Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'lacking definition'.
Found 3 results
Hi Fellow Photographers ... I saw that another patron posted a photo that was rejected and he received lots of great input on how to improve his own QC process. I recently uploaded a photograph I took from a trip to Pompeii. It was one of the Pompeii dogs. I felt the image had excellent quality. The picture was taken with a Canon T6s; ISO 250; 1/200 sec. f/5.6 135mm; file size of 16.3 MB; with a resolution of 6000 x 4000 uncropped or enhanced. The image of the dog and surrounding grass is so clear you can see the individual hairs on the dog, the red stitching on the collar, and the grass seed heads at the feet of the dog, which are crisp and clear. The background of the road and surrounding grass are blurred on purpose. Any feedback you can provide would be greatly appreciated. This was the only image I uploaded and I am at a total loss as to how to evaluate my own images at this point. It was rejected as "soft or lacking detail."
I had turned in my 4 pictures for approval and got the response to all of them, "Soft or lacking definition" . Im not sure what they mean by this because i felt like the images were all pretty good. Id appreciate any advice or further explanation as to what they meant for each picture. http://www.viewbug.com/photo/4149938 http://www.viewbug.com/photo/4009814 http://www.viewbug.com/photo/4191373 http://www.viewbug.com/photo/3510758