Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Would you mind telling us the reason it was rejected? I suspect there are both technical flaws and intellectual property violations here.
The upper corner of the arch is out of focus. Had you positioned yourself parallel to the doorway that probably wouldn't have happened; as a result the composition is lacking. I agree with George that if it hadn't been rejected for technical issues, it might have earned an IP rejection, since it is someone's artwork and includes the street number which makes it more identifiable.
If viewed at 200%, you can see srtifacts around the edge of the arch. Also, the artwork may require a property release.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Would you mind telling us the reason it was rejected? I suspect there are both technical flaws and intellectual property violations here.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
The upper corner of the arch is out of focus. Had you positioned yourself parallel to the doorway that probably wouldn't have happened; as a result the composition is lacking. I agree with George that if it hadn't been rejected for technical issues, it might have earned an IP rejection, since it is someone's artwork and includes the street number which makes it more identifiable.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
If viewed at 200%, you can see srtifacts around the edge of the arch. Also, the artwork may require a property release.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied