Help with rejections...

[rmk2112]

Hi ya,
Just a thought, but could there a system of shorthand introduced whereby, for example, those receiving "Over Processed / Bad postprocessing" rejections could be given some advice as to where they need to improve the shot in the screeners comments section perhaps.
For example
c+ Too much Contrast
C- Too little contrast
B Blurry
S+ Too Sharp
S- Soft
H Halo
DS Dust Spot
N Noisy

I feel that this would be a great help as often I'm not sure when getting "too much/Too little constrast" message which way to go.
For example I got a rejection today

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4131810

I don't know where I went wrong.
I know I can ask this in the forum, but if the above was implemented and I re-submitted and still got it rejected then I could ask in the forum.
Not saying this should be mandatory, but if a screener had the time, those 2 extra keystrokes could be a help and time saver.
Regards
René

[brianw999]

Your linked image has dark and light haloes around the aircraft.

I agree that a note should be left to very briefly explain where it is not immediately obvious. If nothing else it would help to lessen the number of appeals that we get.
On the subject of appeals..... This goes out to everyone, not necessarily you Rene,

.... Please do not use the appeal system to ask questions......

The proper place for this is in the forums where your question and the answer will gain a wider audience. Assessing an appeal takes more time than a straight forward screening. That time is better used in the screening process. Up to now I have been answering appeal questions but from now on appellants who are accepting a rejection and just asking a question will get a stock "Please use the forums for your question" reply.

The appeal system should only be used for when you don't agree with a rejection and want a final decision.

Finally, a note to screeners. A short note doesn't only help the photog. It also helps subsequent screeners and the appeal screeners.

[J.Louwen]

Finally, a note to screeners. A short note doesn't only help the photog. It also helps subsequent screeners and the appeal screeners.

I DO AGREE ON THAT!

Regards.

[Mr Chips]

Finally, a note to screeners. A short note doesn't only help the photog. It also helps subsequent screeners and the appeal screeners.

I do often go out of my way to leave a message to uploaders about a rejection, however it seems half our members do not bother reading their screening emails. Some photographers seem to appeal a rejected image before the screening email even reaches their inbox (top of every hour). No point in leaving screening messages unless they will get read.

Dave

[Alex - Spot-This !]

I do often go out of my way to leave a message to uploaders about a rejection, however it seems half our members do not bother reading their screening emails. Some photographers seem to appeal a rejected image before the screening email even reaches their inbox (top of every hour). No point in leaving screening messages unless they will get read.

Dave

Very true unfortunately

[arnie]

I do often go out of my way to leave a message to uploaders about a rejection, however it seems half our members do not bother reading their screening emails. Some photographers seem to appeal a rejected image before the screening email even reaches their inbox (top of every hour). No point in leaving screening messages unless they will get read.

Dave

Could this be a formatting problem? I do remember almost overseeing a message because it was buried. But then, most rejections I got were without message.....

[LX-A343]

For example
c+ Too much Contrast
C- Too little contrast
B Blurry
S+ Too Sharp
S- Soft
H Halo
DS Dust Spot
N Noisy

I think, you are mixing up a few things. apart from "Halo" all other rejections are dealt with specific rejection reasons.

The contrast is not just too much or too little, but simply "check the histogram, something is odd". Perhaps a photo needs more shadows or more highlights. Simply adding more contrast will kill it in another way.

And for the comments to photographers: some photogs will get messages from me if needed, for many others I don't even bother, as they don't read them anyway.

[aceriana]

Your linked image has dark and light haloes around the aircraft.

I imagine Brian sees the halos via Photoshop (image - adjustments - equalize). Otherwise I don't see any.

Anyhow, I used to go bananas with halos around the aircraft in my photos.

I solved this issue by taking photos in RAW mode and specifically in my Nikon D90 turning off any D-Lighting whatsoever.

This has solved my problem almost 99%. No more halos.
Cheers!

[brianw999]

I imagine Brian sees the halos via Photoshop (image - adjustments - equalize). Otherwise I don't see any...

That's where you can check for them. The dark roof haloes and light underside haloes are clearly visible unequalised.