User avatar
walter2222
Posts: 1237
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:40 am

Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (Walter2222)

Fri Mar 06, 2009 9:23 am

Hi All,

I had this shot rejected for double and motiv:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r..._ebfn_19940703_scan_wvb_1200px.jpg

I understand the double, since I have another shot in the database (same day, same side of the aircraft), but I had decided to upload anyway, given that there are only three shots of this reg. in the database. I thought this motiv was different enough (close-up, showing some details which can be handy for aircraft modellers...).

The question I have is thus more related to the motiv rejection part. Is it because of the steps attached to the aircraft or is this type of close-up not wanted?

Thanks and regards,

Walter
Canon 347d mkII ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l IS USM - ...
 
flyingzacko
Posts: 572
Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 4:46 am

Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (Walter2222)

Fri Mar 06, 2009 9:43 am

Hi Walter,

not sure about the motiv, but you might as well have gotten NOA_Quality or NOA_Overprocessed for your excessive use of the shadow highlight tool showing up right underneath the wing and on the belly. The photo is rather grainy right there.

Cheers,
Sebastian
Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX
 
ZakHH
Posts: 1570
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2005 11:32 pm

Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (Walter2222)

Fri Mar 06, 2009 10:03 am

Maybe, but as a matter of fact, it was rejected due to motiv, and Walter was wondering why.

In the end, that's a question only a screener could answer, but my guess would be the attached steps as well. The crop would work for me.
Tired of a.net? Join a friendly aviation community!
 
User avatar
walter2222
Posts: 1237
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:40 am

Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (Walter2222)

Fri Mar 06, 2009 10:57 am



Quoting FlyingZacko (Reply 1):
but you might as well have gotten NOA_Quality or NOA_Overprocessed for your excessive use of the shadow highlight tool

If I remember well, I did not use the shadow/highlight tool. It is, however, a scan from a slide and most of my scans are indeed grainy and that is more or less linear with age (from the slide  Smile ...).

Quoting ZakHH (Reply 2):
but my guess would be the attached steps as well. The crop would work for me.

Thanks for the feedback!

Best regards,

Walter
Canon 347d mkII ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l IS USM - ...
 
Lanas
Posts: 945
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2006 7:27 am

Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (Walter2222)

Fri Mar 06, 2009 1:15 pm

Hi Walter

Quoting ZakHH (Reply 2):
but my guess would be the attached steps as well.



Quoting Walter2222 (Thread starter):
Is it because of the steps attached to the aircraft

 checkmark 
Yes, I believe that as well.

Quoting ZakHH (Reply 2):
The crop would work for me.

For me too!  Wink

Despite all this, I´m not sure you´ll pass the double cut. Be sure to include a message to the screeners explaining why you´re uploading this double shot.
Could you paste the link to the other photo from the aircraft, so we can see it?

Good luck with it.  thumbsup 

Cheers Big grin
Gastón.-
"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens." J.R.R. Tolkien
 
User avatar
walter2222
Posts: 1237
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 3:40 am

Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (Walter2222)

Fri Mar 06, 2009 4:23 pm



Quoting Lanas (Reply 4):
Could you paste the link to the other photo from the aircraft, so we can see it?

Sure!


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Walter Van Bel



and in order not to be egoistic, I will also include the two other pictures in the database:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rogier Vermeulen



and


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Stephane Moitry




I had put a note to the screener that I was aware that this would be a double (given that it was also my shot, on the same day and showing the same side of the aircraft), but I also noted that I thought this close-up shot was a different motiv.

I was not surprised with the double rejection, but I just want to learn more why the shot was a not acceptable motiv.

After all the feedback, I assume that it is indeed the steps that are attached to the aircraft ( as is often the case with Swedish aircraft) that caused the motiv rejection.

Case closed  Smile

Best regards,

Walter
Canon 347d mkII ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l IS USM - ...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 21 guests