Advice/Confirmation requested by jakerepp

[dlowwa]

Another rejection I'm unsure about, for bad post processing. I don't see any halos, though I could just be missing them, and I didn't do much more than a little contrast and increasing the exposure a bit. Screener didn't leave notes.

What am I missing?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10828074

Above the buildings/roofs; relatively minor, but it is noticeable even unequalized.

[jakerepp]

Another rejection I'm unsure about, for bad post processing. I don't see any halos, though I could just be missing them, and I didn't do much more than a little contrast and increasing the exposure a bit. Screener didn't leave notes.

What am I missing?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10828074

[jakerepp]

It's fine. I added that one.

Thanks!

[dlowwa]

Thanks. Erwin responded to my request and said 'he would add it to the DB', which I'm assuming meant he would accept the photo, but hasn't happened yet. He didn't really explain what he meant by that or why he would add it, so I'm still unsure if I should appeal or not.

Anyways, I just got this rejection for heat distortion and I just do not see any. Can you tell me what I'm missing?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10780014

It's fine. I added that one.

[jakerepp]

Yes, that is correct.

Thanks. Erwin responded to my request and said 'he would add it to the DB', which I'm assuming meant he would accept the photo, but hasn't happened yet. He didn't really explain what he meant by that or why he would add it, so I'm still unsure if I should appeal or not.

Anyways, I just got this rejection for heat distortion and I just do not see any. Can you tell me what I'm missing?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10780014

[dlowwa]

Where would I reach out to the editors? Is that just in the aircraft types sub forum?

Yes, that is correct.

[jakerepp]

1. dirty, borderline soft
2. ok for me

You would do better to ask the editors about aircraft types since they will have the final decision on such topics.

Where would I reach out to the editors? Is that just in the aircraft types sub forum?

[dlowwa]

Bumping this back up and adding another couple photos for screening. Both were fairly heavy crops and I can never tell if the quality is still there.

1. dirty, borderline soft
2. ok for me

You would do better to ask the editors about aircraft types since they will have the final decision on such topics.

[jakerepp]

Thanks.

Sorry to bug you again, but just got a Bad Info rejection on this one and the screener noted that it's an SR20 TRAC.

I searched high and low before uploading and after but could find no evidence that that is correct. FR24, FlightAware, FAA.gov, Planefinder.net, and radarbox.com all say it's just an SR20. There's no info on this aircraft on Airfleets.net either. I also inspected the fuselage pretty closely to find any markings indicating a model but I found none.

I don't know what data source was used to find that info. Not saying it's wrong, I just can't find proof of it.

Here's the rejection link.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10804139

Bumping this back up and adding another couple photos for screening. Both were fairly heavy crops and I can never tell if the quality is still there.

[jakerepp]

Bit of a halo around the tail, otherwise ok for me.

Thanks.

Sorry to bug you again, but just got a Bad Info rejection on this one and the screener noted that it's an SR20 TRAC.

I searched high and low before uploading and after but could find no evidence that that is correct. FR24, FlightAware, FAA.gov, Planefinder.net, and radarbox.com all say it's just an SR20. There's no info on this aircraft on Airfleets.net either. I also inspected the fuselage pretty closely to find any markings indicating a model but I found none.

I don't know what data source was used to find that info. Not saying it's wrong, I just can't find proof of it.

Here's the rejection link.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10804139

[dlowwa]

Thanks, I'm just gonna leave that one.

This one looks odd to me for some reason but I can't pinpoint it. Can you pre-screen it?

Bit of a halo around the tail, otherwise ok for me.

[jakerepp]

Contrast is a bit harsh I suppose, but it's not dark. You can appeal if you like, keeping in mind that's my opinion only, and others may disagree.

Thanks, I'm just gonna leave that one.

This one looks odd to me for some reason but I can't pinpoint it. Can you pre-screen it?

[dlowwa]

This was rejected for dark, but you had given it the green light here a while back. Worth appealing?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10758820

Contrast is a bit harsh I suppose, but it's not dark. You can appeal if you like, keeping in mind that's my opinion only, and others may disagree.

[jakerepp]

This was rejected for dark, but you had given it the green light here a while back. Worth appealing?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10758820

[jakerepp]

Better centered yes, but I meant much tighter. This would likely be a cut off rejection. If you're going to crop the rotors, you can't leave much empty space on the sides of the chopper.

Ah! Copy that. I'll definitely discard it then.

Thanks Dana.