
Joined: Mon May 17, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:00 pm

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 5):
LIPH
Now come on, that is being really absurd. You are old enough to know better than that !!!

Mick,
I've never learned enough !!  Wink

Ciao
Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
 
Stealthz
Posts: 5546
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 11:43 am

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:06 am

Quoting Eadster (Reply 2):
I had a rejection of a war wreck recently. It clearly shows the remains of the WWII Thunderbolt wing, but it went for motive.

Send it to me, who cares what the motive "Police" at A.nut care about, some of us are interested in Aviation history.
The Pacific War may not mean much to the Eurocentric A.net view but it is important to some of us!

Cheers
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
 
Morvious
Posts: 637
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 8:36 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:12 am

I love that A380 tail, but indeed you have cropped to much. You have cut off some of the tail on the left side. Crop it untill the tail meets the rest of the fuselage and you will be alright! If you have it on the original though!
have a good day, Stefan van Hierden
 
User avatar
ptrjong
Posts: 4109
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:38 am

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sat Apr 21, 2007 1:38 am

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 8):
The Pacific War may not mean much to the Eurocentric A.net view

That's an absurd accusation I think. My fairly crappy shots of old Japanese planes in Indonesia have all been accepted.

Peter
The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1645
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sat Apr 21, 2007 2:46 am

Quoting Eadster (Reply 2):
Peter, its one of those mysteries that may never be resolved. I had a rejection of a war wreck recently. It clearly shows the remains of the WWII Thunderbolt wing, but it went for motive.

Martin,
I would be intrigued to see that too !
Mick Bajcar
 
eadster
Posts: 2125
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2005 7:31 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:43 am

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 11):
I would be intrigued to see that too !



Quoting StealthZ (Reply 8):
Send it to me, who cares what the motive "Police" at A.nut care about,

I'll send you guys and email with what I have so far. It's quite interesting. A lot to be found around this place.

To Airliners.Net...
Yet another example. You guys ARE rejecting stuff that people WANT to see.
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1645
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:58 am

Quoting Eadster (Reply 12):
Yet another example. You guys ARE rejecting stuff that people WANT to see.

Martin, you are making a leap to far and jumping to conclusions here !
I would like to see it but I might well reject it too if I was screening it. It happens you know. There are some great aircraft that get rejected because they are awful quality. In my minds eye I see one that I rejected a few hours ago, a superb aircraft but dreadful quality and the info all wrong too.
It can be a fine balance and it is a tightrope we have to walk. If I had accepted that one a lot would have looked but there would have been screams about quality too. When I can point an uploader in the right direction to impriove I do, but it would have taken more space than is available for that one so we won't see it again unless/until someone else manages to catch it.
The same might be the case with yours, though I do know your images and doubt it. Without seeing it my suspicions are already around motive. Why not post it here for us all to see and comment on ?
Mick Bajcar
 
YANQUI67
Posts: 358
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 2:57 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:14 pm

I had this one rejected for border, very fair. I left a white border edge on the right upper corner. I fixed it resubmitted it, waited a week and then I got the dreaded motiv. What!
http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.fil...7633&filename=1177139529NC0HEw.jpg
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Topic Author
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sat Apr 21, 2007 4:57 pm

Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 1):
...



Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 3):
...



Quoting Morvious (Reply 9):
...

Thanks for your feedback guys.

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 5):
The building is not an architectural masterpiece and

Also thanks but the quality of the architecture as screening criteria is fairly new isn't it?

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 5):
The cropped feet are again very distracting

 Wow!  Confused






Quoting Yanqui67 (Reply 14):
I fixed it resubmitted it, waited a week and then I got the dreaded motiv. What!

This rejection Ping Pong is getting very annoing indeeed.
-
 
dendrobatid
Posts: 1645
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 3:40 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sat Apr 21, 2007 5:44 pm

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 15):
Also thanks but the quality of the architecture as screening criteria is fairly new isn't it?

Taken in isolation, of course not.

I went on to say........
I find my eyes wandering around it with no focal point. The cropped feet are again very distracting

And that to me is a subjective rejection criteria ie motive. Your editing of my comment seems like an attempt to have a dig at me (as a screener, not personally I hope )

Yes rejection ping-pong can be annoying and you have been on the ping and pong end of things.

I also think that your thanking of Boeingfreak, Ptrjong and Morvious, (excluding me) before you take shots at me is downright rude. YOU asked for my opinions and I gave YOU them, just that, opinions !!!
Mick Bajcar
 
PUnmuth@VIE
Topic Author
Posts: 3119
Joined: Thu Aug 24, 2000 9:31 pm

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sat Apr 21, 2007 5:52 pm

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 16):
Your editing of my comment seems like an attempt to have a dig at me (as a screener, not personally I hope )

No it is not i was just wondering about criterias. If it came over that way please accept my appologies.

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 16):
I also think that your thanking of Boeingfreak, Ptrjong and Morvious, (excluding me) before you take shots at me is downright rude.

Mick please re-read my reply

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 15):
Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 5):
The building is not an architectural masterpiece and

Also thanks

I did not exclude you!!! In contrary it's a nice change to get screener feedback. (No sarcasm intenden here)

Quoting Dendrobatid (Reply 16):
YOU asked for my opinions and I gave YOU them, just that, opinions !!!

And as written in my reply I was thankful for you opinions.
-
 
brianw999
Posts: 307
Joined: Sat Dec 27, 2003 3:15 am

RE: Motiv, Soft, Blurry, Oversharp, NOA_lost_the_grip

Sun Apr 22, 2007 6:08 pm

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 15):
I had this one rejected for border, very fair. I left a white border edge on the right upper corner. I fixed it resubmitted it, waited a week and then I got the dreaded motiv. What!
http://www.airliners.net/uf/view.fil...w.jpg

I find that one a bit hard too. Very striking picture, the type that Song Airlines might well use in their literature/on their website.

I can only guess that the screener thinks that the background intrudes on the motive. With that in mind, perhaps this crop, wirh a touch of selective sharpening on the tail title registration and windows, would work. If I was the Song Airlines executive in charge of adverising I'd be looking at using it.

http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/3694/1177139529nc0hewv2vw5.jpg

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests