Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rejection help

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

  • Rejection help

    Hello

    I uploaded a photo of JA874J recently and was rejected due to Undersharpened (Soft) and Too much or too little contrast. After appeal, the admin comments that the photo is definitely a bit too soft.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=8823657

    However, I've sharpened the photo before uploading it to Jetphotos, as you can see the no. (874) on the front landing gear is quite sharp and clear.
    It makes me quite confused...


    Click image for larger version  Name:	jal.jpg Views:	0 Size:	432.5 KB ID:	1108018
    the cropped photo above can see the words are clear, but is it not enough?

    What should I do to improve the photo quality and makes it becomes sharper?

    Thank you everyone for your help and sorry for my bad English,
    Ka Hung Yue

  • #2
    Originally posted by Ka Hung Yue View Post
    Hello

    I uploaded a photo of JA874J recently and was rejected due to Undersharpened (Soft) and Too much or too little contrast. After appeal, the admin comments that the photo is definitely a bit too soft.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=8823657

    However, I've sharpened the photo before uploading it to Jetphotos, as you can see the no. (874) on the front landing gear is quite sharp and clear.
    It makes me quite confused...


    Click image for larger version Name:	jal.jpg Views:	0 Size:	432.5 KB ID:	1108018
    the cropped photo above can see the words are clear, but is it not enough?

    What should I do to improve the photo quality and makes it becomes sharper?

    Thank you everyone for your help and sorry for my bad English,
    Ka Hung Yue
    1. the cropped close up is actually relatively soft
    2. the edited image is not that bad, imho, but sharpening is one of those subjective things that is sometimes hard to get everyone to agree on.

    Easiest solution is add both a little sharpening and contrast, and put it back in the queue.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

      1. the cropped close up is actually relatively soft
      2. the edited image is not that bad, imho, but sharpening is one of those subjective things that is sometimes hard to get everyone to agree on.

      Easiest solution is add both a little sharpening and contrast, and put it back in the queue.
      Thanks for your advice!
      I adjected the sharpening and contrast, is it better now...?
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Ka Hung Yue View Post

        Thanks for your advice!
        I adjected the sharpening and contrast, is it better now...?
        Honestly, don't see a huge difference between the two, but the rejected version was ok for me, so..

        Comment


        • #5
          Hello,

          The photo of A6-EFH was rejected due to Undersharpened. However, I have already sharpened the photo and using the output sharpening feature before uploading it to Jetphotos, I'm not sure how to adjust it.

          The 1st attachment (DSC_2781-2.jpg) is the rejected photo (size: 1280 * 854)
          The 2nd attachment (DSC_2781-4.jpg) is the original size of the photo
          The 3rd attachment (DSC_2781-5.jpg) is the photo with higher output sharpening (size: 1280 * 854)

          Comparing to the 1st photo, is the 2nd photo sharp enough?
          Is the 3rd photo is better than the first one?

          If the 2nd photo is better than the 1st photo, it means that the output process has an issue, because I can't maintain the sharpness of the photo. Am I right...?

          Besides, I'm not sure how to define a photo is undersharpened or not. As I sharpened the photos with the same method, most of them were accepted and some of them were rejected. Is there any guideline for us to have a better understanding of the definition of Undersharpened? (eg check the reg/ logo is blurry or not to identify it is sharp enough or not)

          I want to improve my photo quality, therefore I want to deal with this problem. I hope that I can find the answers here.

          Many thanks,
          Ka Hung Yue
          Attached Files

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Ka Hung Yue View Post
            Hello,

            The photo of A6-EFH was rejected due to Undersharpened. However, I have already sharpened the photo and using the output sharpening feature before uploading it to Jetphotos, I'm not sure how to adjust it.

            The 1st attachment (DSC_2781-2.jpg) is the rejected photo (size: 1280 * 854)
            The 2nd attachment (DSC_2781-4.jpg) is the original size of the photo
            The 3rd attachment (DSC_2781-5.jpg) is the photo with higher output sharpening (size: 1280 * 854)

            Comparing to the 1st photo, is the 2nd photo sharp enough?
            Is the 3rd photo is better than the first one?

            If the 2nd photo is better than the 1st photo, it means that the output process has an issue, because I can't maintain the sharpness of the photo. Am I right...?

            Besides, I'm not sure how to define a photo is undersharpened or not. As I sharpened the photos with the same method, most of them were accepted and some of them were rejected. Is there any guideline for us to have a better understanding of the definition of Undersharpened? (eg check the reg/ logo is blurry or not to identify it is sharp enough or not)

            I want to improve my photo quality, therefore I want to deal with this problem. I hope that I can find the answers here.

            Many thanks,
            Ka Hung Yue
            First one looks decent enough to me, and the third oversharpened now. Do you have a link to the rejected image?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

              First one looks decent enough to me, and the third oversharpened now. Do you have a link to the rejected image?

              https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=8901180

              Comment


              • #8
                Ah, I see you've already appealed. In that case, I will no longer comment.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi,
                  I'm confused about the rejected reason, as I can't see any heat distortion of the uploaded photo.

                  https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8963514

                  Thanks,
                  Ka Hung Yue

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Ka Hung Yue View Post
                    Hi,
                    I'm confused about the rejected reason, as I can't see any heat distortion of the uploaded photo.

                    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8963514

                    Thanks,
                    Ka Hung Yue
                    Looks acceptable to me too.

                    Comment


                    • #11

                      Hello

                      Recently, one of my uploaded photos was rejected due to overexposed. However, I think the exposure of the photo is acceptable. And the histogram looks fine too.

                      https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=9020951

                      Thanks,
                      Ka Hung Yue

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Ka Hung Yue View Post
                        Hello

                        Recently, one of my uploaded photos was rejected due to overexposed. However, I think the exposure of the photo is acceptable. And the histogram looks fine too.

                        https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=9020951

                        Thanks,
                        Ka Hung Yue
                        Not sure what histogram you're looking at, but I wouldn't really call that 'fine'. The big spike on the right edge is indicative of some areas being close to blown out, so..

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	histogram.jpg
Views:	113
Size:	25.4 KB
ID:	1113391

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

                          Not sure what histogram you're looking at, but I wouldn't really call that 'fine'. The big spike on the right edge is indicative of some areas being close to blown out, so..

                          Click image for larger version

Name:	histogram.jpg
Views:	113
Size:	25.4 KB
ID:	1113391
                          Well... I think that few areas being close to blown out is unavoidable as the sun directly shines on it at noon.
                          It will get a similar result even when it is underexposed (for me).

                          Or you think my underexposed photo is acceptable......?
                          Attached Files

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Ka Hung Yue View Post

                            Well... I think that few areas being close to blown out is unavoidable as the sun directly shines on it at noon.
                            It will get a similar result even when it is underexposed (for me).

                            Or you think my underexposed photo is acceptable......?
                            Honestly I think your best solution is to find a better/different time to shoot than noon, which is obviously a notorious time for harsh light.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

                              Honestly I think your best solution is to find a better/different time to shoot than noon, which is obviously a notorious time for harsh light.
                              Thank you for the advice

                              The notorious time will be getting longer in June, even it is not taking at noon, it will get a similar result.
                              What can I do is edit an image that makes screeners think it is acceptable


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X