Jag_guar Prescreening advice

[Jag_guar]

Hi, may I have an opinion on these 2 photos - would either or both be considered backlit as the light is falling more on the front of the aircraft? Any other issues? Thanks!

[dlowwa]

Hi, may I have an opinion on these 2 photos - would either or both be considered backlit as the light is falling more on the front of the aircraft? Any other issues?

These are both backlit and will not be acceptable for here.

[Jag_guar]

I suspected as much, thanks for confirming. How about this one, taken from a different angle with the light more uniformly distributed along the fuselage?

[Jag_guar]

Hi, looking for some advice on a rejected photo. Tried to send it in 3 times now...First submission got rejected for 'horizon and missing categories'. I corrected and resubmitted but it got rejected again, this time for 'Dark / Underexposed':
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9678676

I added a bit of brightness and now it got rejected a 3rd time - for 'Over Processed / Blurry':
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9717723#

So I guess my question is - is there any hope for this image in your opinion? Any advice on what I can do to get it accepted? The adjustments are absolutely minimal (crop, horizon and just a touch of brightness) - honestly I'm puzzled what is causing overprocessing, especially since it wasn't cited in previous rejections and neither was softness/blur.

Thanks,

[dlowwa]

Hi, looking for some advice on a rejected photo. Tried to send it in 3 times now...First submission got rejected for 'horizon and missing categories'. I corrected and resubmitted but it got rejected again, this time for 'Dark / Underexposed':
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9678676

I added a bit of brightness and now it got rejected a 3rd time - for 'Over Processed / Blurry':
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9717723#

So I guess my question is - is there any hope for this image in your opinion? Any advice on what I can do to get it accepted? The adjustments are absolutely minimal (crop, horizon and just a touch of brightness) - honestly I'm puzzled what is causing overprocessing, especially since it wasn't cited in previous rejections and neither was softness/blur.

Thanks,

Unfortunately the first two screening missed the poor quality/blurriness, and I apologize for that. It doesn't look fixable, but without seeing the original, I couldn't say for sure.

[Jag_guar]

Hi, may I get advice on this rejected photo: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9856280

I have not added any vignetting to it; whatever may be visible (I'm guessing dark around the edges?) is from the lens distortion. My software doesn't have a preset correction option for the lens that I'm using... do you have a suggestion how to correct this photo? Would adding vignetting brightness be allowable?

[dlowwa]

Hi, may I get advice on this rejected photo: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9856280

I have not added any vignetting to it; whatever may be visible (I'm guessing dark around the edges?) is from the lens distortion. My software doesn't have a preset correction option for the lens that I'm using... do you have a suggestion how to correct this photo? Would adding vignetting brightness be allowable?

Yes, the vignetting is due to your lens/settings. As is it considered a quality flaw (like softness, also due to lens/settings) the rejection was correct. Best to avoid vignetting in the first place, as correcting it afterwards can lead to other issues if not done properly.

[Jag_guar]

Hi, I am wondering why these photos skipped the queue and got rejected right away as soon as I uploaded them, before I had a chance to review (and correct the necessary data). Any chance to remove them from backlog?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10037095
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10037084


Thanks.

[dlowwa]

Hi, I am wondering why these photos skipped the queue and got rejected right away as soon as I uploaded them, before I had a chance to review (and correct the necessary data). Any chance to remove them from backlog?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10037095
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10037084


Thanks.

The registration was entered incorrectly, so was tagged as a new reg. by the system.

https://www.jetphotos.com/registration/15-01

As this was your fault for not reviewing the data before uploading, the rejected images will remain on your list.

[Jag_guar]

OK, thanks for explaining how new registrations work. As for this being my fault for not reviewing before uploading - I did an online search for this aircraft and all sites list the reg as 15+01 (this is the marking on the plane itself too) - below are some examples. It did not occur to me that JP would be using a different registration... now that I know I'll be more careful.

https://www.airfleets.net/ficheapp/plane-a319-3897.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Execut...rman_Air_Force)
https://www.planespotters.net/airfra...r-force/elw9o1
https://www.radarbox.com/data/registration/15+01

[Jag_guar]

Hi, may I get advice on this rejected photo: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10137824
What is the main issue with post-processing that needs improving? And can you also clarify the dirty scan comment - I used the spot removal tool prior to uploading to correct a couple of areas and I don't see any obvious dust spots remaining - can you point them out to me please. Thank you.

[ylu01]

Hi, may I get advice on this rejected photo: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10137824
What is the main issue with post-processing that needs improving? And can you also clarify the dirty scan comment - I used the spot removal tool prior to uploading to correct a couple of areas and I don't see any obvious dust spots remaining - can you point them out to me please. Thank you.

From what i see in the pic, theres an obvious circle as a result from the healing tool. Over process i think means there is too much work done on the pic it starts to look unnatural. But then thats what i see.

[dlowwa]

Hi, may I get advice on this rejected photo: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10137824
What is the main issue with post-processing that needs improving? And can you also clarify the dirty scan comment - I used the spot removal tool prior to uploading to correct a couple of areas and I don't see any obvious dust spots remaining - can you point them out to me please. Thank you.

Visible editing halos, and poor dust removal below the nose.

[Jag_guar]

Hi, may I get an opinion on this rejection: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10212123
I am unclear what the issue is specifically and if it can be corrected. Thanks

[dlowwa]

Hi, may I get an opinion on this rejection: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10212123
I am unclear what the issue is specifically and if it can be corrected. Thanks

Editing halos are visible. A better edit should correct the issue.