-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Wow, I think this is the most rejection reasons I've had on a single photo. I especially don't agree with the color cast point. I have a feeling the screener thinks the gray on the bottom of the fuselage is too blue, but from other pictures of the airline, it IS a cool gray color.
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... G_5325.jpg
The image quality of these photo(s) does not meet the very high standards
of Airliners.Net. This does not mean that it is a bad photo, but it does
mean that we think it has certain (possibly minor) flaws.
There is a problem with the colours in these photo(s). This may be due to
one of two reasons: either there is a strong colour cast that makes the
photo(s) look too red/blue/yellow etc., or you seem to be using a low
colour depth in your photos.
There is a problem with the contrasts in these photo(s). The whites in the
image are not pure white, or the blacks are not pure black.
The overall impression of these photo(s) is too dark. This may be due to
incorrect exposure settings for your camera or scanner, or it may be
because the photo was taken in difficult light conditions.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by wunaladreamin
Kenny I dont see anything too wrong with it, the color looks well. nice and sharpened. I dont see nothing wrong with the picture....
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by wunaladreamin
Looks like a blue cast on my monitor. Does this look better?
http://www.pbase.com/image/105270567.jpg
Corey
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corey
Looks overprocessed to me.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Normally I understand the rejection reasons, but I am puzzled by these. Can anyone help?
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2188075
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2188066
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2188109 (It's a night shot, it's dark at night, thats why the photo is "dark")
Thanks
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Not sure on the "Overprocessed" rejections, Mat - that's always a tough one for me to judge.
On the night shot, I think your problem is that the subject of the shot, the Virgin 744, is just too dark and hard to see. I have a bunch of "night" shots on JP.net. If you look at them, you will see that the main subject is typically fairly well lit despite being a night shot. In your shot, the sunset looks to be the main subject. Also, I'm not a fan of the way the 744 is cut off - I'm sure there wasn't much you could do about framing the shot, but it looks a little awkward to me.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
It looks like a "just after" sunset shot, that is perfect, it very pretty as orangey light of the sky high lights part of the 747.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2180675
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2180667
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2180666
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2180664
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2180661
All this - after they tell me my photos can't be over 1024 wide. so I crop them to conform to their size demands, and then they reject me because of size ratio and cropping?!?!?! it's getting old already.. at least on Flickr, and here, what we post, stays up and everyone wins. anyone else have a "size" problem??? any opinions? i would love to hear some feedback! thanks! Roman
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Roman, take a deep breath. You need to crop in a 3:2 or 4:3 ratio (6" X 4" or 8" X 6") to avoid such rejections. Also cropping closer to the aircraft will help a lot. Don't be discouraged, try visiting the jp digital processing forums. You can get a much better idea of what the screeners are looking for in those forums.
Where were you shooting those belly shots? Burger King?
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by N75715
The guidelines for size format are the following. There are some other issues with those photos as well, to much contrast and a couple of them could use a touch more sharpening.
1.2 Image Formats
Photos should be uploaded between 4:3 or 3:2 format. Those formats are typically used by almost all digital cameras, so that any changes to the format can only be achieved by deliberately cropping the photo differently. A photo outside these size ratios will be rejected using the rejection reason "Cropping / Photo edges".
To make it easier for you here are the typical sizes for both ratios.
4:3 3:2
800 x 600
1024 x 76
1280 x 960
1600 x 1200
800 x 533
1024 x 681
1200 x 800
1600 x 1067
Example: a photo of 1024 px should be between 681 and 768 pixels high.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/reje ... -Large.jpg
This was rejected for quality and motiv - I'd love to know what Motiv of a.net this broke because I read through their motiv section on their rejections and couldn't find what was at fault - I also question the quality rejection, but, that's my opinion...
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
They don't like pictures of planes :mrgreen:
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Mark, I don't get the motiv either but, she is a bit grainy in the sky and the wing is showing jaggies (on my monitor at least). Whaddaya tryin' to rub the EK 772 in my face man?!?!?! Great sets from JFK btw!
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
I'd love to know what Motiv of a.net this broke because I read through their motiv section on their rejections and couldn't find what was at fault
The right main gear is blocked by the runway sign. That is the motiv rejection.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
I didn't even notice that - well - thanks Nick for pointing it out.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by NIKV69
Quote:
I'd love to know what Motiv of a.net this broke because I read through their motiv section on their rejections and couldn't find what was at fault
The right main gear is blocked by the runway sign. That is the motiv rejection.
How is that a motive rejection and not a "Obstruction/Clutter" rejection?
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
A quick search would have answered your question but here is the info from the page on anet. I believe the answer to your question is a few lines down.
MOTIVE
Your photo(s) showed a motive that is not accepted by Airliners.net. This problem may be due to a very wide range of reasons.
Some of the most common examples are:
Photos showing just a part of an aircraft (with no motivation for doing so, like a special sticker, damage etc.). Additionally, cutting off the nose or a part of the tail can also result in a motive rejection.
Photos with distracting or obstructing objects in the foreground (this is especially true for gate shots which are very difficult to get accepted due to their common nature and the large amount of equipment which usually surrounds the aircraft). Any equipment or objects blocking parts of the aircraft will result in a motive rejection.
Photos that do not show an aircraft or anything sufficiently related to aviation at all. Common examples are photos of ramp equipment, like stairs, or cars. Or airport structures like radar towers, jet bridges, office buildings.
Photos showing the date in the lower left or right corner of the image. If your photos show the date on them please disable this feature on your camera.
Close up cockpit shots with the only reason for the shot being showing pilots waving.
Cockpit photos in which the pilots block out most of the panel
Photos taken through aircraft windows that show little wing/engine and have no airport visible on the ground.
Photos that include window reflections. These can result from taking photos through terminal windows or observations decks that are enclosed by glass. Shots taken through aircraft windows can also result in reflections, or can show scratches or dirt from those windows. This will also result in a motive rejection.
Photos taken inside aircraft that only show tables, dinner trays, or personal tv's. Cabin overviews that are taken from a very low standpoint and have seatbacks block out most of the image.
Please note that motive rejections can also result from other, more subjective reasons. These are usually of an aesthetical nature.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Thanks wunaladreamin and T-Bird76 for your inputs... maybe they just don't like pictures of planes, like stuart schechter said. that is possible, too... LOL. I'll keep plugging along and should get it right one of these days. The belly shots (aircraft moving from R to L) were indeed taken at B.K. no hassles there at all, and i got to hang out under the shade of the tree in the parking lot, to boot.
cheers,
Roman
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Maybe someone can help me with this since I am totally confused and at a dead end here.
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2220528
This photo got rejected for "Bad Composition (bad framing / aircraft not centered)"
I rechecked the centering in the photo by measuring all four directions and it appears correct to me.
So I submitted an appeal with a very polite and factual request. It got rejected instantly.
I then decided to reply to the rejection email with the following:
- "I appreciate you considering my appeal, but I am now more confused than ever. Please bear with me while I try and understand this...
Isn't it a requirement that the aircraft be centered within the photo? To me that would mean that there be equal amounts of space on all sides of the aircraft. This is the case with my photo.
I could very easily move the aircraft up and place the main fuselage along the center line of the photo, but that would place the tail close to the top border and leave a lot more empty space below the aircraft. I think that would certainly reject???
Help"
This email got bounced from their server, so I decided to post my question here for some help.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
This photo got rejected for "Bad Composition (bad framing / aircraft not centered)"
I rechecked the centering in the photo by measuring all four directions and it appears correct to me.
The subject is way to low in the frame.
Quote:
I could very easily move the aircraft up and place the main fuselage along the center line of the photo, but that would place the tail close to the top border and leave a lot more empty space below the aircraft. I think that would certainly reject???
Nope, do it and you shoud be fine.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg_NY
Maybe someone can help me with this since I am totally confused and at a dead end here.
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2220528
This photo got rejected for "Bad Composition (bad framing / aircraft not centered)"
I rechecked the centering in the photo by measuring all four directions and it appears correct to me.
So I submitted an appeal with a very polite and factual request. It got rejected instantly.
I then decided to reply to the rejection email with the following:
- "I appreciate you considering my appeal, but I am now more confused than ever. Please bear with me while I try and understand this...
Isn't it a requirement that the aircraft be centered within the photo? To me that would mean that there be equal amounts of space on all sides of the aircraft. This is the case with my photo.
I could very easily move the aircraft up and place the main fuselage along the center line of the photo, but that would place the tail close to the top border and leave a lot more empty space below the aircraft. I think that would certainly reject???
Help"
This email got bounced from their server, so I decided to post my question here for some help.
Mate you also have a nasty dust spot above the plane as well.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Thanks NIKV69 and T-Bird76
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
I have two that are against an overcast sky and got rejected for dark/underexposed. How do I fix this without blowing out the plane?
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2235429
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2235427
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuart schechter
Stuart try only selecting the plane using the magic wand and increasing the levels. Both also need a bit more sharpening as well.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
mine were rejected a few weeks ago at airliners.net.. of course it was a lot larger and without the watermarks.. just took it from my site
http://www.flyawayphotos.com/IMG_007531.jpg
http://www.flyawayphotos.com/IMG_15722.jpg
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
I got a rejection from anet today for specks. When I looked at the picture, all I could see that were specks were black specks that are birds in the distance. I've equalized the picture and can't see anything else. Can anyone else see anything that I might have missed?
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... 292008.jpg
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkLawrence
I got a rejection from anet today for specks. When I looked at the picture, all I could see that were specks were black specks that are birds in the distance. I've equalized the picture and can't see anything else. Can anyone else see anything that I might have missed?
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... 292008.jpg
Photo isn't loading.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by stuart schechter
Photo isn't loading.
Probably because I appealed it....here it is:
[EDIT] - It got rejected again - I've corrected the link to my own website - can someone see specks on this?
http://www.tavustheman.com/images/AN...L-12292008.jpg
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
i don't see specks, but i see small birds around the aircraft image. maybe someone mistook those as specks or dust???
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
That's what I'm thinking as well - but - according to the screeners and head screeners at anet, those are the reason for rejection - my thinking is they want them edited out.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkLawrence
That's what I'm thinking as well - but - according to the screeners and head screeners at anet, those are the reason for rejection - my thinking is they want them edited out.
Hi Mark, how are you? Here's what I saw that may be what they are talking about, I don't think they want the birds out bc that would be manipulation. Also did you catch the JAL 747 at FLL this morning?
http://i75.photobucket.com/albums/i2...L-12292008.jpg
Bill
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Well darn...thanks Bill - I really didn't see those at all. I missed the JAL - can't get to FLL today - maybe it will stay unitl Monday when I'm down there next!!! :)
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
I don't understand this one at all:
The rejection reasons are contradictory:
A) oversharpened
B) undersharpened (soft)
C) bad info: CN
D) invalid hot
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2328637
Additionally, the bad info that was rejected on this shot was accepted on my second upload of the same a/c almost 45 minutes later along with another shot an hour after my acceptance - again with the same exact info.
Finally, why would this shot be considered an invalid hot when the second shot of the same a/c was accepted 45 minutes later as a hot photo?
These make no sense to me.
Help anybody?
Link to the accepted shot of the same a/c
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php? ... 469&nseq=0
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerslice
I don't understand this one at all:
The rejection reasons are contradictory:
A) oversharpened
B) undersharpened (soft)
C) bad info: CN
D) invalid hot
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2328637
Additionally, the bad info that was rejected on this shot was
accepted on my second upload of the same a/c almost 45 minutes later along with another shot an hour after my acceptance - again with the same exact info.
Finally, why would this shot be considered an invalid hot when the second shot of the same a/c was accepted 45 minutes later as a hot photo?
These make no sense to me.
Help anybody?
Link to the accepted shot of the same a/c
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php? ... 469&nseq=0
The screeners aren't perfect and the shot was accepted on appeal. I can see where the screener saw parts that were soft and parts that were oversharpened but I felt when I accepted it on appeal it was within our standards.
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
-
Re: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!
