Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ms spot- prescreening advice

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

  • #91
    Originally posted by ms spot View Post
    Hello, would you please prescreen the following picture? I have cropped very much so I am unsure about the quality.
    Quality/crop/processing is fine. Borderline soft, and needs a bit of CCW rotation. Should be fixable.

    Comment


    • #92
      In recent time, I have received many rejections due to underexposure so in order to prevent this I would like you to have a look at following photos and tell me if the exposure is fine. If there are other reasons which would lead to a rejection I'd be happy if you informed me about them, too.
      Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_92new76.JPG
Views:	42
Size:	558.0 KB
ID:	1113439Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_91new34.JPG
Views:	40
Size:	597.2 KB
ID:	1113440Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_91new15.JPG
Views:	40
Size:	620.7 KB
ID:	1113441
      Thanks & regards

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by ms spot View Post
        In recent time, I have received many rejections due to underexposure so in order to prevent this I would like you to have a look at following photos and tell me if the exposure is fine. If there are other reasons which would lead to a rejection I'd be happy if you informed me about them, too.
        Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_92new76.JPG
Views:	42
Size:	558.0 KB
ID:	1113439Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_91new34.JPG
Views:	40
Size:	597.2 KB
ID:	1113440Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_91new15.JPG
Views:	40
Size:	620.7 KB
ID:	1113441
        Thanks & regards
        1 & 3 would certainly be rejected for dark (and soft as well). 2 borderline, but probably ok.

        Comment


        • #94
          Would it be helpful to photograph with a higher ISO than 100 (which I use) or can it simply be fixed with editing?
          Another question: if a photo has exactly the size ratio 16/9 (in my case 1200/675 px), would it be rejected as it's not below the desired ratio or would it be accepted as it's not above it?

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by ms spot View Post
            Would it be helpful to photograph with a higher ISO than 100 (which I use) or can it simply be fixed with editing?
            Increasing the ISO generally will lower the dynamic range, so unless there is some other reason to do so, probably won't help. Editing may fix the issue, as long as the originals weren't too badly underexposed.

            Originally posted by ms spot View Post
            Another question: if a photo has exactly the size ratio 16/9 (in my case 1200/675 px), would it be rejected as it's not below the desired ratio or would it be accepted as it's not above it?
            16/9 ratio (but not less) is accepted here.

            Comment


            • #96
              Thank you!
              I have re-edited the following images. Are they acceptable now?
              Click image for larger version  Name:	IMG_92nj76.JPG Views:	0 Size:	594.4 KB ID:	1113513 Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_91nk15.JPG
Views:	27
Size:	600.8 KB
ID:	1113514

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by ms spot View Post
                Thank you!
                I have re-edited the following images. Are they acceptable now?
                Click image for larger version Name:	IMG_92nj76.JPG Views:	0 Size:	594.4 KB ID:	1113513 Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_91nk15.JPG
Views:	27
Size:	600.8 KB
ID:	1113514
                1. soft, borderline noisy
                2. soft, color (white balance too warm)

                Comment


                • #98
                  Hello, the Condor which you prescreened above was today rejected for "overexposure and too little (I suppose) contrast". I actually thought it was "borderline dark but probably ok" so it was a bit unexpected to have it rejected for the opposite reason... Maybe I used a wrong edit for posting it here but in fact, I am quite sure that the rejected photo was identical with the one posted here.
                  Maybe the screener meant "underexposed" but wrote "overexposed"? And what do you think about contrast?
                  My technical skills are unfortunately not the best so I do not know how to link the rejected photo here...maybe you can see it as a screener? (It's the condor above, was rejected about 10 am UTC time)...
                  Thanks for your help!

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9050696
                    ah, now it has worked...here's the link to the rejected photo.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by ms spot View Post
                      https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9050696
                      ah, now it has worked...here's the link to the rejected photo.
                      It appears to be the same image you posted in the forum. Call it what you like, but root of the problem is the same: the light is too harsh. Either the shadows will be considered too strong, or the highlights too bright. If possible you might want to choose a different time of day to shoot, when the light isn't quite so stong.

                      Comment


                      • Thank you! That makes it clear for me! Unfortunately, exactly when I took this photo a cloud covered the sun so maybe the light was really not the best (A photo with better light which I have taken 15 minutes later was accepted).

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X