Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!

[eric8669]

Help with a rejection.

http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2456013

Over processed/ Bad post processing.

Any Help. Thanks.

[wunaladreamin]

Eric, there are halo's all around the plane, not to mention a dust spot near the tail.

[MarkLawrence]

I'm interested in opinions here - too much or too little?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2468609

[cancidas]

I'm interested in opinions here - too much or too little?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2468609

i could see how someone could say little contrast, especially when looking at the tail and empenage. the tail code and star-and-bars is hard to make out. then again... that's the point of painting the airplanes like that...

aside from that it looks fine to me, just wish you slowed the shutter to blur the props. i don't really like shots when the rotors or props are frozen in time.

[jerslice]

somewhat disappointed by this one: http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2473980

[heeshung]

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2493023

Don't know if I should appeal. The horizon is actually level; my vantage makes the tower look crooked.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2492989

[moose135]

Mark, I think on that tower shot, you really need to have it straight, especially since that is your only reference point in the shot, you don't really see any of the horizon. The same with the ORBIS shot - I think you should give it some CCW rotation, to have the verticals on the equipment rack at the rear closer to true vertical. To me, both look awkward rotated the way they are.

[heeshung]

Should I bother re-uploading the tower shot? Is the "Bad Composition" referring to the fact that the tower's not in the middle?

[moose135]

I didn't even notice the composition rejection - yeah, I guess it's because the tower is off-centered, although I think it makes a better picture that way. I don't know if it would get accepted either, but do you have a shot from the same spot with the full tower and the horizon below the sunset? That might make a cool shot.

[heeshung]

http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2525530

http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2525506

http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2525527

"Screener's Comments: Sky is overexposed. There is detail there that can be recovered."


I think #1 and #3 can use some more tweaking. I don't know if any degree of sharpening can help #2.

[T-Bird76]

http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2525530

http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2525506

http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2525527

"Screener's Comments: Sky is overexposed. There is detail there that can be recovered."


I think #1 and #3 can use some more tweaking. I don't know if any degree of sharpening can help #2.

One you can save, just bring down the levels a bit, easy fix. Two is def blurry, can't save it. Three I don't think is all that bad..might want to appeal it.

[heeshung]

Thanks.

I'm going to get to #1 when I get a chance, and #3 made the appeal.

[jerslice]

Rejected for: contrast/personal


Rejected for: grain...???


Rejected for: grain & contrast....???


At first glance I just don't understand these rejections - especially the grain ones. Anyone have any thoughts?

[afr022]

jerslice the cactus aircraft is a nice pic and what do they mean by grain?

[MarkLawrence]

I'm working with a new laptop/monitor combination, and I guess I am missing something on the setup - I see heat distortion on the runway behind, but can someone point out the heat distortion on the plane please?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2552032