Hi,
I had a photo recently rejected due to two reasons. One is the photo being too dark / underexposed, which is totally fair. The other reason is the "watermark too intrusive" reason, which I found a bit funny as it is applied by the website. Anyway I've always thought the screening is done without the watermark?
A watermark, by definition, is always intrusive but a necessary evil. That the watermark is applied by the website, how can a photo be rejected because of that?
Cheers,
Radzi
I had a photo recently rejected due to two reasons. One is the photo being too dark / underexposed, which is totally fair. The other reason is the "watermark too intrusive" reason, which I found a bit funny as it is applied by the website. Anyway I've always thought the screening is done without the watermark?
A watermark, by definition, is always intrusive but a necessary evil. That the watermark is applied by the website, how can a photo be rejected because of that?
Cheers,
Radzi
Comment