Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

chengcheng2 - Editing Advice

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by chengcheng2 View Post
    I don't have a picture, just a question this time:

    The EY Dreamliner in F1 livery A6-BLV has made a slight change to its livery by changing the year from "2020" to "2021", is this considered a new livery now?

    Can I upload new pictures of the 2021 livery without worrying that they might be considered similar to old shots with 2020 livery?

    For example, would these 2 be considered "similar"? (They are not my shots, I haven't been able to spot this one yet)

    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10187057
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9923382

    Thanks!
    Not similar, but you may want to note the difference in a note to the screeners when uploading.

    Leave a comment:


  • chengcheng2
    replied
    I don't have a picture, just a question this time:

    The EY Dreamliner in F1 livery A6-BLV has made a slight change to its livery by changing the year from "2020" to "2021", is this considered a new livery now?

    Can I upload new pictures of the 2021 livery without worrying that they might be considered similar to old shots with 2020 livery?

    For example, would these 2 be considered "similar"? (They are not my shots, I haven't been able to spot this one yet)

    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10187057
    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9923382

    Thanks!

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by chengcheng2 View Post
    Questions about this rejection: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9392002

    1. I don't think the fence blocked the aircraft, is this still considered clutter? I've uploaded worse fences than this.

    2. Is this really underexposed? I originally thought it might be too bright. Maybe its the smoke that's messing up the exposure, just want another opinion on this.

    Thanks!
    Not blocking anything, but rejection was for obstruction/clutter, meaning anything in the frame that might also be too distracting - like the out of focus fence. Yes, it is too dark.

    Leave a comment:


  • chengcheng2
    replied
    Questions about this rejection: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9392002

    1. I don't think the fence blocked the aircraft, is this still considered clutter? I've uploaded worse fences than this.

    2. Is this really underexposed? I originally thought it might be too bright. Maybe its the smoke that's messing up the exposure, just want another opinion on this.

    Thanks!

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by chengcheng2 View Post
    Hi, want to ask about these 4 rejects:

    1. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9372383
    How is the horizon unlevel in this one? Also, I think the processing isn't that bad.

    2. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9372361
    Same as above

    3. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9342857
    This wasn't shot thru a window and I did not find any dust spot.

    4.https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9336117
    I appealed, and another screener said it wasn't soft, but rather too much contrast. I still think the contrast is not that bad with this one.
    1. needs a little CCW rotation, and dark circle in the center of the frame.
    2. heat distortion visible, horizon same as above
    3. I don't see any dust, but there is a horizontal band through the top of the frame.
    4. already appealed, I will not comment.

    There is the same effect visible in the sky in all images, I guess likely due to some kind of vignetting correction.

    Leave a comment:


  • chengcheng2
    replied
    Hi, want to ask about these 4 rejects:

    1. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9372383
    How is the horizon unlevel in this one? Also, I think the processing isn't that bad.

    2. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9372361
    Same as above

    3. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9342857
    This wasn't shot thru a window and I did not find any dust spot.

    4.https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9336117
    I appealed, and another screener said it wasn't soft, but rather too much contrast. I still think the contrast is not that bad with this one.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by chengcheng2 View Post
    1. would this be considered similar to this: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9954618 ? Exact same location but drastically different light.
    Click image for larger version Name:	DSC09893.jpg Views:	0 Size:	1.28 MB ID:	1119947
    Borderline. If they were taken relatively close to each other then probably similar, but if there is a few years of time between them, might be ok.

    Leave a comment:


  • chengcheng2
    replied
    1. would this be considered similar to this: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9954618 ? Exact same location but drastically different light.
    Click image for larger version  Name:	DSC09893.jpg Views:	0 Size:	1.28 MB ID:	1119947

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by chengcheng2 View Post

    Thank you, the overprocessed I can understand, you warned me about it during prescreen. However, is there actually a framing and contrast issue? I wasn’t expecting these and would like to know how to fix them. Especially how to frame wing shots.
    Framing is fine imho, and contrast can be fixed. Reflection, probably not.

    Leave a comment:


  • PabloGlez
    replied
    Originally posted by chengcheng2 View Post

    Thank you, the overprocessed I can understand, you warned me about it during prescreen. However, is there actually a framing and contrast issue? I wasn’t expecting these and would like to know how to fix them. Especially how to frame wing shots.
    Im not screener, but from my point of view (about the wingview) the problem with the contrast comes from the lack of dark tones mainly, and about the framing, for me its a really wide crop, leaving the wing in the bottom of the frame, showing a lot of sky where there is nothing relevant to focus on.

    Leave a comment:


  • chengcheng2
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    The overprocessed if for the glow/halo around the winglet, but I think that's actually a reflection for the window rather than a processing artifact, so you could remove the 'overprocessed' rejection and add 'glare/dirt' instead.
    Thank you, the overprocessed I can understand, you warned me about it during prescreen. However, is there actually a framing and contrast issue? I wasn’t expecting these and would like to know how to fix them. Especially how to frame wing shots.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by chengcheng2 View Post
    Hi, want to ask for advice regarding these 2 rejects:

    1.https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9204352
    I don't think it is underexposed, want to make sure.
    Exposure looks acceptable to me.

    Originally posted by chengcheng2 View Post
    2.https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9210560
    Not sure what to say, I think the screener just doesn't like this picture at all.
    The overprocessed if for the glow/halo around the winglet, but I think that's actually a reflection for the window rather than a processing artifact, so you could remove the 'overprocessed' rejection and add 'glare/dirt' instead.

    Leave a comment:


  • chengcheng2
    replied
    Hi, want to ask for advice regarding these 2 rejects:

    1.https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9204352
    I don't think it is underexposed, want to make sure.

    2.https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9210560
    Not sure what to say, I think the screener just doesn't like this picture at all.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by chengcheng2 View Post
    Do these look better?
    Both slightly better; first ok for me, second contrast still an issue for me.

    Originally posted by chengcheng2 View Post
    I think I've always had issues with checking exposures, do you have any suggestions on how should I check for it?

    I tried the histogram but they all look so different for different pictures.
    I do it first by eye, then check the histogram if I suspect any highlights might be close to being clipped.

    Leave a comment:


  • chengcheng2
    replied
    Do these look better?

    1.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07131-4.jpg
Views:	25
Size:	1.35 MB
ID:	1117671
    2.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07302-2.jpg
Views:	35
Size:	1.33 MB
ID:	1117670


    I think I've always had issues with checking exposures, do you have any suggestions on how should I check for it?

    I tried the histogram but they all look so different for different pictures.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X