Tweet
Originally posted by AirVi
View Post
-
Yes. -
Hi Dana, i have just rejected two photos with some my dubts. First is A380, already saw by you 2 moths ago and it was soft. Today rejected for obstructing and heat distortion. The railing is underneath the plane and doesn't cover it at all. It could be slightly annoying but I don't think so much given its position very low and far from the plane. Distortion from peat jets is normal, it distorts the view of the sky behind but does not affect the aircraft itself and therefore should not be a problem.
The second is this A320 for undersharpened and overexposed. I re-look and it not seem soft, but with a good sharpen. Also not seem overexposed enought to be rejected even looking to the histogram, there isn't too light in the right side.
What do you thing?
Comment
-
1. heat hazed/soft.. usually the same thing so no surprise. foreground clutter is subject as to whether it's too distracting; in this case whoever screened it decided it was.Originally posted by AirVi View PostHi Dana, i have just rejected two photos with some my dubts. First is A380, already saw by you 2 moths ago and it was soft. Today rejected for obstructing and heat distortion. The railing is underneath the plane and doesn't cover it at all. It could be slightly annoying but I don't think so much given its position very low and far from the plane. Distortion from peat jets is normal, it distorts the view of the sky behind but does not affect the aircraft itself and therefore should not be a problem.
The second is this A320 for undersharpened and overexposed. I re-look and it not seem soft, but with a good sharpen. Also not seem overexposed enought to be rejected even looking to the histogram, there isn't too light in the right side.
What do you thing?
2. look more like harsh contrast than overexposed, but definitely soft, probably even blurry. not fixable.Comment
-
Hi Dana, can i have more explanations about reasons of rejection? I have difficult to understand them. No for chromatic aberrations because i have just anderstood it. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11618079
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11618115
Thanks.Comment
-
-
Why both two images would be over-processed? I don't see any paticular problems. Contrast are harsh? The first is soft? Before it was rejected for overshapen and now i don't think that i exaggerated with decrease of sharpen. All for me seem good.Comment
-
Halos/banding in both. Both also blurry/oversharpened as well. Dust spot missed on the second one.Originally posted by AirVi View PostComment
-
Halos/banding on the sky? I never knew banding, can you tell me what is that and how to see it in the photo?Comment
-
Halos = areas of the sky closer to the aircraft darker/brighter than other areas of the skyOriginally posted by AirVi View Post
Banding = harsh transitions between light/dark/colors in the sky, often in repeated patternsComment
-
Hi Dana, why this photo was rejected for over processed? I don't see any particular problem with it. Also the sharpen is still soft?
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11646009Comment
-
Halo/outline around the whole of the aircraft. Pretty bad edit, and quality doesn't look great overall.Originally posted by AirVi View PostComment
-
Hi Dana, i request an information about this photo rejected. Is the light in the sky very hard?
Comment
-
Comment