Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

RobertLN - prescreening request

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

  • Pilot8998
    replied
    Originally posted by RobertLN View Post

    Hello Pilot 8998,
    thanks for your response. The email clearly states, that it is the serial which is "wrong". I dislike it very much to post a rejection in the forum because it usually wastes the valuable screeners time, but as it is impossible to reach the screener, this is my only way of expressing how unfair this rejection is.
    Hello Robert,

    I see your picture will be the first picture of this registration on JetPhotos.

    Upload it again and you have two options:

    1) in this case of the „unknown“ serial, you can leave the serial box blank. In this case please use the Message to screeners box and tell the screener that you don‘t know the serial.

    2) Or you can search the internet, maybe this registration is already in the database of other databases. In this case please use the serial and put the link to this website in the „message to screener“ box. The screener can now see your source.


    You always can put the link to the serial in this message box for the screener.

    Kind Regards
    Julian

    Leave a comment:


  • RobertLN
    replied
    Originally posted by Pilot8998 View Post

    Hello Robert, I will try to help you with your rejection.

    At first, please use the forum before you send and appeal. You only can appeal one times for one rejection, so it‘s good to ask in this forum first to find a solution for the appeal text to the admin screeners.

    You usually got a mail with your screening results. The rejection reason „Bad Info“ often is explained further.
    Did the screener mentioned there anything?

    I think the serial number is not the problem for your „Bad Info“.

    Can you look in the mail again?

    Thanks!

    Regards
    Julian
    Hello Pilot 8998,
    thanks for your response. The email clearly states, that it is the serial which is "wrong". I dislike it very much to post a rejection in the forum because it usually wastes the valuable screeners time, but as it is impossible to reach the screener, this is my only way of expressing how unfair this rejection is.

    Leave a comment:


  • Pilot8998
    replied
    Originally posted by RobertLN View Post
    Hello there, even though I already appealed I have a question regarding this rejection. First of all it is impossible to reach the screener. Even though it says so in every single JetPhotos Submission results email that by replying I'd be able to get in touch, it just never works. But that is not the point of this post.

    This is the rejection:
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8223416
    Serial number is apparently incorrect. TGEE028 seems to be not suitable, even though scramble.nl shows this serial albeit without the zero. 79-27 is multiple times on Jetphotos with the serial being TGEE027. Example:
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9354503

    I don’t see why TGEE028 is suddenly not acceptable, as I used 79-27 serial on the DB as reference. Any ideas on what I can do? Any thoughts?
    Thank your for your time and effort
    Hello Robert, I will try to help you with your rejection.

    At first, please use the forum before you send and appeal. You only can appeal one times for one rejection, so it‘s good to ask in this forum first to find a solution for the appeal text to the admin screeners.

    You usually got a mail with your screening results. The rejection reason „Bad Info“ often is explained further.
    Did the screener mentioned there anything?

    I think the serial number is not the problem for your „Bad Info“.

    Can you look in the mail again?

    Thanks!

    Regards
    Julian

    Leave a comment:


  • RobertLN
    replied
    Hello there, even though I already appealed I have a question regarding this rejection. First of all it is impossible to reach the screener. Even though it says so in every single JetPhotos Submission results email that by replying I'd be able to get in touch, it just never works. But that is not the point of this post.

    This is the rejection:
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8223416
    Serial number is apparently incorrect. TGEE028 seems to be not suitable, even though scramble.nl shows this serial albeit without the zero. 79-27 is multiple times on Jetphotos with the serial being TGEE027. Example:
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9354503

    I don’t see why TGEE028 is suddenly not acceptable, as I used 79-27 serial on the DB as reference. Any ideas on what I can do? Any thoughts?
    Thank your for your time and effort

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by RobertLN View Post
    Hello there,
    I would like to have these photos prescreened
    Firstly this wreck:
    Should be ok.

    Originally posted by RobertLN View Post
    Secondly this Iberia, which was shot through a fence (only visible when equalized). Would this shot be okay?
    Don't see any evidence of a fence, so should also be ok.

    Leave a comment:


  • RobertLN
    replied
    Hello there,
    I would like to have these photos prescreened
    Firstly this wreck:
    Click image for larger version

Name:	LEJR-EC-JFV-2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.38 MB
ID:	1041779
    I am aware that there is obstruction, but it was unavoidable.
    Secondly this Iberia, which was shot through a fence (only visible when equalized). Would this shot be okay?
    Click image for larger version

Name:	LEJR-EC-JXJ.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	888.8 KB
ID:	1041780
    Thanks so much for the advice.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by RobertLN View Post
    Hey, would this be a suitable Airport overview for the Airbus plant at Finkenwerder/Hamburg.
    No.

    Originally posted by RobertLN View Post
    Would the quality be ok? I am just wondering.
    Quality looks ok, but not really sure the composition is justified.

    Leave a comment:


  • RobertLN
    replied
    Hey, would this be a suitable Airport overview for the Airbus plant at Finkenwerder/Hamburg. Or are there too many airplanes? Would the quality be ok? I am just wondering. Thanks Click image for larger version

Name:	EDHI.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.02 MB
ID:	1040164

    Leave a comment:


  • RobertLN
    replied
    Alright, thanks for the confirmation! I am very thankful for your advice and work in the forum.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by RobertLN View Post
    Thanks so this photo too would have zero chance of acceptance? [ATTACH=CONFIG]25054[/ATTACH]
    Correct.

    Leave a comment:


  • RobertLN
    replied
    Thanks so this photo too would have zero chance of acceptance? Click image for larger version

Name:	EDHI-AVXR-8830-Final.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.19 MB
ID:	1039709

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by RobertLN View Post
    Hey there, I took some sunrise shots, would these be considered backlit? Any other issues with the images? Thanks a lot for your time [ATTACH=CONFIG]25022[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]25023[/ATTACH]
    Yes, those are both backlit.

    Leave a comment:


  • RobertLN
    replied
    Hey there, I took some sunrise shots, would these be considered backlit? Any other issues with the images? Thanks a lot for your time Click image for larger version

Name:	EDHI-D-AYAV-8887.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.22 MB
ID:	1039677Click image for larger version

Name:	EDHI-D-AVXW-8837.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.12 MB
ID:	1039678

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by RobertLN View Post
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]24722[/ATTACH] I added 0.2 CW Rotation in Lightroom. Would that be okay now? Thanks
    Levelling would be ok for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • RobertLN
    replied
    Click image for larger version

Name:	D-AVVB-8870-Corr.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.09 MB
ID:	1035345 I added 0.2 CW Rotation in Lightroom. Would that be okay now? Thanks

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X