Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'lacking definition'.
Found 4 results
Rejection reason Soft or lacking definition - Noise I have never spent so much time examining sky and shadows in my pictures and the edges of the frame. But this does not seem to be enough. I would like to rant, but more than rant, I would like to understand why some softness at the edge of the frame is enough to (well I think it's the scaffolding top right which has been softened in perspective correction that is the problem) why the edge of the frame is so important to QC.. "Softness lacking definition" would that be my problem, top right or is it the whole image? Also "Noise" is that the brown in the shadow in the bottom mid right of the image? Or is it that the sky is not right? I'm trying to understand and I am also trying not to second guess myself. If they can't sell a picture like this; well there's possibly a little something they won't like in a LOT of my pictures? (only 25+ years as a professional what would I know?) I'm worried. I'm really worried. The time, the turnaround for a rejection on a unique view (the scaffold). It all seems a very hit and miss. I would be interested in feedback. I KNEW that that piece of scaffolding was soft; did not and does not bother me - it's not the focus or the locus of the image. Is this how it's gong to be, a set rejected over this? Am I missing something? Thank you for your input, I am trying to understand when I must drop an image from my selections. 100% Scaff detail (wont let me load the link) https://photos.app.goo.gl/FxWCnVGqx3jqMLBc7 100% Dark bottom of frame https://photos.app.goo.gl/VZjNWAS4KsiswCvY9
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