Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JuklicekCZ - Pre-Screening advice

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

  • JuklicekCZ
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Bit of glare there, but would be ok for me.



    Not at all soft for me.
    Thank you very much.
    It seems that the rejection might likely have been a mistake, appeal was successful.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by JuklicekCZ View Post
    Hello, I'm not sure about this shot.
    The aircraft is very silver and under a direct light causing the fuselage to be very bright.
    Could this end up as a glare rejection, or would it be ok?
    Bit of glare there, but would be ok for me.

    Originally posted by JuklicekCZ View Post
    Also, may I ask, based on what measurement is the following shot considered soft?
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10621907
    To me the border around the A/C seemed sharp enough so just wanted to know what else should I look for in the future.
    Not at all soft for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • JuklicekCZ
    replied
    Hello, I'm not sure about this shot.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	image_51415.jpg
Views:	46
Size:	365.9 KB
ID:	1149618
    The aircraft is very silver and under a direct light causing the fuselage to be very bright.
    Could this end up as a glare rejection, or would it be ok?
    Also, may I ask, based on what measurement is the following shot considered soft?
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10621907
    To me the border around the A/C seemed sharp enough so just wanted to know what else should I look for in the future.

    Leave a comment:


  • JuklicekCZ
    replied
    Thanks guys

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Agree with Mark.
    Unfortunately faced this issue myself on some occasions as well.
    Even when there is a very tiny bit of the aircraft cut off, you will get rejected for that.
    A very tiny tip of the tail edge is indeed missing.

    Regards.

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkLawrence
    replied
    While I am not a screener, I think the rejection is valid - it does appear (correct or not) that the tip edge does seem to be cut off - I think a framing rejection would have applied probably as well, but purely on looks, it does seem cut-off. Just my opinion.

    Leave a comment:


  • JuklicekCZ
    replied
    Hello,
    I just wanted to double-check this rejection.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10614207
    It is rejected for cut off because of the tail apparently, however, eventhough the crop is really close I dont think there would actually be a missing part.
    Shall I understand the rejection more like a centering issue, or can a close crop result into a cut off as well?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by JuklicekCZ View Post
    Ok, thank you very much for your service.
    I ended up uploading them almost unedited (colorwise).
    Please don't tell me now, that they are still hash, because now, they are like black -2 in the lightroom sliders.
    Ok for me; can't say for others.

    Leave a comment:


  • JuklicekCZ
    replied
    Ok, thank you very much for your service.
    I ended up uploading them almost unedited (colorwise).
    Please don't tell me now, that they are still hash, because now, they are like black -2 in the lightroom sliders.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by JuklicekCZ View Post

    Thank you, I have tried to reduce the blacks even more, however, would't the historgram be a problem now?
    I mean specifically the gap on the left.
    A bit better. I usually don't check the histogram when screening unless I need to confirm something. I suspect most screeners are the same.

    Leave a comment:


  • JuklicekCZ
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    These are slightly improved.
    Thank you, I have tried to reduce the blacks even more, however, would't the historgram be a problem now?
    I mean specifically the gap on the left.
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by JuklicekCZ View Post

    Thanks, I tried to brighten the darks a bit.
    Would these be acceptable?
    These are slightly improved.

    Leave a comment:


  • JuklicekCZ
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Borderline harsh contrast on the first two, otherwise ok for me.
    Thanks, I tried to brighten the darks a bit.
    Would these be acceptable?
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by JuklicekCZ View Post
    Hello, may I get a feedback on theese?
    What concerns me most is contrast, Processing (overprocessed) and sharpness.
    Thank you very much
    Borderline harsh contrast on the first two, otherwise ok for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • JuklicekCZ
    replied
    Hello, may I get a feedback on theese?
    What concerns me most is contrast, Processing (overprocessed) and sharpness.
    Thank you very much
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X