Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
xaapb
Topic Author
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:08 pm

Second opinion please on rejected pictures.

Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:50 am

Good afternoon gents,

Could you please give me your advice on this rejected pictures please?

1. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 365e8180c0
Rejected reason: Soft

2. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... f0cdf11b07
Rejected reason: Soft (I personally don't have great hopes for this picture, but as the post title says...)

3. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... d794dea6ff
Rejected reason: Soft & CW Rotation

4. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 0648aaf382
Rejected reason: Soft.

Thank you very much in advance for any advice!

Regards,

Jorge.
 
User avatar
HarryLi
Screener
Posts: 1061
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:51 am

Re: Second opinion please on rejected pictures.

Wed Jul 26, 2017 4:13 am

Hello, Jorge
Mexico 787 : Windows soft i think. And the tail also has a little bit soft.
Second one : well, i am not pretty sure for it. But both of these 2 aircrafts seem to be soft.
Mexico E170 : The level seems ok for me but the nose seem to be bit of Soft not so bad.
KLM B747 : Regarding to this one,the nose of the KLM is sharp enough i think but the rest parts of the aircraft look pretty soft including the tail.
Just my personal opinions.
Cheers,
Harry
 
User avatar
xaapb
Topic Author
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:08 pm

Re: Second opinion please on rejected pictures.

Wed Jul 26, 2017 12:55 pm

Hello Harry,

Thank you very much for your comments, I'll wait to see more opinion and tonight after work I will rework those pictures.

Greetings,
Jorge
 
User avatar
airkas1
Posts: 7904
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:01 am

Re: Second opinion please on rejected pictures.

Wed Jul 26, 2017 2:13 pm

AM 787: passable
AM 737: agree with soft
AM Connect: looks ok
KLM: blurry, soft.
 
User avatar
xaapb
Topic Author
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:08 pm

Re: Second opinion please on rejected pictures.

Wed Jul 26, 2017 3:42 pm

airkas1 wrote:
AM 787: passable

AM Connect: looks ok


Thank you Airkas1, in your opinion, should I appeal those pictures?

Greetings,
Jorge
 
User avatar
airkas1
Posts: 7904
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:01 am

Re: Second opinion please on rejected pictures.

Thu Jul 27, 2017 5:27 pm

I would've said yes, but just saw the appeal results and noticied that both were rejected upon appeal. Sorry for giving apparently wrong advice.
 
User avatar
xaapb
Topic Author
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:08 pm

Re: Second opinion please on rejected pictures.

Thu Jul 27, 2017 9:55 pm

airkas1 wrote:
I would've said yes, but just saw the appeal results and noticied that both were rejected upon appeal. Sorry for giving apparently wrong advice.


No worried Airkas1 thanks! I'll reworked both of them and try again.

Greetings,

Jorge.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos