Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pre Screening Advice - Robbie Mathieson

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by VH-ROB View Post
    Appealed, and accepted. Thanks Gerardo
    You're welcome!
    My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

    Comment


    • #32
      Hi guys, can I please get some pre-screening on this one. I'm especially a bit unsure on whether or not it would be considered as similar to photo id 7775578.
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by VH-ROB View Post
        Hi guys, can I please get some pre-screening on this one. I'm especially a bit unsure on whether or not it would be considered as similar to photo id 7775578.
        Would be rejected for oversharpened, cut off, and yes, similar.

        Comment


        • #34
          Hi all, in reference to https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7085691

          how can I avoid getting compression rejections? There's nothing I've changed in my editing workflow that I feel would lead to a compression rejection. Only thing I can think of would be having uploaded at 1024 but I highly doubt that's the case. Many Thanks, Robbie

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by VH-ROB View Post
            Hi all, in reference to https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7085691

            how can I avoid getting compression rejections? There's nothing I've changed in my editing workflow that I feel would lead to a compression rejection. Only thing I can think of would be having uploaded at 1024 but I highly doubt that's the case. Many Thanks, Robbie
            Blotchy sky, but that's more an effect of shooting through a window than bad editing. I would ignore that particular rejection reason unless you start getting more and more of the same type, in which case bring back those examples to the forum.

            Comment


            • #36
              Hi All, a few questions in regards to https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7161632.

              It's just been rejected for manipulation, and the rejection email states that the bottom shows signs of cloning. I'm assuming that the screener means the part on the left hand side? This is actually part of the airport perimeter fence, and obviously, if I was to clone it out, it would then be rejected fro manipulation. What would you suggest that I do in this instance? Would the photo be best left for my personal collection?

              Many Thanks, Robbie

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by VH-ROB View Post
                Hi All, a few questions in regards to https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7161632.

                It's just been rejected for manipulation, and the rejection email states that the bottom shows signs of cloning. I'm assuming that the screener means the part on the left hand side? This is actually part of the airport perimeter fence, and obviously, if I was to clone it out, it would then be rejected fro manipulation. What would you suggest that I do in this instance? Would the photo be best left for my personal collection?

                Many Thanks, Robbie
                Something has already been removed (or added) to the frame. There are very obvious repeating patterns in the grass directly below the nose indicative of cloning/manipulation. Perhaps you removed the fence in this version but didn’t mean to submit it. In any case, as the rejection email stated, this is not allowed and will result in further action if repeated in the future, so please take care with such editing in the future.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Hi guys, can I get a second opinion on this one please. I already have a photo of this aircraft in the database from this day, however the accepted photo is a take-off shot compared to this rejected landing shot. The upload guidelines state
                  2.6 Similar - "a photo taken from the same sequence the same day e. landing, taxiing, ramp parking or take off"
                  Now I could be reading the guidelines wrong, but I interpret that as meaning that 2x Take off shots would be rejected as similar, not 1 take off and 1 landing. Can you please confirm what the rule is. Many Thanks, Robbie

                  Rejected photo (landing) - https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7205789
                  Accepted photo (take-off) - https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9175846

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by VH-ROB View Post
                    Hi guys, can I get a second opinion on this one please. I already have a photo of this aircraft in the database from this day, however the accepted photo is a take-off shot compared to this rejected landing shot. The upload guidelines state Now I could be reading the guidelines wrong, but I interpret that as meaning that 2x Take off shots would be rejected as similar, not 1 take off and 1 landing. Can you please confirm what the rule is. Many Thanks, Robbie

                    Rejected photo (landing) - https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7205789
                    Accepted photo (take-off) - https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9175846
                    Hi Robbie,
                    Correct rejection. You are misreading the guideline. Pick your best shot within the given same day/sequence.
                    Regards T
                    Last edited by 777MAN; 2019-04-05, 10:46.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by VH-ROB View Post
                      Hi guys, can I get a second opinion on this one please. I already have a photo of this aircraft in the database from this day, however the accepted photo is a take-off shot compared to this rejected landing shot. The upload guidelines state Now I could be reading the guidelines wrong, but I interpret that as meaning that 2x Take off shots would be rejected as similar, not 1 take off and 1 landing. Can you please confirm what the rule is. Many Thanks, Robbie

                      Rejected photo (landing) - https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7205789
                      Accepted photo (take-off) - https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9175846
                      While some same side take off/landing images might both be acceptable as they are technically different sequences, they would need to be quite different. Yours are very similar, so yes, the rejection was correct. If you want to be certain that 'similar' won't apply, the rule of one image per side in the air and one per side on the ground is generally useful. There may be exceptions, but as I stated, the images would need to be quite different.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                        While some same side take off/landing images might both be acceptable as they are technically different sequences, they would need to be quite different. Yours are very similar, so yes, the rejection was correct. If you want to be certain that 'similar' won't apply, the rule of one image per side in the air and one per side on the ground is generally useful. There may be exceptions, but as I stated, the images would need to be quite different.
                        Thanks Dana, please accept my apologies as I must've totally missed reading about when the rule changed from the previous wording. Perhaps it may be an idea in the future to email all uploaders explining changes, as I daresay I'm probably not the only one who hasn't realised when changes to the upload guidelines have been made,

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by VH-ROB View Post
                          Thanks Dana, please accept my apologies as I must've totally missed reading about when the rule changed from the previous wording. Perhaps it may be an idea in the future to email all uploaders explining changes, as I daresay I'm probably not the only one who hasn't realised when changes to the upload guidelines have been made,
                          No need to apologize. The updated guidelines were published in the forum when we made the changes two years ago. You can read them here:

                          https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthr...ES-New-version

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Hi all, can I have a second opinion on https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7219506 please. Regarding obstructing objects/clutter, the upload guidelines state that both
                            Exceptions may be made if the equipment forms part of the motive of the shot
                            if the angle of the shot means only a small part of the aircraft is obstructed
                            . In my opinion, considering the two sections of the upload guidelines that I've quoted, this photo should've been accepted. Many Thanks, Robbie

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by VH-ROB View Post
                              Hi all, can I have a second opinion on https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7219506 please. Regarding obstructing objects/clutter, the upload guidelines state that both . In my opinion, considering the two sections of the upload guidelines that I've quoted, this photo should've been accepted. Many Thanks, Robbie
                              Would have been a rejection for me as well if I had screened it. If it weren't blocking the main gear, probably would have been ok. Generally tugs only get away with blocking the nose gear (if they're actually in the process of towing). Anything more than that, and an obstruction rejection is likely, as was the case here.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                                Would have been a rejection for me as well if I had screened it. If it weren't blocking the main gear, probably would have been ok. Generally tugs only get away with blocking the nose gear (if they're actually in the process of towing). Anything more than that, and an obstruction rejection is likely, as was the case here.
                                Thanks Dana, would this photo be more appropriate? Obviously rezised etc before uploading
                                Click image for larger version

Name:	2feb19 51.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.68 MB
ID:	1034320

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X