TexasCHLforum.com

We just got notification from DPS that they rejected ALL photos from one of our recent classes due to a problem scanning them, but I don't know which one.

If you happen to be one of those who has been rejected, please contact me. Sorry for the inconvenience. This has not happened to us before. We will correct the problem and make arrangements to retake your photos.

I was in the 8/2 class, and my renewal just arrived...all is good with the pic. Pic is nice and clear no blurrs or scan lines at all.

It is an old style card, not sure if that has anything to do with it or not?????

That's disheartening, huh? Ya changed film or paper recently?

I'm down to the absolute last box for passport camera with Poloroid "690", on which they have ceased production. Camera vendor said that Fiji has a "substitute" on the market. The photos happen to be taken with it?

I've had two photos rejected as being "too dark." These were very recently done on a 10 megapixel camera. I looked at the photos on my laptop and they were just fine. If there is any doubt, I lighten them before printing, so I fear this is an excuse.

Chas.

I don't know why they were rejected. I am working out of town this week, and only talked to Marty briefly on the phone. All he said is DPS called to let us know they were rejecting ALL the photos from one class, but he didn't get which one or why.

We use a 10 megapixel camera and an Epson PictureMate printer. We have never had a single photo rejected for quality before. We have had one or two sent back for too big, glare on glasses, etc, but never anything like this. We are going to change the print cartridge in the printer and see what happens.

I am hoping someone who has one of our rejected photos will have an explanation from DPS so we will know what to correct.

That's unfortunate. Let us know when you find out which class it was.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I've had two photos rejected as being "too dark." These were very recently done on a 10 megapixel camera. I looked at the photos on my laptop and they were just fine. If there is any doubt, I lighten them before printing, so I fear this is an excuse.

Chas.

It's a good idea to print stuff out because contrast on monitors is usually MUCH better than paper or photographs.

Somewhere around a year ago I had a couple a "rejects" due to "background too dark" - although it was exactly the same set-up used for years. I subsequently purchased an even "whiter" backdrop and have had no more (that I've heard about).

A "re-do" that I did hear about (from a student) within the past year was related to the TR-100. Instead of writing out the same "location" again under the "Proficiency" portion as in the "Classroom" portion, I had written "Above", just as I'd done for years. Again, the description of the "need to re-do" all came via a phone call from one student - as I suspect whoever it was at DPS that wrote it up knew they did not want to have discuss such absurdity with me (although our range id number and my cell phone number were right there too). As Charles said, I fear they are sometimes looking for excuses.

Seems DPS is using that as an excuse to get past packets. I had my photo rejected for being to dark, but a co-worker who was in the same class and had his picture taken at the same time was fine. Seems DPS just picks some out to delay those and move on to others.

I sent mine back in and now being told the 60 days starts over. To me it is just a way of delaying lots of apps so they can cut the number down and put the blame on the user. By the photo being a little dark should not stop the process and it should be ready to go when the photo is returned not put back in the system.

nitrogen wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I've had two photos rejected as being "too dark." These were very recently done on a 10 megapixel camera. I looked at the photos on my laptop and they were just fine. If there is any doubt, I lighten them before printing, so I fear this is an excuse.

Chas.

It's a good idea to print stuff out because contrast on monitors is usually MUCH better than paper or photographs.

Oh I do print them and if any look dark, then I lighten them and print new photos. When I reprinted photos for the two students, the photos were fine without any touch-up. I felt bad that my photos were causing a delay, but I was also mad because there was nothing wrong with the original prints. The replacements were accepted.

Chas.

Crossfire wrote:I don't know why they were rejected. I am working out of town this week, and only talked to Marty briefly on the phone. All he said is DPS called to let us know they were rejecting ALL the photos from one class, but he didn't get which one or why.

We use a 10 megapixel camera and an Epson PictureMate printer. We have never had a single photo rejected for quality before. We have had one or two sent back for too big, glare on glasses, etc, but never anything like this. We are going to change the print cartridge in the printer and see what happens.

I am hoping someone who has one of our rejected photos will have an explanation from DPS so we will know what to correct.

I took this class on 9/20. Could it be possible that they're moving so quickly now that these could be the ones? They should've had mine by the end of last week, although I've not received my postcard yet. I would think that this whole class' apps are still in a pile somewhere.

thelurker wrote:I took this class on 9/20. Could it be possible that they're moving so quickly now that these could be the ones? They should've had mine by the end of last week, although I've not received my postcard yet. I would think that this whole class' apps are still in a pile somewhere.

Based on DPS processing time, I would imagine this was the July or August class, but still don't know for sure.

I had a handful of photos rejected as 'too grainy' last year. It seemed to be an arbitrary determination, as all photos in my classes were taken with the same camera, printed on the same paper, using the same printer. What I did determine, however, was the photo paper I was using seemed to be heat sensitive; it yellowed badly when stored in high temperatures (hot cars, mail carrier trucks, etc.) I switched to a high quality HP photo paper and haven't had any problems.

Now, I'm dealing with fingerprint issues. I'd never had prints rejected up until recently. I'm very, very picky about the quality of my prints and will print and reprint people until we get it right. There have only been a couple that I knew would be questionable (the student had scarring, calloused or very wrinkled fingertips), but they're returning prints I KNOW were good.

I have to believe they're so overloaded they're rejecting as many as possible for every technical reason they can think of.

I had my 12 yo daughter take my pic against a white door in our house. Cut me out of picture using Photoshop and pasted it onto a white background. Lightened my face up a bit and printed it using a Cannon printer (iP4200) on photographic paper that I bought @ the Dollar store. Photos came out great! I even printed pics in several different sizes to make sure that I had one that would fit perfectly on photo holder. My app. got returned because I was missing 2 signatures. One mine, (card holder) other from one of my fingerprint cards my instructor missed. No biggie maybe slowed me down a week. Couple days later my app. is showing "processing".

Well ... I just had an e-mail from a student from a couple of months back ... "too dark". I'm beginning to question if the problem might also be related to startup with the new style of license. http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administra ... cement.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ???