Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!

[wunaladreamin]

Mark, if I'm seeing correctly, there is a slight halo by the tail which would explain the overprocessing/bad post rejection. The shot is also grainy and the nose is blurry. Sorry Mark, but it looks like one for the personal collection.

[MarkLawrence]

Thanks Kenny - I edited that on my work machine - and saw it on there today as well - I''ve got several more of that series - so I'll look at the others....

[heeshung]

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2426038

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2426005

[moose135]

I definitely see the backlit rejections, Mark, it looks like you had high light, but on the other side of the aircraft. You see how bright the nose/fuselage top is compared to the sides of the aircraft.

The serial number is a bit trickier - according to the FAA database, the serial number is 001, but according to the JP.net Aircraft Census Database it is listed as 28-001. I guess they want that, rather than what the FAA shows...

[heeshung]

Yep, I see that too. That area is generally bad for taking pictures in the afternoon.

[heeshung]

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2432832

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=2432873

Hmm...based on Jetphotos' own database, there are two Falcon 900's that look just like that. How can I tell them apart?

[moose135]

Mark, on the Lear, it looks a little low in the frame, which is probably what got you the "center" rejection, and the C/N is likely that "28-001" thing again. Not sure about the Falcon - I guess you could pick either one, unless you come up with a way of knowing which was at TEB this month. Looking at the accepted photos of those two, F-RAFP was photographed in Canada in March, so I guess you could make the argument... I wonder how the flight/ground crews tell them apart on the ramp?

[heeshung]

Oops; I forgot I had another photo of 128LR in queue. Just wondering, if I can pick either of the two registrations, what's the 'Unknown' option there for?

By the way, thank you, I really appreciate all the help.

[moose135]

I just suggested picking one in case that was the reason for the rejection, however, I see it said "Registration, Genre" on the rejection. Did you select Military or Civilian? I think it should be Military in this case, but that doesn't always pre-load, especially when you don't have a registration on the auto-fill.

[heeshung]

Hmm, now that I think back, I don't recall selecting that genre, so that's probably why.

[threeholerglory]

reason for rejection is "too much grain"....while i can definitely see it in the LCD screens, it was unavoidable and i feel minimized. any thoughts?

[jerslice]

You could blur the grain out of grainy areas if you're careful. If not, run it through neatimage (or send me the file and I'll run it through for ya).
I don't think the grain is that noticeable by any means. I'd consider appealing.

[T-Bird76]

You could blur the grain out of grainy areas if you're careful. If not, run it through neatimage (or send me the file and I'll run it through for ya).
I don't think the grain is that noticeable by any means. I'd consider appealing.

I advise strongly against using Neat Image...it ruins a lot of pics and it's results generally can be scene and turn into a rejection for over processing.

I'm surprised that shot was rejected to begin with. I would have accepted it, you might want to appeal it.

[jerslice]

it ruins a lot of pics and it's results generally can be scene and turn into a rejection for over processing

If you're not careful with how much you run on it, and then edit it very carefully back through after processing, I'd agree.
But if used well in combination with other tricks it can work. That being said, I prefer to blur it out of the image myself. Though we've both noted that in his photo it isn't really needed anyways!

[jerslice]

This same shot was rejected from a.net for blurry: http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php? ... 133&nseq=1

And this was rejected as a double, same shot as the first: sorry for not giving the actual links - I'm too tired.
Either way, this was after they both were rejected for being incorrectly labeled as a priority for being a greenie - despite two other shots of the same a/c from the same morning uploaded and accepted as priority. The screeners agreed to resolve the issue. Both ended up rejected