Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!

[heeshung]

- Too much or too little contrast
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2878220
Screener's Comments: Needs some serious histogram adjustment.

- Dark / Underexposed
- Too much or too little contrast
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2878245

[AirtrafficController]

I'm trying to adjust the levels just on the aircraft but the magic wand keeps on selecting the fence once I click select inverse. Any ideas?
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2887360

[lijk604]

Use the magic wand to click the sky, then inverse. Don't worry about the fence it's not the subject of the photo.

[Matt Molnar]

Reason(s) For Rejection:
- Dark / Underexposed
- Bad motive



a. The foreground is dark but the subject is well lit, as planned.
b. That's about as good a motive you're going to get for that terminal. Do they just not like terminal shots?

[aeropup]

I'm trying to adjust the levels just on the aircraft but the magic wand keeps on selecting the fence once I click select inverse. Any ideas?
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2887360

I'm in love with that image.
Are they just really, really, really fussy?

[wunaladreamin]

I'm trying to adjust the levels just on the aircraft but the magic wand keeps on selecting the fence once I click select inverse. Any ideas?
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2887360

Yeah, after you magic wand, switch to the rectangular marquis tool, hold "shift" to add the fence to the initial selection. That way, when you inverse, you've got only the bird selected.

Are they just really, really, really fussy?

Jetphotos isn't very fussy, but things have to be edited right. For this one, it's all in the histogram. An easy fix for Luke.

[seahawks7757]

I got a couple-
N706AS-
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2904953
N506AS-
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2904882
N747EX-
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2903613
N787BA-
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2903572

I am like 0 for 20 on jetphoto's

Thats why I like this site-
www.airlinefan.com
They are more fair and practical. I get about 40% of my entry in there.

[seahawks7757]

Just curious is this photo blurry to anyone else?
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2907119

[heeshung]

Right by the APU exhaust is where it's most noticeable.

[MarkLawrence]

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2916625

Are they talking about just under the cockpit window???

[NIKV69]

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2916625

Are they talking about just under the cockpit window???

I see it along the whole fuselage. more easily noticed front of fuselage

[MarkLawrence]

Thanks Nick - darn monitor calibration..didn't see it at first...

[seahawks7757]

And not even a rare WWII bird can get me in :(
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=2920394
Also they say the reg is wrong but it doesn't come up with the L in it. W/out it it does though.

[moose135]

Brandon, that looks too low in the frame, and it definitely needs some CCW rotation.

N7079G is a valid registration in the FAA database. NL7079G is a carryover of an interim registration scheme where the L indicated military aircraft modified for limited civil use. Officially that was phased out in the early 1950s, but you still see many war birds carrying it. That may be part of the reason you got that rejection - it says "Bad Info in the following field(s): Airline,Registration" so they may want the NL7079G as that is what is shown on the tail. I don't see any other photos in the DB, so I can't compare, but some of my war bird shots include the prefix after the N, since that is what is painted on the aircraft, even though that is not their official "FAA" registration. Your "Airline" designation is also wrong. It is a privately owned aircraft, it is not currently owned/operated by the US Navy. War birds should not be listed under the service they once flew with, but rather their current owner.

[seahawks7757]

Thanks for the help Moose!