Thanks Mark...yeah, I've gotten the whole different reason deal a few times, too. Despite my complaints about A.net, they *have* made me look more critically at my images, and that's a good thing. But this latest deal has ticked me off to the point where I was almost going to tell them to pull all my photos from the site.Originally Posted by Zee71
I've submitted a ramp shot to Anet of the JetBlue with the new scheme........let's see what happens!
Is the shot Manny fixed the one that got rejected? Color was way off. Priority is one thing but that wasn't even close. I have had some priority shots with slight faults that would have got rejected otherwise but where still in the ballpark. As for why your second upload is not getting screened. You didn't send them a love email did you? :D. The Ethiad shot should have been accepted. It's an awesome capture in terrible conditions and halos are not enough to reject a new scheme of a airline not many people get to see.
'My idea of a good picture is one that's in focus and of a famous person doing something unfamous.' Andy Warhol
Not sure what everyone else is seeing, but I don't see any huge issues with the color balance on the photo, and I'm using a hardware calibrated S-IPS monitor. The only thing A.net wanted me to fix was the sharpness (or lack of it) near the nose of the plane, and I don't disagree that it's soft in the original. I found another shot from the series, and that's what I resubmitted. As for my email to them, this is exactly what I said: "Thanks for the note...I have just uploaded a different shot from the series that has better focus." That wasn't too harsh was it?As for the Ethiad shot, yes, people in the US won't get to see it, but at the same time, people in Europe won't see JetBlue. I prefer this shot of it: http://jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=7047366 - which looks like it was exposed properly to start with, and not salvaged with the shadow/highlight tool. Beautiful scheme though...I don't think anyone can argue that!
I think Manny's side by side is pretty clear. I see a huge difference in the fuselage. As for the JP Ethiad shot I can't see any detail on it and the glare is annoying. Again anet only took the shot because it's the first shot of a new scheme. Though he did great job saving it in PS.Not sure what everyone else is seeing, but I don't see any huge issues with the color balance on the photo, and I'm using a hardware calibrated S-IPS monitor. The only thing A.net wanted me to fix was the sharpness (or lack of it) near the nose of the plane, and I don't disagree that it's soft in the original. I found another shot from the series, and that's what I resubmitted. As for my email to them, this is exactly what I said: "Thanks for the note...I have just uploaded a different shot from the series that has better focus." That wasn't too harsh was it?
'My idea of a good picture is one that's in focus and of a famous person doing something unfamous.' Andy Warhol
Manny's side by side makes it clear if you assume one side is the correct WB. Yes, the original looks cold when you put it next to a warmer color intent, but the adjusted balance looks too warm to me. If you look at the striped version and prefer the original color balance, it makes the adjusted stripes look warm and the sky looks duller. Again, there was never any mention of poor color/color balance/contrast/anything. Just fixing the soft focus near the nose. If A.net had rejected it for having bad color, no problem....I just push the temperature a little higher. But they didn't, so I don't understand why it keeps getting brought up here.
I have no issue that the Ethiad shot got accepted...like I said, they relax their standards first shots for new schemes....but if that gets accepted, I don't see any reason why mine shouldn't be, or should be held up while waiting for a second opinion, or whatever is going on. They said to fix the sharpness near the nose, and I thought I did. Anyway, I just seem to be repeating everything I've already said, so I'm going to take a timeout from this thread before I get more worked up than I already am
As much as I love the concept, I believe they could have done better with this livery...
In any case, great catch Cary! And that SXM edit made me laugh out loud! Gosh, I miss SXM...
Congrats Carey... ITS TOP OF THE DAY ON JP.
Manny, you hit the nail... its about the taste & analytic mindset of screeners. Only computers will do it (once given the parameters) same task without any discrepancies. Humans can come close but will never achive 100%. I have been in hobby since 1988 or so, and have known so many photogs that are just out of A.net cause of inconsistency. I cannot even imagine the task @ hand and to do this free... I applaud each and every screeners. However I believe to scrutinize a 0.001% off photo that is "NEWS OF THE DAY" and hold for someone is just what seems to be happening. And its not hard to see why same one to two dozen photogs time and time have the front five pics on A.net.
Pascal Maillot also has about 650 shots and lots of views so that may play a roll in the decision... I think the H/S on that Etihad may be natural... If you equalize it, it is very well distributed and shows little to no banding which is typical of bad H/S ... perhaps more of a crves adjustment with a channel mask which is a lot more tolerable than H/S filter.. I use it from time to time with good results as long as it is not overdone.
Regardless, the fact that there are zero to no entries of the JB should give you a good chance to get accepted regardless. Good luck Cary, hope it makes it in. REPRESENT!!
Manny Gonzalez
Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS
No no, you meant reprAZent :)Good luck Cary, hope it makes it in. REPRESENT!!
All jokes put aside, I have to feel Cary's frustration here.
I am very new to all this, both spotting and photographing, but it comes to a point where you don't even know what's "up to standard" anymore... I've had many pictures rejected this past couple of weeks, and all rejections were fair... I don't think any of these photos qualified to go through... But the rejection reason is always different. As a trial, I submitted a bunch of about 10 pictures, all taken the same way, the same day, and edited the same way... all rejected (which, again, is fine) for different reasons! One time I get dust spots, one time I get file error, one time I get too sharpened when I sharpened another one just as much and which wasn't rejected for sharpening matters.
Look, 8 years ago I got one picture accepted by a.net on my second attempt (my avatar pic). I shot with a stupid Canon Powershot G3 and it was the luckiest shot in the world. It would take that thing about 6 weeks to focus before it actually shot, and I was just lucky to get it in the frame. For some reason, it got accepted...
I totally understand that standards must be high, and I agree with that principle if we want to keep good quality content around. But when I get VERY generous advice from you guys, I hear the very WISE saying "there is no perfect formula". And I SO agree with this... we all have different tastes and it should be this way.
But whether it is JP or a.net, it does really feel like it is up to a given screener at a given moment. Yes, I'm sure they are ethical and are trying to be as fair as they can be... But if it was up to me, although I see differences, I couldn't say for instance "hey Manny, your shot is bad because Mark, Eric, and Moose shot it differently" (sorry Manny I'm not picking on you, just an example!).
Anyway, it is indeed confusing. And Cary SHOULD get his shot accepted... otherwise, there is no point in being a big aviation website. If you're that big, then you MUST present the NEWS to your audience (in this case, a new, creative livery from JetBlue).
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks