Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 33

Thread: Weird a.net rejection reasons

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Bklyn, NY
    Posts
    325

    Weird a.net rejection reasons

    http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/reje ... 06copy.jpg

    Reject reason: soft oversharpened

    How could that be? I understand oversharpened and I actually agree, but isn't it contradicting when you say soft and that it's oversharpened? :?

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    2,323
    Haha! Welcome to the wacky world of ridiculous rejections. I've seen that exact one before.

    While one could make themselves feel better by saying: "Well, maybe one part of the plane is blurred or soft and the rest is oversharpened" I think it's more likely that the Anet screeners are just indecisive and inconsisant. (gasp!)

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Bklyn, NY
    Posts
    325
    Thanks for a quick respons Mel. I'm wondering now if these will ever be accepted, as of right now I'm confused on what a.net wants.

    http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ ... 112406.jpg
    http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ ... 112406.jpg

    When I check whether my pics got accepted or not I navigate myself to "Rejected Photos" section right away, it's like an empty hope. :(

  4. #4
    Senior Member moose135's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Long Island, NY
    Posts
    8,041
    Got a similar one from jp.net over the weekend. As Mel said, the photo was over-sharpened (although I have a hard time telling where the limit is on that) but one area was definitely soft.

    It is frustrating when you get seemingly contradictory rejection reasons, but in my case when I took a closer look, the soft area was obvious. (Gotta stop processing at 1am!)

    My favorite a.net rejection was on a Qantas 744 which was cropped to show just the forward fuselage, up to the wing root, shot from Burger King - this one here:
    http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5716238

    I have about 8 or 10 such shots on jp.net, but a.net rejected it for "parts of aircraft cut off".

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    8,285
    Quote Originally Posted by Mellyrose
    Haha! Welcome to the wacky world of ridiculous rejections. I've seen that exact one before.

    While one could make themselves feel better by saying: "Well, maybe one part of the plane is blurred or soft and the rest is oversharpened" I think it's more likely that the Anet screeners are just indecisive and inconsisant. (gasp!)
    Actually that is a very valid rejection. I've seen plenty of pictures that I've screened and rejected for the same reason. There are generally two reasons behind this kind of rejection. First when the camera focused the focus points only locked onto one part of the plane causing the other part to be soft. So when you go to edit the shot you over sharpen trying to compensate for the softer part of the plane and the other part is oversharpened. The other reason is selective sharpening; some people try to sharpen sections of the plane which stands out like a sore thumb.

    In this case the titles and the rose are oversharpend while the belly, nose, and tail are a bit soft for A.net standards and maybe JP.net as well. How did you sharpen the photo?

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    8,285
    Quote Originally Posted by AirbusA350XWB
    Thanks for a quick respons Mel. I'm wondering now if these will ever be accepted, as of right now I'm confused on what a.net wants.

    http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ ... 112406.jpg
    http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ ... 112406.jpg

    When I check whether my pics got accepted or not I navigate myself to "Rejected Photos" section right away, it's like an empty hope. :(
    These are pretty good shots, there not over sharpened at all but A.net might say they are dark (belly) and soft. The best way to see what A.net wants is to look through similar shots and say, "does my shot look like that?" If it does then you stand a good chance of it getting in.

    Before I became a screener I often wondered what was up with the consistency when it comes to screening. The consistency falls into place when it comes to things like horizon, composition, color, information, and categories. However three people look at each photo and three people have different views on what they think. I've see pics that were rejected by the first screener for being soft but I've accepted it. Each situation deems a different way of looking at a pic. A pic taken in cloudy conditions is not going to be as sharp as one taken in sun, but that doesn't mean itís still not a good pic.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Bklyn, NY
    Posts
    325
    First off, I'm not saying if the rejection is valid or if it isn't. I've see much softer shots on a.net and I really think what got me here is the oversharpening part.

    I sharpen by selecting the inverse and simply using the sharpen option. That's how I got my first photo in, which was in fact rejected once for being oversharpened and once for being too soft.

    This one got the boot too, but I also agree with the rejection reasons: soft commonWhen I was editing I used unsharpen mask, I didn't want to over do it on sharpening.

    http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/reje ... 112406.jpg

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    8,285
    Quote Originally Posted by AirbusA350XWB
    First off, I'm not saying if the rejection is valid or if it isn't. I've see much softer shots on a.net and I really think what got me here is the oversharpening part.

    I sharpen by selecting the inverse and simply using the sharpen option. That's how I got my first photo in, which was in fact rejected once for being oversharpened and once for being too soft.

    This one got the boot too, but I also agree with the rejection reasons: soft commonWhen I was editing I used unsharpen mask, I didn't want to over do it on sharpening.

    http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/reje ... 112406.jpg
    Dude calm down a bit... I'm not attacking you. I was addressing Mel's response saying that over and soft in the same pic is a valid rejection. I was trying to give some insight to how screening works.

    The last shot is pretty good; the screener was def being picky on the soft. IMO common or similar should only be used if you already uploaded a similar shot not if someone else did.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    DTW
    Posts
    2,751
    I got one rejected for Common, actually, it was my first ever upload, that kind of confused me since I didn't have any uploaded yet... How do the screeners check for common? Do they manually go and check your photos?
    nwa FOREVER!

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    8,285
    Quote Originally Posted by nwafan20
    I got one rejected for Common, actually, it was my first ever upload, that kind of confused me since I didn't have any uploaded yet... How do the screeners check for common? Do they manually go and check your photos?
    Yes and no. We are warned about same regi, date, and location in the screening screen. There we can check the "common" photo in the database and decided how common it is.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    DCA
    Posts
    670
    Quote Originally Posted by T-Bird76
    Before I became a screener
    Did I miss something? Where do you screen? a.net or jp ?

    Rafal
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "Its basic economics, I don't understand it at all..." - Randy Marsh, South Park, CO

  12. #12
    Senior Member NIKV69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    IFP, ISP, JFK, IGM, SAN, VCV, LGA, LAX, SEE, LAS
    Posts
    4,258
    I think it's more likely that the Anet screeners are just indecisive and inconsisant. (gasp!)
    Actually Mel this not a great thing to say to someone who is trying to upload their photos to anet. First I feel the comment is false and second it just plants seeds in people's heads about the famous anet conspiracy theory. The screeners at anet are not only great photogs but also have a pretty keen eye when it comes to looking at pictures and giving us feedback on them. It is not only possible but routine to have pics that have part of the aircraft soft and others oversharpened. Sharpening is a critcial part of the post processing and one that takes a ton of trial and error and feedback. Rather than tell Jakub that the rejection reason is probably due to a screener that couldn't make up his mind I would advise him to post the pic in the av-photo forum and get a critique on it and how to fix it.

    Quote Originally Posted by airbusa350xwb
    I'm wondering now if these will ever be accepted, as of right now I'm confused on what a.net wants.
    Don't get confused with the "what anet wants" rather concentrate on the initial capture and editing. If you buy into the anet screener crap you are going to just grow more frustrated about something that doesn't exist.


    On your Turkish shot the tail is soft. As for the oversharpening on the front part of the aircraft it looks ever so slight but then again it's not us who says what too much sharpening is.

    For the two in the queue, the Aerflot it looks pretty good. I don't think the Belly being dark is that big an issue. Anet gives you some latitude with that depending on the lighting you had for the shot. I just got this in the DB and it's similiar to your subject.

    http://www1.airliners.net/open.file/1142090/L/


    The LOT is nice too. Should have a good chance. I would say don't crop so tight give yourself a little room on the nose and tail. That's how Tommy used to crop until Art showed him how. :mrgreen:

    Quote Originally Posted by airbusa350xwb
    When I check whether my pics got accepted or not I navigate myself to "Rejected Photos" section right away, it's like an empty hope
    Horrible attitude. Be a little more positive and ask advice of people in the anet forums. You can get some very good help there.
    'My idea of a good picture is one that's in focus and of a famous person doing something unfamous.' Andy Warhol

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    2,323
    Honestly guys...I was trying to poke a little fun at a situation that everyone always takes to such an extreme. I guess it's hard to convey extreme sarcasm through a post (though I don't agree that screeners are 100% consistant....even on Jetphotos).

    This will eventually boil down to the age-old arguement....it's inevidable. :-P

  14. #14
    Senior Member NIKV69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    IFP, ISP, JFK, IGM, SAN, VCV, LGA, LAX, SEE, LAS
    Posts
    4,258
    even on Jetphotos).
    Well of course they are not consistent, they hired Tommy! lolol

    I wasn't sure if you were kidding or not Mel, I figured we be serious since Jakub was stressing and needed an intervention.
    'My idea of a good picture is one that's in focus and of a famous person doing something unfamous.' Andy Warhol

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    2,323
    I'm not usually one to get involved in the (screening) arguments at all - so I thought it might be a bit more obvious that I was leaning toward the joking side ;)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •