Hi John, thank you for your quick reply again. Well, this is quite subjective imo. So I keep them in my collection. Like I wrote already: Only by a.net have these problems. For me at makes no sense to reedit them and to wait for screening for another app. two week for this minimal issue. I simply ha...Jump to post
Hi, I'd like to have your opionions about my recent oversharpened rejections. I do get them quite often by A.net, but never in other dbs. To me the pics look good. Less sharpened would bo too soft imo. Pls. check here and give me your personal opinion as detailed as you like. https://abload.de/img/q...Jump to post
this pic https://abload.de/img/q33a6957-cr2_dxo_grosu3kof.jpg was depriorized even twice when uploaded as priority with the notice that the big sticker is new. There is no pic with this sticker in the db so far.
Why was it depriorized?
Hi Rainer, Under the present rules, once a photo has been rejected on appeal the decision is final. It can be difficult to draw the line on doubles. Sorry John Hi John, thank you for your reply. I take it that way: "Your db, your rules and your decisions what is attractive for the db and what ...Jump to post
Rainer, its technically a double, but there could be an exception due to the different view and sequence. I suggest you appeal the rejection. No guarantees Cheers, John Photo screener Hi John, thank you for your reply. I had appealed already and it was rejected again. What shall I do! Best regards ...Jump to post
Hi, this pic was successfully uploaded: https://abload.de/img/q33a2719-cr2_dxo_gros7ej4g.jpg This second uplaod was rejected for "double" even after appeal with the notice "same date/side of the first pic" https://abload.de/img/q33a2637-cr2_dxo_gros54k0o.jpg It is right, that the...Jump to post
Hi, yesterday I uploaded two pics of LH Cargo MD-11F D-ALCC with the farewell stickers as priority which were rejected for oversharpened. At this time and still now this a/c is not in he db with these quite big stickers stickers. After reuplaoding new versions with less sharpness with priority they ...Jump to post
this was rejected for Overexposed Oversharpened CW Rotation
I can bet that when I reedit it, it will come out as soft at least.
What do you think?
Hi jelpee, thank you very much for your quick answer, explanation and the reedited version. Honestly: I do not like your edit at all. Especially the rear part of the fuselage is much too blue and also the tail is a bit darker and has a blue tint. The whole pic looks quite artificial and does not sho...Jump to post
Hi, from time to time I really get a bit mad about some screening results. This pic https://abload.de/img/q33a2424-1grossfilter6hkmr.jpg was first rejected for "underexposed" and "cw-rotation". After appeal (Pic is level (see right lightpost) , horizon sneaks away due to not 90 d...Jump to post
Hi, thank you all for your replies and effort. I reedited the pics and uploaded them again in he hope that thy are not regarded as soft now. Especially the issue sharpness seems to me a very indivdual issue. Here are the previews: https://abload.de/img/q33a6373-1grossfiltert4k9t.jpg https://abload.d...Jump to post
Hi, in the past days I recieved multiple "oversharpened" rejections although I hadn't these problems before and didn't change my editing procedures. Also all appeals were rejected. In addition in other dbs I had these problems not at all with exactly the same pics. Here are some examples: ...Jump to post
thxs again for your quick reply.
The pic is a 2003 negative scan from the Coventry airshow.
I gave it a last try: https://abload.de/img/unbenannt-49kleinneukgskj7.jpg
thank you for your quick reply and the inensive explanation.
Does this look better? The vignetting cannot be removed complety without ruining the pic.
is that uncentered framing ok to show the dynamic of the spraying process?
do you see any chance to get this pic accepted although not centered but showing many birds during approach?
Hi Jehan, thank you for your quick and respectful reply and thank you for the explanation. Well, the first rejection was oversharpened and "common" not added what would have been necessary after your explanations. But one detail should not be forgot: This a/c is in the db with only 34 pics...Jump to post
Hi, this pic was first rejected for oversharpened only: https://abload.de/img/q33a8608-1grossfilter5gkjm.jpg I reedited it with lower sharpening and al other setting were untouched. I uploaded it again with the notice that lower sharpening was done as required after first rejection with this pic htt...Jump to post
Hi Jehan, thank you again for kind and quick answer and help. Good that I found the right filter. I can see the halos there but I still don't see them in the normal version no matter from which angle I look at the screen. I mean to remember to have read somewhere here that screening is done with the...Jump to post
thank you for explanation. I'm not sure if I found the right filter. With the only filter which might makes sense the pic comes out like this: https://abload.de/img/q33a8587-1grossfilter28ktq.jpg But is this really an equalized version and what shall it tell me?
Hi, I don't get the clue of the following halo rejections of the same pic: First rejection with halos only: https://abload.de/img/q33a8587-1grossfilter59jh8.jpg Second rejection again with halos only and screeners comment "Sorry Rainer, Halos still visible.": https://abload.de/img/q33a8587...Jump to post
Hi Jehan, thank you for your quick and respectful reply. Now I understand the development of this case and agree to what you wrote. I regarded this pic quite a litte unique and atmospheric and assumed that the lower quality could be acceptable, like the accepted Etihad A330 in the same manner. And t...Jump to post
Hi, I appreciate the voluntary screeners work very much but today I'm a little upset about the screening process by reedits after first rejections. First rejection with: Oversharpened ,Low Contrast (I can agree!) On February 10,th, 06:05 pm https://abload.de/img/anareject1kwk7h.jpg After reediting s...Jump to post
Thxs for your reply airkas1.
Would it be allowed to clone the flares in this case like dustspots or is this an offend?
It would look like this edition (without the contrast adjusted which could be made later)
Uups, maybe the pic cannot be seen with the mentioned link.
Here is the link which should work:
this pic https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-cor ... to/5388955 was rejected for under-and overexposed (and low contrast).
I know, that it is a difficult light condition but imo quite atmospheric. Is there anything I can do to get it accepted?
Hi, after my pic 5338363 was accepted I reuploaded yesterday a brighter version which was accepted thankfully soon. But in the preview the pic was not changed.Only the larger versions show the reuploaded version. Is that by purpose/site related, a tecnical problem or will it be changed automatically...Jump to post
this pic was rejected for blurry/oversharpened.
Is the blurry foreground the reason for blurry? Than the pic cannot be rescued for Anet.
Or is with blurry also the a/c meant and the foreground can be ignored?
Hi, first rejected for uncentered only. https://abload.de/img/q33a5409-1grossfertigshfhq.jpg After appeal I got this: Here's why your photo was rejected: - Motive - Oversharpened - Personal Message The Screener left a comment regarding this photo: "Rejection reason revised, centering acceptable...Jump to post
Hi Kas, thank you again for your honest and detailed answer. Although I think that both pics have potential to be accepted I agree that the light is a bit critical. I still regard some decisoins of the screeners as inconsistent but nevertheless I just started uploading again because of your differen...Jump to post
I just stopped uploading after 13 years exactly for that reason. Take a look at my recent odyssee. It became more and more a waste of time.
Hi, @ dutchspotter1: Thxs for your reply. The problem you decribed is true but should be acceptable as long as no structure or painting is is whited out. Answer after the appeal today: Overexposed "Detail lost in blown Areas, not fixable" Version three in the first post was not rejected fo...Jump to post
Again rejected for overexposed although I turned down the lights up to more grey than white. Imo all details are visible. What is the problem? https://abload.de/img/anetrejection5021793t7o0i.jpg I brutally turned down the lights in this way now? https://abload.de/img/anetrejection5021793-t9ur8.jpg B...Jump to post
Hi, after uploading many years already without bigger problems I experience a kind of imo inconsistently screening in the nearer past. I get a rejection, reedit it as far as possible, get a new rejection with the opposite reason and in addituon some other new reasons. I fix it again and the same hap...Jump to post
Hi airkas1, thxs for your quick reply. So I understand that following the rule stands over all first. These are quite unique and permitted shots from a rare apron view and a.net renounce these pics because the same photographer took them ? I was the only one to shoot them. Nobody else can upload the...Jump to post
Hi, I got this pic accepted: http://www.airliners.net/photo/Emirates/Airbus-A380-861/4974045?qsp=eJwtjUEKAkEMBL8iOXsRwcPe9AOK%2BoEwadbBdWdIAjos%2B3fj4K2obroXSmV2fPzeKmggA2t60JYqK7%2BMhoWeaO%2BiEkxXzjN0c6tFJI/RsqJ%2BapEIO44poTrk788q0F8ES31wjINdAPTSmfaH8JKtTtw34JwnWtcvASIx5g%3D%3D and wanted to upload...Jump to post
I cannot see any improvement for me personnally. I only experience disadvantages. Neither on my desktop pc nor on my smartphone I can get the photos or information as quick as before the relaunch. You have to click and srcoll steadily. This drives me really a bit crazy and I stopped to go on the sit...Jump to post