Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Who needs help with their scans / rejects?? We can help you!
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
It needed more screeners to take a look at and to cast their vote, while the others were "smoothly" accepted.
Comment
-
Originally posted by llpilch View PostHi everybody
I've got this rejection: http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3437576
I submitted an appeal citing the item 1.1.8 of the Photo Upload Guidelines, what says that photos like these are accepted, with this example: http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6109388
The answer for the appeal was:
Your appeal for photo id 3437576 has been processed and has been rejected.
Admin Comments >> here it simply does not work
>> http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3437576
Why doesn't work? My photo show the same thing of that A321, i can't see any reason for "simply does not work"...
EDIT: sorry for posting in the wrong place, thanks for moving
First: rejection with no criteria, second: nobody can give me an answer, third, after 4 or 5 more injust rejections, call me a lier in another rejection with no criteria
What was just a hobby for me now made me very disappointed...
I didn't wait it from you, guys
Comment
-
In your photo almost the whole aircraft is sharp, with the exception of the tail. This looks somehow weird, which at the end ended up in a rejection.
and where did we call you a liar?
Comment
-
Originally posted by pilotgolfer View PostI'm honestly a little stumped with these.
Did I miss the warbird/vintage category on both of these?
Thanks
The A-10 needs no category at all
From the screening guideline
Warbird/vintage : This category is to be selected for old planes (anything that was not built after 1970, or where the production started before 1970), planes that are no longer in regular service and planes in museums. Also, replicas of vintage aircraft need the "vintage" category.
Regards
Alex
Comment
-
Originally posted by LX-A343 View PostIn your photo almost the whole aircraft is sharp, with the exception of the tail. This looks somehow weird, which at the end ended up in a rejection.
and where did we call you a liar?
About the liar, i think we resolved it via e-mail
Regards
Comment
-
Need some help with this one please:
Where is the blur and which category was wrong? Is it considered a vintage? I have another in queue of this same a/c and would like to correct categories before screening.
Thanks
Comment
-
Hello screeners,
This one got rejected saying:
Bad Composition (bad framing / aircraft not centered)
Is the aircraft too low or too high in the frame?
Thanks
Yash
Comment
-
Originally posted by yash777 View PostHello screeners,
This one got rejected saying:
Bad Composition (bad framing / aircraft not centered)
Is the aircraft too low or too high in the frame?
Thanks
Yash
The plane is a bit too low in the frame.
Regards
Alex
Comment
-
A bit confused on the wrong titles here - I appealed but got re-rejected. There is no "Oneworld" airline to check like at Airliners.net; I simply put G-CIVP and
EGLL in the autofill.
Thanks for the help!
Comment
Comment