Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

llpilch - prescreening request

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

  • llpilch
    replied
    Hi, can this be accepted? (the photo is no longer on queue, just wanted to check with the JP's equalize).

    I tried a lot on Lightroom to remove the vignette (actually I went to far on reducing the vignette as the extreme corners are starting to become too clear), but the fact is that the issue is not a darker corner like a vignette, the problem is the center that for some reason received more light than the corners, some issue with the lens wich for me is impossible do fix on editing
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • llpilch
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Since we request you come here before appealing and the image has already been appealed, I will no longer comment on it. Please read this page when you get the chance (again), and note that it asks you to seek advice before appealing, not after.

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

    Well, that is the rule, ok, my bad.

    But I must say that I do believe it's not cool. I don't feel good about wasting your time asking for an advice for a rejection that looks so clear that was a mistake and I can easily explain why I think it was a mistake, like I did. And I affirm that it was a mistake because I can see the original file where is more easy to see that it is not unlevel. Plus, one screener said it needed CW, you said it needed CCW, even if a appealed after asking here, it could be rejected since the screeners doesn't always agree, you could say it's ok to appeal but other screener could reject.

    Just to be clear, I'm not here to judge or complain about what I believe to be a mistake, it happens and it's ok.
    I understand you want to avoid the unecessary appeals, but as visible on the full size crop I sent above, this was not the case. Just wanted to see if we could find another solution, because with only 20 slots and the queue taking 13 days, it is disappointing to loose a slot for 14 days and reduce the acceptance ratio by mistake.

    Stay safe!

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by llpilch View Post

    I will ask for your help then, because I really like this picture with this light and the background!

    Well, it was rejected, I appealed it because even with the picture looking a little bit unlevel due to the angle, a lot of vertical stuffs were ok:
    • green building next do the nose gear;
    • white cable car pillar next to the engine;
    • light pole next to the main gear;
    • building under the red painting of the tail;
    • (I don't trust on the light pole next do nose gear, it's more crooked to the right than the others).

    All of this were ok even looking on the original size photo, but the appeal was rejected and the screener said it needed CW. The picture I uploaded on my previous post is with only 0,5 CW, and now I agree with you, it looks like needs CCW =(

    Look the attached file, it's the uploaded and rejected photo, look the white pillar compared to the edge of the photo! Well, can I appeal it again?
    Since we request you come here before appealing and the image has already been appealed, I will no longer comment on it. Please read this page when you get the chance (again), and note that it asks you to seek advice before appealing, not after.

    Leave a comment:


  • llpilch
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Don't see much of a difference, and I think it needed CCW anyway.
    I will ask for your help then, because I really like this picture with this light and the background!

    Well, it was rejected, I appealed it because even with the picture looking a little bit unlevel due to the angle, a lot of vertical stuffs were ok:
    • green building next do the nose gear;
    • white cable car pillar next to the engine;
    • light pole next to the main gear;
    • building under the red painting of the tail;
    • (I don't trust on the light pole next do nose gear, it's more crooked to the right than the others).

    All of this were ok even looking on the original size photo, but the appeal was rejected and the screener said it needed CW. The picture I uploaded on my previous post is with only 0,5 CW, and now I agree with you, it looks like needs CCW =(

    Look the attached file, it's the uploaded and rejected photo, look the white pillar compared to the edge of the photo! Well, can I appeal it again?
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by llpilch View Post
    Hi!

    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    I got this rejection by horizon unlevel, how is it now?
    Don't see much of a difference, and I think it needed CCW anyway.

    Leave a comment:


  • llpilch
    replied
    Hi!

    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    I got this rejection by horizon unlevel, how is it now?
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by llpilch View Post
    Dana, can you help me with this?
    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    What is overprocessed? Why contrast? Seems ok visually and on the histogram.
    Don't think the backlit is an issue here, the sun was above the plane. I really like the clouds and it's reflections on the wing..
    I'm not sure why backlit, but the shadows do look very unnatural.

    Leave a comment:


  • llpilch
    replied
    Dana, can you help me with this?
    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    What is overprocessed? Why contrast? Seems ok visually and on the histogram.
    Don't think the backlit is an issue here, the sun was above the plane. I really like the clouds and it's reflections on the wing..

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by llpilch View Post
    Hi, is the blurred guy next to the nose an obstruction on the 737?
    Maybe. Ok for me, but maybe not for others.

    Originally posted by llpilch View Post
    Will the engine close-up be similar with this nose close? https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10194330 (same plane, date and airport)
    I would consider it similar.

    Leave a comment:


  • llpilch
    replied
    Hi, is the blurred guy next to the nose an obstruction on the 737? Will the engine close-up be similar with this nose close? https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10194330 (same plane, date and airport)
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by llpilch View Post

    Thanks, and that picture from my previous post will be similar with this one?
    Right after take off from SBGR to SBCT. PR-GII. Boeing 737-7L9. JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    Same flight, but one at takeoff and the other landing
    Yes, similar.

    Leave a comment:


  • llpilch
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Inflight.
    Thanks, and that picture from my previous post will be similar with this one?
    Right after take off from SBGR to SBCT. PR-GII. Boeing 737-7L9. JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    Same flight, but one at takeoff and the other landing

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by llpilch View Post
    Hello! Wing views taken at final approach, when the airport isn't visible, but the city is, should be uploaded with location "in flight" or the name of the airport?
    Inflight.

    Leave a comment:


  • llpilch
    replied
    Hello! Wing views taken at final approach, when the airport isn't visible, but the city is, should be uploaded with location "in flight" or the name of the airport?

    It's just a doubt about it:

    "1.2.6 Uploading Wing Views


    Photos taken airborne need the country and 'Inflight' as location, unless an airport is visible."


    I always thougt that if it's possible to see the city of the airport would be possible to sent with the airport name, it would help to upload more wing views of the same flight without being similar
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by llpilch View Post
    On the 737 photo, is that guy next to the engine a problem?
    Shouldn't be.

    Originally posted by llpilch View Post
    The KC390 was rejected by contrast, I asked here for an improved version and was not good enough, what about now?
    Slightly worse than last posted one. The real issue is the overcast light, something editing can't do a whole lot to fix.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X