llpilch - prescreening request

[dlowwa]

Hi, does it have chance? If not, any suggestions to what to do to improve it? Too much dark in the belly?

There are issues with color (magenta tint) and contrast (lack of direct light). Not sure the latter is fixable.

[llpilch]

Hello!

I would like to know if the the attached photo of PS-BED will be considered similar to this one already accepted: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10356908

I know that night shots and day-time shots are not considered similar, but in this case, despite being uploaded under "night shot" category as requested by the site, the accepted photo was taken at sunset, maybe can be considered day yet, I don't know.

Also, will the PR-PTG photo be rejected by backlit?

Thanks!

[dlowwa]

Hello!

I would like to know if the the attached photo of PS-BED will be considered similar to this one already accepted: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10356908

Yes, similar.

Also, will the PR-PTG photo be rejected by backlit?

Not sure if technically backlit, but there will likely be issues with exposure/contrast.

[llpilch]

Hello!

Please, take a look on these 3 rejections:

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9699013

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9699008

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9699004

In one of them, the screener sent a comment: "very noisy sky"

I can't agree with this... "VERY noisy"? The images just have the normal amount of noise expected for a digital image! I do not agree it is enough to reject the photo, it is very weak.

Should I appeal?

[dlowwa]

Hello!

Please, take a look on these 3 rejections:

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9699013

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9699008

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9699004

In one of them, the screener sent a comment: "very noisy sky"

I can't agree with this... "VERY noisy"? The images just have the normal amount of noise expected for a digital image! I do not agree it is enough to reject the photo, it is very weak.

Should I appeal?

Maybe not 'very' noisy, but it is noticeable (and the images were seen by two senior screeners) so you are unlikely to have the rejections overturned.

[llpilch]

Maybe not 'very' noisy, but it is noticeable (and the images were seen by two senior screeners) so you are unlikely to have the rejections overturned.

Thanks Dana! Ok, I agree that the image 9699004 has a strange noise in the sky, I could have paid more attention when editing and before uploading. Still don't think it is a big deal, but ok, the noise is there, will not appeal.

But the other 2 imagens has way less noise! 9699013 and 9699008 didn't needed to be rejected

[dlowwa]

Thanks Dana! Ok, I agree that the image 9699004 has a strange noise in the sky, I could have paid more attention when editing and before uploading. Still don't think it is a big deal, but ok, the noise is there, will not appeal.

But the other 2 imagens has way less noise! 9699013 and 9699008 didn't needed to be rejected

All look similar to me, but if you're certain about it, not sure why you're asking here.

[llpilch]

Hello, what about the 727 as night shot (taken before sunrise)?
The A330, will it be rejected by obstruction on the nose gear?
And the 737, can this framing be accepted? I choose to keep it in the bottom of the frame and not cut the A380

[dlowwa]

Hello, what about the 727 as night shot (taken before sunrise)?
The A330, will it be rejected by obstruction on the nose gear?
And the 737, can this framing be accepted? I choose to keep it in the bottom of the frame and not cut the A380

1. ..shadow is visible, are you sure that's before sunrise? Not night shot in any case.
2. better if no obstruction, yes.
3. borderline. would be a subjective call.

[llpilch]

1. ..shadow is visible, are you sure that's before sunrise? Not night shot in any case.
2. better if no obstruction, yes.
3. borderline. would be a subjective call.

1. yes, the sun rises behind that hills. ISO 400 1/50, was pretty dark yet.
2. I'll try another, thanks!

[llpilch]

Hello!

Please, why bad motive here? Just a cockpit photo...

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9861221

[dlowwa]

Hello!

Please, why bad motive here? Just a cockpit photo...
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9861221

People's faces are visible, and other portion of exterior badly blown out.

[llpilch]

People's faces are visible, and other portion of exterior badly blown out.

Yeah, I totally forgot about the faces until I had another rejection today by the same reason and a comment from the screener regarding this...

Thanks!

[llpilch]

Hi!

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9872489

Please, I would like a feedback about this rejection. I myself have some tail shots like this accepted, I have some engine close up shots accepted, it's common to see photos with parts cut off here, not cut off parts with no reason, like said on the guidelines, but photos that are clearly intended to do only a close-up of some part, maybe to show some detail or give more enphasis to an especific part like the tail or the fuselage, or maybe to do a different photo.

I like a lot pictures with close on the tail and the wingtip. Being honest, this plane was obstructed and was impossible to do a photo of the entire airframe ( https://www.draeronaves.com.br/img/f...1_P1310333.jpg ), but still being an "ok" photo with some details that are not so visible in normal shots, the frame looks cool with almost no empty spaces.

[dlowwa]

Hi!

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9872489

Please, I would like a feedback about this rejection. I myself have some tail shots like this accepted, I have some engine close up shots accepted, it's common to see photos with parts cut off here, not cut off parts with no reason, like said on the guidelines, but photos that are clearly intended to do only a close-up of some part, maybe to show some detail or give more enphasis to an especific part like the tail or the fuselage, or maybe to do a different photo.

I like a lot pictures with close on the tail and the wingtip. Being honest, this plane was obstructed and was impossible to do a photo of the entire airframe ( https://www.draeronaves.com.br/img/f...1_P1310333.jpg ), but still being an "ok" photo with some details that are not so visible in normal shots, the frame looks cool with almost no empty spaces.

Subjective decision by the screener, but I think the crop at the bottom cutting the fuselage is the problem.