Is this blurry or too far away? Should I get really close to that building as in pretty close? Should I appeal?
Purely on the photo, I think the detail is fine and it’s in focus. It shows the proposed wayspot clearly. I’d consider running it through an HDR filter or similar to give some better contrast or vibrancy.
However, I don’t see how the submission meets one of the criteria of socialisation, exploration or exercise. A historic building might meet exploration criteria, but I don’t think you’ve established that. If it’s a historic site then maybe there is a sign or plaque?
The photo makes this look like quite an ugly building, possibly because it is quite an ugly building. This means your submission will have to do a lot of work to convince reviewers that it is a genuinely interesting old building. It is of course possible that it isn’t genuinely interesting and is just an old building.
What exactly was the rejection reason? If you refresh the page, it should show.
Have to agree that the photo isn’t really an issue here, other than maybe using the Remaster setting on your phone.
I agree that this looks just like an old building that isn’t that historic or culturally significant and not a place I’d really want to explore. So, if you want to try to get this passed as a landmark building, the description and supporting info is going to be important for this one. If you can find anything online about this building, include the links in the supporting info, and maybe write your description off of some of that info.