Hi all, been a while since I regularly uploaded to Anet due in part to frustration, however I recently uploaded a shot of Concorde from a helicopter which got to top spot on the home page so thought I would give some more a go, starting with this one:

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 9dd95d1bea

Rejected due to "Too distant with empty space"

Now while I understand the comment, that was kind of the point of the photo... to have a wider view of Washington National's runway, traffic behind and the aircraft coming towards me. I did not want a tighter crop as you lose that feel of where you are, plus I was already at full zoom! From what I can make out the quality of the photo is fine and not an issue, but the crop is. I don't want to crop tighter than it already is because I'll also lose quality, but I will take advice.

Thanks.
Charlie.

To me the crop looks a little awkward and unmotivated — there's really not enough of interest to warrant it — would probably have been better including the edge of the runway bottom right corner (maybe to include that third taxiing aircraft).

Hey Charlie,

This photo has been through four of us in the process, and each of us agrees that this is a nice one with beautiful sunshine, but the upper frame is too empty since the sky doesn't have too many interesting things there.
I would agree what JakTrax talked about above. You can also try to use 16:9 to crop this photo and leave less sky area in the whole frame. Instead, to keep more things on the ground.
Just my 2 centes on it ; )

Regards,
Harry

HarryLi wrote:

Hey Charlie,

This photo has been through four of us in the process, and each of us agrees that this is a nice one with beautiful sunshine, but the upper frame is too empty since the sky doesn't have too many interesting things there.
I would agree what JakTrax talked about above. You can also try to use 16:9 to crop this photo and leave less sky area in the whole frame. Instead, to keep more things on the ground.
Just my 2 centes on it ; )

Regards,
Harry

Hi Harry

Thanks for the feedback. The fact it has gone through four screeners makes me think it's not far off, so I'll have another go at it and submit shortly. Thanks.

OK I couldn't wait... retrying and link to new upload is here: https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-co ... to/6141783

Please let me know if that is more what you had in mind?

Thanks
Charlie.

EGTESkyGod wrote:

OK I couldn't wait... retrying and link to new upload is here: https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-co ... to/6141783

Please let me know if that is more what you had in mind?

Thanks
Charlie.

Hey Charlie,

The link you posted is for your own Photo Corner, which will lead us to our own Photo Corner not your photo

OK I couldn't wait...

Should be fast these days Queue is not as long as before now lol.

Regards,

HarryLi wrote:

Should be fast these days Queue is not as long as before now lol.

Kudos to the screening team for bringing the queue down recently Hopefully this level can be maintained or perhaps the queue can be trimmed down even more

Oh... oops... Let's try it again, here with my own watermark.

https://flic.kr/p/2jDe2og

Well, it is better than the previous version, but I still think that you left too much unnecessary upper empty sky. Replacing those sky areas with the bottom areas would be better IMO.

Regards,

HarryLi wrote:

Well, it is better than the previous version, but I still think that you left too much unnecessary upper empty sky. Replacing those sky areas with the bottom areas would be better IMO.

Regards,

You mean like this?

https://flic.kr/p/2jDg872

EGTESkyGod wrote:

HarryLi wrote:

Well, it is better than the previous version, but I still think that you left too much unnecessary upper empty sky. Replacing those sky areas with the bottom areas would be better IMO.

Regards,

You mean like this?

https://flic.kr/p/2jDg872

Yes with appropriate size and quality, this is much better

OK, sorry for delayed reply, a couple of family events over the weekend. Re-uploaded using the photo from the previous link without watermark.

EGTESkyGod wrote:

OK, sorry for delayed reply, a couple of family events over the weekend. Re-uploaded using the photo from the previous link without watermark.

I saw it, but that won't work at this size honestly. 1920px requires very high quality from many aspects. Would be better at a smaller size like 1300px - 1400px if possible since you crop tighter and more details shown now (Looks very soft). Re-sizing to a smaller size simultaneously would be better.

Sorry for the confusion as I thought the one you posted before is not the real size you are going to upload ;(

Sincerely,
Harry

HarryLi wrote:

EGTESkyGod wrote:

OK, sorry for delayed reply, a couple of family events over the weekend. Re-uploaded using the photo from the previous link without watermark.

I saw it, but that won't work at this size honestly. 1920px requires very high quality from many aspects. Would be better at a smaller size like 1300px - 1400px if possible since you crop tighter and more details shown now (Looks very soft). Re-sizing to a smaller size simultaneously would be better.

Sorry for the confusion as I thought the one you posted before is not the real size you are going to upload ;(

Sincerely,
Harry

OK thank you Harry. Think I might just remove it from the queue... My Concorde pic was accepted at 1920 and now it feels like too much effort for a not particularly special photo of a 737 at DCA. Thanks.