Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

planespotter.lars Editing/Pre-screening advice

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

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by planespotter.lars View Post
    Click image for larger version

Name:	JP 1 (1 von 1)-285.jpg
Views:	20
Size:	902.4 KB
ID:	1116806

    Thanks. Tried to fix it, would be great if you could have a look.
    Would be acceptable for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • planespotter.lars
    replied
    Click image for larger version

Name:	JP 1 (1 von 1)-285.jpg
Views:	20
Size:	902.4 KB
ID:	1116806
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Borderline for overexposed/horizon.
    Thanks. Tried to fix it, would be great if you could have a look.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by planespotter.lars View Post

    Thanks, Dana. What about the Beluga two posts above?
    Borderline for overexposed/horizon.

    Leave a comment:


  • planespotter.lars
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Borderline soft/overexposed, but ok for me.
    Thanks, Dana. What about the Beluga two posts above?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by planespotter.lars View Post
    Good evening,
    Would like to hear your opinion about this one, too.
    Borderline soft/overexposed, but ok for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • planespotter.lars
    replied
    Good evening,
    Would like to hear your opinion about this one, too.
    Thanks in advance and best regards,
    Lars
    Click image for larger version

Name:	JP 1 (1 von 1)-260.jpg
Views:	40
Size:	505.8 KB
ID:	1116557

    Leave a comment:


  • planespotter.lars
    replied
    Click image for larger version

Name:	8199FE08-9A24-4FCF-96D6-5F354D2A8FA1.jpeg
Views:	72
Size:	887.6 KB
ID:	1116435 Good morning Dana,
    This shot should be okay but as I have never uploaded a Beluga XL before I‘d like to know if the crop etc. is fine.
    Best regards,
    Lars

    Leave a comment:


  • planespotter.lars
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Image was not submitted within the allowable size range of 4:3 to 16:9.
    God damn it I thought 16:10 was still allowed so my bad, sorry for the stupid appeal.

    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    Also please read here very carefully, especially #8:

    https://forums.jetphotos.com/forum/a...ning-from-crew

    "this picture was prescreened by Dana and she (he) said it was absolutely alright" is not an acceptable appeal reason, and if repeated will lead to me no longer commenting on your images.
    I am sincerely sorry that I didn't take that into account, must have been too long since I last read that thread. I ensure you that this will not happen again as I really don't want to lose this nice opportunity of getting pictures prescreened at all.
    Best regards and my apologies for the mistake,
    Lars

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by planespotter.lars View Post

    Oh did not know that, thanks for clarifying. Just thought it'd be a good idea to upload nice shots from the time I had the 1280px limit with 1600 or 1920px now.
    Furthermore I yesterday evening submitted an appeal but as only god knows why, I did not receive any Mail regarding the status. Would be cool if you coul check it for me. Photo ID is 9138879.
    Best regards,
    Lars
    Image was not submitted within the allowable size range of 4:3 to 16:9.

    Also please read here very carefully, especially #8:

    https://forums.jetphotos.com/forum/a...ning-from-crew

    "this picture was prescreened by Dana and she (he) said it was absolutely alright" is not an acceptable appeal reason, and if repeated will lead to me no longer commenting on your images.

    Leave a comment:


  • planespotter.lars
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Google: Lens vignetting.



    Not sure that we accept re-uploads simply for better resolution.
    Oh did not know that, thanks for clarifying. Just thought it'd be a good idea to upload nice shots from the time I had the 1280px limit with 1600 or 1920px now.
    Furthermore I yesterday evening submitted an appeal but as only god knows why, I did not receive any Mail regarding the status. Would be cool if you coul check it for me. Photo ID is 9138879.
    Best regards,
    Lars

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by planespotter.lars View Post

    Just by any chance, do you know how this vignetting could be caused without even processing the picture?
    Google: Lens vignetting.

    Originally posted by planespotter.lars View Post
    And another little question, today I resubmitted a picture with an higher resolution, is there any way of checking the status of the resubmission? Will I get an E-Mail? If yes Ill have to get in contact with your team as I haven't been getting Mails for ages now which I don't care about when it comes to screening but is quite tricky with appeals.
    Not sure that we accept re-uploads simply for better resolution.

    Leave a comment:


  • planespotter.lars
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    A bit dark/soft, but otherwise better than the previous.



    Don't see any bad processing, just vignetting and some compression.
    Just by any chance, do you know how this vignetting could be caused without even processing the picture?
    And another little question, today I resubmitted a picture with an higher resolution, is there any way of checking the status of the resubmission? Will I get an E-Mail? If yes Ill have to get in contact with your team as I haven't been getting Mails for ages now which I don't care about when it comes to screening but is quite tricky with appeals.
    Thanks and best regards

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by planespotter.lars View Post
    Jesus, what the was a dreaming of whilst editing the QR, centering and Dust Spots are steps 2&3 of my workflow and that dust spot was freaking huge.
    Fixed it now:
    A bit dark/soft, but otherwise better than the previous.

    Originally posted by planespotter.lars View Post
    EDIT: This is no question for prescreening, I know the pic is in the queue and so on, but I would love to know what the heck happened to that pic if you put it into the equalized version?!
    Link is: https://www.jetphotos.com/members/sh...1620978837.jpg
    As said before I know that would cause an immediate 'vignetting not allowed' oder 'bad postprocessing' rejection, but I would just like to get what the hell happened so that he equalized version looks like that, do you have any guesses or hints?
    Don't see any bad processing, just vignetting and some compression.

    Leave a comment:


  • planespotter.lars
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    1-2. Crops not my personal taste, but not automatic rejections. More of an issue with the LH, which is neither close up nor wide view.
    3. too low in the frame and dust spot.
    Jesus, what the was a dreaming of whilst editing the QR, centering and Dust Spots are steps 2&3 of my workflow and that dust spot was freaking huge.
    Fixed it now:
    Click image for larger version  Name:	JP 1 (1 von 1)-279.jpg Views:	0 Size:	325.7 KB ID:	1115654

    EDIT: This is no question for prescreening, I know the pic is in the queue and so on, but I would love to know what the heck happened to that pic if you put it into the equalized version?!
    Link is: https://www.jetphotos.com/members/sh...1620978837.jpg
    As said before I know that would cause an immediate 'vignetting not allowed' oder 'bad postprocessing' rejection, but I would just like to get what the hell happened so that he equalized version looks like that, do you have any guesses or hints?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by planespotter.lars View Post
    ​​​Good morning,
    I would love to see your opinion on the following pics
    1-2. Crops not my personal taste, but not automatic rejections. More of an issue with the LH, which is neither close up nor wide view.
    3. too low in the frame and dust spot.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X