gdinscoll - post screening\rejection advice

[dlowwa]

Evening,

With this photo can I upload it under the KLM reg? Or would a ramp shot be suitable for the crop type. I didn't want to centralise the KLM and crop out two other DC-9s but understand there's a bit of leeway regarding crops,

Cheers

Not a Ramp shot. Please use the info for the KLM.

[gdinscoll]

Evening,

With this photo can I upload it under the KLM reg? Or would a ramp shot be suitable for the crop type. I didn't want to centralise the KLM and crop out two other DC-9s but understand there's a bit of leeway regarding crops,

Cheers

[dlowwa]

Evening,

would this fence/wire cause a rejection under obstruction on this photo?

Cheers

Normally, absolutely yes. There are already 8 images of this reg. on the DB, which makes it uncommon, but not exactly very rare. As such, I would say that yes, even with age/rarity factored in, still likely an obstruction rejection.

[gdinscoll]

Evening,

would this fence/wire cause a rejection under obstruction on this photo?

Cheers

[gdinscoll]

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=9003127 ?

Just saw your reply, I understand that is the old website layout right? If you were to go through a normal photographers reject section you wont see the serial (https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9002749) not sure if you knew that.

[dlowwa]

Ah, the one that doesn't come up! Thanks for info. How come it never shows on rejected photos the serial?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=9003127 ?

[gdinscoll]

cn seems to be 46, not 126 as you entered.

Ah, the one that doesn't come up! Thanks for info. How come it never shows on rejected photos the serial?

[dlowwa]

Hi

Another bad info with no comment, can't find anything wrong with the details on the page, can you let me know what is bad?

Cheers

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9003127

cn seems to be 46, not 126 as you entered.

[gdinscoll]

Hi

Another bad info with no comment, can't find anything wrong with the details on the page, can you let me know what is bad?

Cheers

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9003127

[dlowwa]

Afternoon,

Out of curiosity, would this shot be accepted? Im conscious of the backlight, but as its an air 2 air and its well lit I'm wondering if it would be sufficient, I have already uploaded one (https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10095796), but on the other side, and would like to publish this one with a different background so I assume it wouldn't fall into the 'similar' rejection category

Cheers

Depending on age/rarity, it may be.

[gdinscoll]

Afternoon,

Out of curiosity, would this shot be accepted? Im conscious of the backlight, but as its an air 2 air and its well lit I'm wondering if it would be sufficient, I have already uploaded one (https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10095796), but on the other side, and would like to publish this one with a different background so I assume it wouldn't fall into the 'similar' rejection category

Cheers

[dlowwa]

Hi,

had this rejected, before I appeal as I believe everything is correct could you mention what is "bad" https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8990197

Incase its the aircraft type, it has Air Wolf written on the side but that name is interchangeable with Iskierka: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL_M26_Iskierka

Cheers

Hmmm.. there was a comment left for you, which should be visible on your rejected images page, but I can see that it is not. In that case..

[gdinscoll]

Hi,

had this rejected, before I appeal as I believe everything is correct could you mention what is "bad" https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8990197

Incase its the aircraft type, it has Air Wolf written on the side but that name is interchangeable with Iskierka: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PZL_M26_Iskierka

Cheers

[dlowwa]

Hi Julian, I understand, but as I said in the appeal, that is the code of the aircraft not the registration, as the FAA website says N17667 is the registration, there is a load of photos of aircraft with registrations not using the second letter on the aircraft which would be the same here. Surely we are to use the registration and not the aircraft code?

Cheers

As previously stated, we prefer as displayed on the aircraft. There are multiple examples of NC- regs. (and NX- for that matter) on the DB if you check.

[gdinscoll]

Hello.

Yes, its because of the registration. Please use the reg which is shown on the Aircraft itself - "NC17667"

Regdards

Hi Julian, I understand, but as I said in the appeal, that is the code of the aircraft not the registration, as the FAA website says N17667 is the registration, there is a load of photos of aircraft with registrations not using the second letter on the aircraft which would be the same here. Surely we are to use the registration and not the aircraft code?

Cheers