Airliners.net Rejection

[awacsfan]

Gary,
I have no clues as to what they may mean with "washed out" but I'd suggest you appeal the image and put that question into the reason box for the appeal and hopefully you'll receive an answer. I've done that a few times and even received a personal email from one of the head screeners in at least two cases.

Good luck

Andy

[gary1701]

Thanks Andy, and I'm glad it's not just me then. I kept thinking that 'washed out' meant something else besides the obvious and it was me being thick! I'll try the appeal system and see what they're thinking is. I doubt they'll take it as once it's already been rejected I tend to think they don't go back on it, but it should give me some info to work with at the very least. Thanks again.

Gary

[gary1701]

I stand corrected, and also a little suprised. Appeal was successful!

Gary

[awacsfan]

I stand corrected, and also a little suprised. Appeal was successful!

Gary

Wow, congrats Gary - good to hear that your appeal was successful Well done!

Cheers

Andy

[Ben Montgomery]

Another "how did this get accepted shot"

Is it just me, or are the nose, and all the extremities VERY blurry?

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia-- ... 3b33c51e73" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[davekench]

Ben, I agree with your comment you are right it is blurred, a case of another one getting through the net without being rejected.

Dave

[Zymurgy661]

Sorry to drag up an old thread but anyone able to cast their eye over this -

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... d-7798.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Been rejected as 'soft' but would appreciate some other opinions!

[Flyingmonster]

Im not brilliant at this but possibly the engines on the right wing are a wee bit shoft

[awacsfan]

I was looking at the nose and tail and at least on my monitor they seem to be a tad soft, however, I've had more than my fair share of a-net rejections being "soft" which looked okay on my monitor. It's a good picture and it looks good to me for sure!
cheers

Andy

[MikeB]

I think i'd just give that one a boost of sharpening and then get it back in the queue.

[Wallace]

Referring to Zymurgy661's KC135 photo one thing to realise is that USM sharpening works by boosting the local contrast difference, in this case between black and gray, and there is not that much contrast between the two, hence the soft rejection.
I would maybe use High pass Sharpening or even a sharpening mask to bring out the details on the aircraft without sharpening the sky and the risk of creating noise in the uniform blue sky.

You have caught a highlight on the nose art, over exposed or clipped areas give the impression of being soft because they have little or no contrast to boost and therefore sharpen.
Looking at the histogram you do have clipped tones on the nose maybe one for the album.

[Zymurgy661]

Many thanks for the comments guys, especially Wallace's detail on sharpening. Will have another play around with it once i get back from holiday i think.

Cheers!

[POL]

I'd say crop it to between the two orange boxes, and make sure you put in the comment to screener that you've cropped it like that to show the ground equipment that's connected to the aircraft.

[Wallace]

I thought that I would take another look at your photo. Have you considered a square crop?
The good thing about a.net is that they expect you to crop to less than a few pixels of the frame so a square crop, cutting out the yellow extinguisher may be an answer.
The square crop is better composition as all the key elements; the cockpit, ARW and to an extent the badge lie on or near a third.

Another is a 3:2 crop, again cropped close to the extinguisher with it right down in the bottom RH corner. This is my preferred crop but it would be too reactionary for the likes of a.net

It's a pity that a balanced airport scene has to be sacrificed for the sakes of dogma.

[Wallace]

3:2 is just the ratio of the long side tot he short side, 1024x683 pixels, 1200x800 and so on.

Just because your camera has a native format does not mean that all your photos have to he in that aspect ratio. The 3:2 is quite suited for Airliners, maximum length for the aircraft minimum breadth for the ground/sky.
Ultimately crop to whatever ratio makes the best composition.

[Ben Montgomery]

Any luck Ant?



I just had this rejected for Soft?

[Mike]

The most viewed photo on A-net in the last 24 hours is :- http://www.airliners.net/photo/Cathay-P ... 1882070/M/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yup,a seat,a table,a couple of windows and a telly.

[Wallace]

The seat is SOFT.

Screening is a funny old game...

[Mike]

Another of Sam Chui's shots,just look at those scuff-marks at the bottom of the seat.

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Thai-Air ... 39cb20ef17" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

There's no wonder that some of our members can't get their fantastic shots of aircraft accepted when A-net is full of photos of airliner seats !

Not funny.

[glencoe]

The size wasn't right ?

Looks ok to me & a good "action" shot to boot.