jhud922 - editing advice

[jhud922]

That usually only applies for very old photos (40+ years), or any other image where there is no reasonable way to get the information. An image from a few years ago that is missing the reg. because you didn't catch it at the time would not qualify.

Perhaps that should be stated in the rules more clearly? The way it is written doesn't mention age at all. Kind of feel like I wasted a lot of time with this one.

[dlowwa]

I'm confused, the upload rules state in section 1.2.4 Registration & Construction numbers (CN) "In case you the registration is unknown leave the field blank."

That usually only applies for very old photos (40+ years), or any other image where there is no reasonable way to get the information. An image from a few years ago that is missing the reg. because you didn't catch it at the time would not qualify.

[jhud922]

Rejected because of missing reg./cn

I'm confused, the upload rules state in section 1.2.4 Registration & Construction numbers (CN) "In case you the registration is unknown leave the field blank."

[dlowwa]

I have this rejection for "bad info". As I am still not getting emails from JP, could a screener please tell me what the bad info is? I didn't select a registration as this is an older photo and I can't make it out.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10771094

Rejected because of missing reg./cn

[jhud922]

I have this rejection for "bad info". As I am still not getting emails from JP, could a screener please tell me what the bad info is? I didn't select a registration as this is an older photo and I can't make it out.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10771094

[jhud922]

1,5. subjective calls, but I see the first having a much better chance than the last.
2. tug ok
3,4. borderline backlit, but 4 probably ok

thanks for your time Dana have a good weekend!

[dlowwa]

Question about these please!

Copa Airlines - I know this is a wide shot and not cropped on the aircraft, but given its location I want to see if it would be acceptable. There appear to be similar angles in the DB already - https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10643233 and https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10567774

JetBlue - would this get by with the tug?

Skyway - asking just because I'm making a post. The aqua cast below it is from the water/beach about to land at SXM.

KLM - I know the crop is not standard, but it could be considered creative and it evens out with the shadow and the guy in the water. Might be able to crop tighter if that would work better. Some similar angles, https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10605508, https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10378462, https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9420139, https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9397956

ATR - another wide shot, but plenty of similar shots in the DB - https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9541227

Thanks for your time!

1,5. subjective calls, but I see the first having a much better chance than the last.
2. tug ok
3,4. borderline backlit, but 4 probably ok

[jhud922]

Question about these please!

Copa Airlines - I know this is a wide shot and not cropped on the aircraft, but given its location I want to see if it would be acceptable. There appear to be similar angles in the DB already - https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10643233 and https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10567774

JetBlue - would this get by with the tug?

Skyway - asking just because I'm making a post. The aqua cast below it is from the water/beach about to land at SXM.

KLM - I know the crop is not standard, but it could be considered creative and it evens out with the shadow and the guy in the water. Might be able to crop tighter if that would work better. Some similar angles, https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10605508, https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10378462, https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9420139, https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9397956

ATR - another wide shot, but plenty of similar shots in the DB - https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9541227

Thanks for your time!

[dlowwa]

Also got this rejection for Bad Info (while I was just trying to see how it looked after uploading, but that's on me). As I can't see the rejection emails, could a screener tell me what info was incorrect?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10759214

Location.

[jhud922]

Also got this rejection for Bad Info (while I was just trying to see how it looked after uploading, but that's on me). As I can't see the rejection emails, could a screener tell me what info was incorrect?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10759214

[jhud922]

Not sure about this type of crop, I can try to make it tighter but will look awkward without the tug. Is this acceptable or no?

[dlowwa]

I have this rejection for "heat distortion". https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10669220

Is it worth an appeal? I don't see any noticeable heat haze on the aircraft, so I'm not exactly sure where that is being called out. I could also re-submit at a smaller size that might mitigate it. Just wanted to get a 2nd opinion before I appeal. Thanks.

Not worth an appeal. Quite noticeable on the stipe(s) and bottom of the fuselage.

[jhud922]

Not a screener, but I see pitting in the top of the fuselage - just been caught out with the same thing that I missed too.

Thats probably fair Mark. So shrink it and try again?

[MarkLawrence]

Not a screener, but I see pitting in the top of the fuselage - just been caught out with the same thing that I missed too.

[jhud922]

I have this rejection for "heat distortion". https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10669220

Is it worth an appeal? I don't see any noticeable heat haze on the aircraft, so I'm not exactly sure where that is being called out. I could also re-submit at a smaller size that might mitigate it. Just wanted to get a 2nd opinion before I appeal. Thanks.