Pre Screening Advice - Robbie Mathieson

[dlowwa]

Hi All, the following photo got rejected. In the screener comments, it stated that the motive reason was because of the vehicle registration plates. Am I able to blur these in photoshop? The upload guidelines doesn't specify anything in regards to vehicles. Many Thanks, Robbie

Don't see any photo.

[VH-ROB]

Hi All, the following photo got rejected. In the screener comments, it stated that the motive reason was because of the vehicle registration plates. Am I able to blur these in photoshop? The upload guidelines doesn't specify anything in regards to vehicles. Many Thanks, Robbie

[dlowwa]

Hi all, quick question regarding the following rejection. All photos of this aircraft in the database are uploaded as registration MM62209, however, I uploaded it as registration MM-62209 as that is what is printed on the side of the aircraft. Surely the correct registration should be what it actually says on the aircraft?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6272219

No, MM62209 is the correct format. All Italian military are entered as such.

[VH-ROB]

Hi all, quick question regarding the following rejection. All photos of this aircraft in the database are uploaded as registration MM62209, however, I uploaded it as registration MM-62209 as that is what is printed on the side of the aircraft. Surely the correct registration should be what it actually says on the aircraft?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6272219

[VH-ROB]

Can't say for sure, but a likely culprit would be any noise reduction settings. NR filters tend to smear out fine detail, similar to how small sensors do.

Awesome, thanks.

[dlowwa]

Many thanks for the reply. Regarding the 'pixel-smearing'/compresssion, where in my editing workflow do you think this would happen. I haven't made any changes to my editing workflow, and have only recently started recieving these rejections so am a bit lost as to where in my workflow it would start appearing.

Can't say for sure, but a likely culprit would be any noise reduction settings. NR filters tend to smear out fine detail, similar to how small sensors do.

[VH-ROB]

I didn't screen this one, but I probably would have voted no on the motive as well. The composition is simply poor; the person (not identifiable, so not an issue) is cut off along the feet, so it looks like you were more interested in trying to include them in the frame than actually show the location, which is the purpose of the 'Spotting Location' type of image. A wider shot that actually shows the location better (but still including the person) would probably be more acceptable.



Actually, like this image. Wider, and not so focused on the individual. As for compression, we use that rejection not only for when the image is highly compressed like with a too low jpeg save setting, but also when there is the pixel-smearing you usually see with images taken with small-sensor cameras. Given you are using an EOS 600D, I wouldn't expect to see such an effect like we are in this particular image, so I'd guess somewhere in your editing/saving workflow you've done something to introduce this effect.

Many thanks for the reply. Regarding the 'pixel-smearing'/compresssion, where in my editing workflow do you think this would happen. I haven't made any changes to my editing workflow, and have only recently started recieving these rejections so am a bit lost as to where in my workflow it would start appearing.

[dlowwa]

Hi All, can I please get advice on the following rejection.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6229986

The noise/grain I don't necessarily agree with however can be fixed, however I'm confused by the bad motive. I've looked at the Upload Guidelines and I don't see how it can be rejected for motive. The only reason that I feel it could possibly be rejected for is an easily identifiable person, however in my opinion neither of the people in the photo is not easily identifiable.

I didn't screen this one, but I probably would have voted no on the motive as well. The composition is simply poor; the person (not identifiable, so not an issue) is cut off along the feet, so it looks like you were more interested in trying to include them in the frame than actually show the location, which is the purpose of the 'Spotting Location' type of image. A wider shot that actually shows the location better (but still including the person) would probably be more acceptable.

Can someone also please explain to me JPeg compression artefacts - like in this picture https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6229981. I've only recently started getting these rejections.

Actually, like this image. Wider, and not so focused on the individual. As for compression, we use that rejection not only for when the image is highly compressed like with a too low jpeg save setting, but also when there is the pixel-smearing you usually see with images taken with small-sensor cameras. Given you are using an EOS 600D, I wouldn't expect to see such an effect like we are in this particular image, so I'd guess somewhere in your editing/saving workflow you've done something to introduce this effect.

[VH-ROB]

Hi All, can I please get advice on the following rejection.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6229986

The noise/grain I don't necessarily agree with however can be fixed, however I'm confused by the bad motive. I've looked at the Upload Guidelines and I don't see how it can be rejected for motive. The only reason that I feel it could possibly be rejected for is an easily identifiable person, however in my opinion neither of the people in the photo is not easily identifiable.

Can someone also please explain to me JPeg compression artefacts - like in this picture https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6229981. I've only recently started getting these rejections.

Many Thanks, Rob