If you do not understand a denial.

[Roland74]

Hello JP-Team

Before I put a picture in the queue, I orient myself in the database by JP.
The following picture was rejected today.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4645894

I was oriented on the following pictures:
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.p...541932&nseq=49

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.p...57220&nseq=101

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.p...75338&nseq=106

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.p...96997&nseq=224

I have responded to the rejection, and have received the following reply.
Nose gear is completely obstructed.
So and now my question is what is it?


In picture number 3 and 4 is the reasoning of the case, but not in my image.
I agree that you can not see whole wheel, but almost 75%.

Unfortunately, I find such rejections sad.
A screener should oriented in doubt to the database.

[Mr Chips]

Roland, of the linked images:

Image 1, no part of the aircraft is obstructed. The fence comes close, but as it's a night shot, the fence isn't as distracting as it could be during a daytime image.

Image 2, accepted back in 2010 when standards were a bit more relaxed. Only the stair case is blocking the aircraft. 50/50 by today's standards.

Image 3, accepted back in 2010 when standards were a bit more relaxed. Only the nose gear is partially blocked. Again 50/50 by today's standards.

Image 4 was 2005 when standard were also much much lower than today so not worth comparing.

In your image, the airstairs alone would be borderline reason to reject (like images 3 and 4), but add in the fact that the nose gear is half blocked, the screeners involved deemed it not enough to be accepted. I hope this goes someway towards helping you view things from a screeners perspective. We have to draw the line somewhere when it comes to obstructed aircraft images.

[brianw999]

I was the appeal screener.
Not only is the nosegear obstructed but stairs also obstruct as Dave comments. Also notable but not commented on was the lack of contrast seen in the histogram which was not commented on due to the obstruction killing off the image for a reupload.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

And one important point too, let's suppose we accepted the linked images by mistake (which we did not), does that mean we have to make that mistake again with your picture ?

Seriously, this was a totally correct rejection, which really didn't deserve an appeal, try to save those for the very clear case where you think we did a mistake, and use the forum for explanations on the others, we would greatly appreciate it.

Regards
Alex

[Roland74]

Hello

I will show no errors with these examples, but some people operate this hobby orient these photos in the database.
I look many pictures and would like to try these similar photograph.
As it is difficult to understand if such images are rejected.

So something is the case right here.

I have prayer to delete a photo:
http://www.rfotomoments.ch/Spotterbr...ew.php?id=1799
Here my request:

http://forums.jetphotos.net/showpost.php?p=624601&postcount=352

so I can upload the following
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4646150

Now exactly this that I wanted to upload picture was rejected.
I was told if I want to have this image in the database I have to delete it.

What would you think now?

[Roland74]

It is a great pity nobody for the last rejected wants to express itself.

[LX-A343]

Either your photo wasn't yet deleted whe you uploaded your photo, or, more probably, it was deemed too similar to this one:
[photoid=7845350]

As this is borderline, in my opinion even too harsh, I suggest you appeal the rejection.

Gerardo