Printable View
Seems that a lot of my terminal pictures get rejected for "motive".
The fabulously underwhelming Mercedita airport in Puerto Rico. This picture does not do it justice, this shows the good side of this under-funded, under utilized airport.
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=4295513
how on earth would this considered backlit??
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4405723
Sergio, it is front lit... but the tail is dark... my usual gauge is if your tail has no light on it, then the sun is on the other side... :/
Maybe they were just piling on :mad:Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta777LR
It is "nose lit" to me. Tweak the exposure, perhaps a little fill light and she might make it in.
I personally would not be proud of that shot, no harm meant. I think one has to be a ruthless personal editor. I would not have tried to even keep that shot for my personal library :tongue: But I have learned to be a better editor and self critic over the years. I would keep one image for RECORD but that would be it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JDANDO
Salvaging images should be left for when you capture the first and last ever landing of the Space Shuttle for example :smile:
(My opinion, not the rule of course)
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...g_0962anet.jpg
This was rejected for Quality, blurry, grain, and soft... :confused:
It's backlit too....HOWEVER, I love this shot! At dusk, with the last rays of light in the background, sweet!Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris V
I am surprised they didn't mention that either, and if it wasn't a classic I wouldn't even have even bothered to upload it.Quote:
Originally Posted by lijk604
Do you think if I were to sharpen and maybe re-size it they would accept it then?
Honestly, they would then reject it for backlit. Again, don't get me wrong, I love the shot, it is the ridiculous standards those sites have.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kris V
They don't see the picture for it's true beauty, they only want the cookie cutter shots.