Can anyone give me any pointers to the rather vague generic reason for the two pictures attached? They are 2 pano's the second one was my first attempt at a 180 degree milky way pano. so any tips would be much appreciated.
Surely the reviewer can give a more discriptive reason than "Thanks for giving us the chance to consider your image. Unfortunately, during our review we found that it contains one or more technical issues, so we can't accept it into our collection."
Hi @Alan5FE9 ,
Your shots are nice except for being underexposed. Too much details are lost in the black areas. Also there is color noise in the water of the first image, and color fringing around the edges of the white spot of the second image. Please zoom to 100% to inspect your photos.
Hi Thanks for the kind feedback,
Yea that was a very dark night & I was trying to get Mars & the big dipper in the same pano unfortunately there was a lot of dark forground in the way! & I mistook the color noise for reflected clouds
As for the second image I assumed that the glow around the white spot (star) was due to cloud glow similar to a moon halo!
The dark areas don't disturb, but the noise does. You need to do a correct noise reduction to get this accepted.
The second picture is also strange, as trees don't grow sidewards. In the first picture you see clearly the reflection and that is OK.
Abambo Thanks for the input,
I cropped quite a bit of the foreground out in the first picture & resubmitted it & it was accepted.
As for the second picture that is my first attempt at a 180 degree panorama of the Milky way arching over head hence the trees looking like they are growing sideways! I could have put the picture in portrait orientation but then one sid of the picture the trees would appear to be groing upside down?