Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Jag_guar Prescreening advice

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

  • #46
    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!
    Click image for larger version  Name:	2020_02_18_9_65.jpg Views:	0 Size:	703.8 KB ID:	1128352Click image for larger version  Name:	2020_02_18_9_66.jpg Views:	0 Size:	734.8 KB ID:	1128353

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Jag_guar View Post
      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.

      Comment


      • #48
        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?
        Click image for larger version

Name:	2020_02_18_9_62.jpg
Views:	76
Size:	672.3 KB
ID:	1128438

        Comment


        • #49
          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,

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Jag_guar View Post
            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.

            Comment


            • #51
              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?

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Jag_guar View Post
                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.

                Comment


                • #53
                  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.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by Jag_guar View Post
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      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

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        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.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Jag_guar View Post
                          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.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by Jag_guar View Post
                            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.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              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

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Jag_guar View Post
                                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.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X