rejected my photo!

[ALIKANAANI1377]

Hello good time
My photos have been rejected in the last few days
Please comment! Are my photos really bad?
what is the problem?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6033560

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6034837

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6031286

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6031291

[FederalAce]

The problem here is that you're not framing them properly, your photos aren't bad you just need to make the images smaller properly and take photos at the right time. For ex. in the 4th link it's almost borderline backlit and the airframe is on a bland background making for many colour issues. You'll get used to it.

[dlowwa]

The problem here is that you're not framing them properly

No, framing is only an issue on one of them, and even that one is not so bad.

Are my photos really bad?
what is the problem?

Please check the rejection reasons that are given with each rejection, which should help you understand the individual flaws. If you then still have any specific questions, please feel free to ask in the Digital Photo Processing Forum

[ALIKANAANI1377]

No, framing is only an issue on one of them, and even that one is not so bad.



Please check the rejection reasons that are given with each rejection, which should help you understand the individual flaws. If you then still have any specific questions, please feel free to ask in the Digital Photo Processing Forum

Thanks for the help
Yes, I review the rejected reasons, but I do not think it is logical. Maybe I think it's a mistake

[ALIKANAANI1377]

The problem here is that you're not framing them properly, your photos aren't bad you just need to make the images smaller properly and take photos at the right time. For ex. in the 4th link it's almost borderline backlit and the airframe is on a bland background making for many colour issues. You'll get used to it.

Thanks for helping you with the photo number 4 of your letter is correct and the photo is properly rejected
But in the case of other photos, I think there are no problems and have been rejected with great intensity
Photo 1: (Compressed JPG Artifacts)
I do not think that compressing a photo is such that the photo is rejected by the site and everything is normal!
Photo 2: Over Processed / Bad postprocessing
Dark / Underexposed
The image has not Dark / Underexposed
, Over Processed / Bad postprocessing
is not there , every things are ok
Check the histogram!

[dlowwa]

Thanks for helping you with the photo number 4 of your letter is correct and the photo is properly rejected
But in the case of other photos, I think there are no problems and have been rejected with great intensity
Photo 1: (Compressed JPG Artifacts)
I do not think that compressing a photo is such that the photo is rejected by the site and everything is normal!
Photo 2: Over Processed / Bad postprocessing
Dark / Underexposed
The image has not Dark / Underexposed
, Over Processed / Bad postprocessing
is not there , every things are ok
Check the histogram!

If you do not agree, you are free to appeal the screening decisions, but if you seek advice in the forum as I suggested, you will likely find little support for your stance. As an an example, you suggest checking the histogram for the second one, but if you actually do that, you will see a large gap on the right side indicating underexposure. Furthermore, there are editing halos visible, which explains the overprocessing rejection.

Once again, I strongly suggest seeking advice from your peers/other crew members before automatically assuming you are in the right.

[aviatoruk]

If framing is still enough of an issue to be flagged upon rejection, then why if you look at the two photos
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6031286
and
https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8678762
Are both from the same angle but one has been accepted? I would also like to ask about the rules on noses as a few weeks ago I had the shot below rejected for part of aircraft cut off

[ALIKANAANI1377]

If you do not agree, you are free to appeal the screening decisions, but if you seek advice in the forum as I suggested, you will likely find little support for your stance. As an an example, you suggest checking the histogram for the second one, but if you actually do that, you will see a large gap on the right side indicating underexposure. Furthermore, there are editing halos visible, which explains the overprocessing rejection.

Once again, I strongly suggest seeking advice from your peers/other crew members before automatically assuming you are in the right.

I sent an appeal
But the appeal was rejected for no reason or explanation

[ALIKANAANI1377]

If framing is still enough of an issue to be flagged upon rejection, then why if you look at the two photos
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6031286
and
https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8678762
Are both from the same angle but one has been accepted? I would also like to ask about the rules on noses as a few weeks ago I had the shot below rejected for part of aircraft cut off[ATTACH=CONFIG]8422[/ATTACH]

Yes !!
I mean this
Please direct managers on this issue
Thanks

[MarkLawrence]

Just a suggestion from a regular user - not a JP screener or anything - just a regular user - that has been on these boards for a little while - you get a whole lot more help and encouragement when you ask questions and ask advice rather than being demanding and telling everyone that they are wrong, particularly screeners - just wanted to mention it.

[TomEPKK]

Mark - thank you for this, you are absolutely right

[SAMRPICS]

To be honest Alikanaani I agree with the screeners decisions on these photos but I think with re-editing at least half of them will get onto the site. In my early editing days I made many of the same mistakes and have learned through trial and error and listening to others. If you compare my earlier photos or anyone elses for that matter to the ones I upload now you will see what I mean.

The first photo has some jpeg compression which is usually down to oversharpening. This could be fixed by a re-edit of the original but it would depend on if the oversharpening was trying to mask the photo being a touch blurred on the nose.

The second photo is a touch dark and if I am not mistaken you have tried to reduce this with shadow highlights or something similar. This can reduces the dark look on the underside but if overdone gives an un-natural look.

The third photo is missing a small amount off the tip of the tail thin, if you wish to try it again try giving a touch more space at the back of the tail thin. The only thing I am not so sure about is if the photo is bordering on heat haze.