Who needs help with their scans / rejects?? We can help you!

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Hi Ben,
Not only do I think that 90% of cabin shots are boring to hell and hit seeking excuses (personal opinion) but I ALWAYS reject cabin shots taken from a seat. How lazy is that ? at least, stand up, go in the alley and try to show something interesting while taking cabin shots.
As a side note, it's considered as extremely rude and unpolite to question somebody's else picture (Even if I would indeed have rejected it too).
And I would add that we ask to NOT have recognizable faces on such shots, which is also a problem on your picture.

Cheers
Alex

PS : using words like "hello", "hi", "please", "thank you" like most of other user is also considered as a nice way of internet communication...

[Michel]

Hi,

I have a question, is a picture with backlit always a rejection?
This picture is rejected for Bad Composition (bad framing / aircraft not centered) & Backlit, but the exposure is in my eyes oke. And aircraft not centered....somebody some tips?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3572420

Thanks in advanced

[LX-A343]

Backlight does not always end up in a rejection. Backlight can add a lot to a photo, for example reflections on the fuselage, silhouette photos, and so on. But here, the backlight doesn't add anything at all, it just takes away contrast. So, in such cases, the photo will most probably be rejected.

Composition is a bit more tricky. I for one would have accepted it, taking the abckground into consideration. But I am also probably the one screener with the most rejections for bad framing, as I like to place the subject sometimes off centre .

Conclusion: for the composition alone, an appeal could be accepted. The backlight however kills it.

[ErwinS]

Hi,

This photo was rejected because of "Bad Composition (bad framing / aircraft not centered)"

http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=3572955

Please explain to me: what is my mistake with this photo ?

Thanks in advance,
Erez.

She is a bit to high in the frame.

[ErezS]

She is a bit to high in the frame.

Thanks for the reply,
Meanwhile, I saw the explanation by e-mail and I delete my question ...
Thanks anyway.

[hdgrubb]

...cabin shots...hit seeking excuses

Cha-ching! Hit the nail right on its head

[MOB]

Hi,

Okay I get the joke.....your gonna make me wait sixteen days until
I get a response to my query.....very good !!

Mike.

[AJ]

Mike, is the image you attached the file you intend to upload?

If so it is showing excessive jpeg compression.

[MOB]

Hi AJ,

Its the second image that I was going to upload - could you please tell me
a non-visual way of detecting jpegs as after a lot of years uploading to this site im still unable to detect them 100% visually - even when i click on my image posted on this thread i still only see fine lines - should i get my eyes tested ?

Mike.

[MarkLawrence]

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3575223

Once again, I seem to have been bitten by the single reject re-do. The first time this was screened - it was rejected for only dust spots. I took that same picture and only eliminated the dust spots and re-submitted and now this time is is rejected for dark. Was it not considered dark the first time? Or is it a borderline case that might be worth and appeal? And - is that the only reason for rejection? I don't want to spend another 18 days in the queue only to have it rejected for something else.

Thanks

[ErwinS]

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3575223

Once again, I seem to have been bitten by the single reject re-do. The first time this was screened - it was rejected for only dust spots. I took that same picture and only eliminated the dust spots and re-submitted and now this time is is rejected for dark. Was it not considered dark the first time? Or is it a borderline case that might be worth and appeal? And - is that the only reason for rejection? I don't want to spend another 18 days in the queue only to have it rejected for something else.

Thanks

Worth an appeal imo.

[MoBL]

Good day!

What is wrong with contrast here?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3574202

I was looking at this image many times to realise that there is something with contrast but every time I see this, I think it is allright! There is even no over or under exposed places ;( I can't understand this rejection.

Regards
Kornel

[MarkLawrence]

Worth an appeal imo.

Thanks Erwin - appeal successful.

[rmk2112]

Hi all,
Had 2 rejected today, i appealed but still rejected for too much or too little contrast...
Are they really that bad, are they recoverable? I feel they show how these aircraft look in the low summer sun pretty well. Any thoughts gratefully recieved.
The Arik and Oman were rejected, but the EVA and Asiana were accepted. I'm guessing different screeners were involved. All shots taken within 15mins of each other from the same location.
Regards
René

[MarkLawrence]

Can someone help me out with the dust stop on this one - I'm missing it - one thing to note - if it's the black spot above the tail on the left (as you are looking at it), that is a bird in the distance - and I don't normally clone out birds. I did appeal the rejection pointing out the bird spot and asking for clarification on the dust spot, but the rejection notice did not detail anything at all in the admin comments.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3576462