I don’tsee any issues with the photo, if the OP hadn’t admitted to it being from the car I could have argued several reasons why this photo could not have been taken from a car… (next time plead the 5th 
)
2 Likes
Thanks.
TBH I’d have had no problem accepting that photo as is. There’s an obvious glare but better than many photos I’ve taken with sun flare. It’s recognizable what the candidate is and if somebody is unhappy with the picture, we’ve had guidance that better photos can be added later.
The biggest times I reject for car photos is if the dashboard or door frame is in view.
I think this photo should have been acceptable.
2 Likes
I would not have rejected this either. Wow.
1 Like
I will sit on the fence with this one, don’t think I would have noticed the flair until it was pointed out.
The Criteria does state " taken inside a car" so I could not complain about anybody that did reject but personally I see the " taken inside a car" criteria is to stop people trying to take images whilst the car is moving (passenger will result in a poor image, driver it could be much worse).
How did you get the photo of me 
, I use the walking poles to prod people asking “what ya doing?”
1 Like
Missed my chance 
I think in the glare you can see a reflection if you zoom in. I probably would’ve gotten caught 
I 
agree. I thought the sun glare was actually pretty great. There’s not even any kind of reflection. I’ve seen photos of places on a street that has glass windows and you can clearly see the person in the photo and it gets accepted but this doesn’t. It honestly blew my mind a little bit. I completely agree with you
It honestly blew my mind that this was denied. I submitted tons of other things that got accepted that day and this one got denied. It was the one that I expected to be a shoe in. Boy was I wrong 
1 Like
I learned never to expect…
Nearly 200 year old Grade II listed building, history as the Rectory for a Church, now used as Offices (so not SFPRP). 2 attempts + 2 appeals before going through.
Standard footpath over a road, needs a good clean and repaint. Plenty of fly tipped rubbish. Read the forums after it went in to voting and decided that was a waste of time. Went straight through.
You just have to sometimes just forget it and try something else. Maybe you will pass some day and decide to try again.
1 Like
Should I consider the quality of the photo when analyzing a nomination?
If the photo is so poor-quality that you are unable to judge or verify the nomination, taken from a third party, or ineligible as defined in the acceptance criteria, provide a one-star vote for the question “Should this be a Wayspot?” and select the relevant rejection reason.
Found that looking for something else and it stood out for this case.
1 Like
Appreciate you man. You’re 100% right