Jag_guar Prescreening advice

[dlowwa]

Thoughts on this rejection please: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10398376

Is it fixable by adding contrast?

You might be able to get a better edit out of it, but it's more a result of the high cloud cover causing diffuse light, not something editing can usually fix easily.

[Jag_guar]

You might be able to get a better edit out of it, but it's more a result of the high cloud cover causing diffuse light, not something editing can usually fix easily.

Thank you.

Any opinion on this one? https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10374666

I had a few other pictures from this sequence with same lighting conditions accepted and this one looks OK to me so I'm a bit puzzled as to what can be done to improve it, if anything. Appreciate any suggestions.

[dlowwa]

Thank you.

Any opinion on this one? https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10374666

I had a few other pictures from this sequence with same lighting conditions accepted and this one looks OK to me so I'm a bit puzzled as to what can be done to improve it, if anything. Appreciate any suggestions.

Borderline for me. Same issue, you've got some (light) clouds interfering with direct lighting of the aircraft.

[Jag_guar]

Hi, would like an opinion on this rejected image please and suggestion on what can be done to get it to an acceptable standard : https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10517903

[dlowwa]

Hi, would like an opinion on this rejected image please and suggestion on what can be done to get it to an acceptable standard : https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10517903

Contrast is a bit harsh. Also slight yellow cast.

[Jag_guar]

Hi, looking for an opinion on this rejection please: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10604757
There is no vignetting that I can see (at least nothing that was the effect of the lens or added in post-processing) - the dark areas are not uniformly distributed; the sky in naturally brighter in the front bottom part of the image as that's where the light source is.

[dlowwa]

Hi, looking for an opinion on this rejection please: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10604757
There is no vignetting that I can see (at least nothing that was the effect of the lens or added in post-processing) - the dark areas are not uniformly distributed; the sky in naturally brighter in the front bottom part of the image as that's where the light source is.

Top corners are darker. This is not uniform distribution, and looks very much like vignetting, otherwise it would be just on one side.

[Jag_guar]

Hello, would appreciate feedback on this rejection: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10644578
Any suggestions for correction? Thanks

[dlowwa]

Hello, would appreciate feedback on this rejection: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10644578
Any suggestions for correction? Thanks

Slightly lower exposure with a bit more contrast.

[Jag_guar]

Slightly lower exposure with a bit more contrast.

Thanks. How's this?

[dlowwa]

Thanks. How's this?

Slightly soft in spots, but otherwise fine for me.

[Jag_guar]

Hi, would these be acceptable as ramp shots? Thank you for any advice as always.

[dlowwa]

Hi, would these be acceptable as ramp shots? Thank you for any advice as always.

Yes, these qualify as ramp shots.

[Jag_guar]

Hi, looking for clarification on obstruction. Per upload guidelines: "Items of ramp equipment must not obscure any of the aircraft, including stairs, aerobridges etc. Exceptions may be made if the equipment forms part of the motive of the shot, such as in use de-icing equipment, or if the angle of the shot means only a small part of the aircraft is obstructed, such as ground power units/cargo loading devices." I recall this question raised on the forum and generally I've seen some leeway given when less that half of the wheel is obstructed. I realize this may not be a hard and fast rule and would ultimately be up to screener's discretion but would appreciate getting an opinion on this rejected photo and if it has a chance of being successfully appealed. I.e. would consideration be given to baggage carts being part of the motive (symmetry of them lining up between aircraft and the interplay of blue tarp with the blue fuselage) and the fact that obstruction is minor and unavoidable in this case? Thank you.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10795559

[dlowwa]

Hi, looking for clarification on obstruction. Per upload guidelines: "Items of ramp equipment must not obscure any of the aircraft, including stairs, aerobridges etc. Exceptions may be made if the equipment forms part of the motive of the shot, such as in use de-icing equipment, or if the angle of the shot means only a small part of the aircraft is obstructed, such as ground power units/cargo loading devices." I recall this question raised on the forum and generally I've seen some leeway given when less that half of the wheel is obstructed. I realize this may not be a hard and fast rule and would ultimately be up to screener's discretion but would appreciate getting an opinion on this rejected photo and if it has a chance of being successfully appealed. I.e. would consideration be given to baggage carts being part of the motive (symmetry of them lining up between aircraft and the interplay of blue tarp with the blue fuselage) and the fact that obstruction is minor and unavoidable in this case? Thank you.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10795559

Baggage carts are not part of the motive, just unfortunate timing for you. If you have an image without them use that.