View Single Post
Old 04-13-2015, 07:08 PM   #16
Senior Member
Mgoldman's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,691

Originally Posted by dnsommer2013 View Post
I want to clarify that it was the use of the term "Unacceptable Image Quality" that raised questions for me.

In other words, I am not saying this is a great shot or a terrible shot, or that it was a good location or a bad location in Ithaca, or that they should have or should not have accepted it. I am not questioning their decision. What I said is that I have never seen this explanation for a rejection before, where they cite "Image Quality".
There should be a check box option in the Forums stating -

Reply either:

■ Specific to the question
■ Ramble on with unrelated thoughts and opinions.

Going with the first one, I don't see the image quality issue.

I can only assume the screener got lazy and found enough issues of personal objection that PIQ was misused in a poor attempt to cover them all - or, perhaps it was selected in error. You are seemingly aware of those issues and, when so, it's best to leave a comment to the screener at time of posting (with fingers crossed) as well as noting why the image could be of interest to those oblivious in the caption.

Personally - and related, I'd crop out the foreground as I believe the shadows are distracting and they require placing the subject too high in the frame resulting in a "rule of thirds violation" without any need to be "in violation".


Last edited by Mgoldman; 04-14-2015 at 06:02 AM.
Mgoldman is offline   Reply With Quote