thebigdog360 - Prescreening Advice

[thebigdog360]

Hello, would appreciate any feedback regarding these business jets. In order, N443QS, C-GSAT, & C-FACO.

[arseni628]

Not a screener, but
All 3 soft
1 borderline noisy
2 aircraft not centered (too low)

[AKH]

Copy of my reply in your previous post.

Not a screener, but I would have doubts about the mentioned HOT status.
- N443QS would be a first registration in database (but the airframe is from 2021).
- C-FACO is an older CN550 and there are many photos in the database, except for this c/s. As far as I can see, C-FACO is currently assigned to a CN560.
- C-GSAT would be indeed new, as the reg was an Air Transat A310 before. So you may give priority to this photo in order to keep the HOT criteria.
My 5 cents.
Regards AKH

[JuklicekCZ]

Copy of my reply in your previous post.

Not a screener, but I would have doubts about the mentioned HOT status.
- N443QS would be a first registration in database (but the airframe is from 2021).
- C-FACO is an older CN550 and there are many photos in the database, except for this c/s. As far as I can see, C-FACO is currently assigned to a CN560.
- C-GSAT would be indeed new, as the reg was an Air Transat A310 before. So you may give priority to this photo in order to keep the HOT criteria.
My 5 cents.
Regards AKH

As N443QS registration is not in the DB, it is definitely hot, the hot text field should not even be filled as such a shot is hot automatically, regardless of whether the airframe is 1 year old, or 20.
This C-FACO livery is also not present yet, so it most likely is hot either.

[AKH]

As N443QS registration is not in the DB, it is definitely hot, the hot text field should not even be filled as such a shot is hot automatically, regardless of whether the airframe is 1 year old, or 20.
This C-FACO livery is also not present yet, so it most likely is hot either.

I mean to tick the "HOT" box when uploading. So N443QS would qualify and also C-GSAT for sure. I still woudl doubt C-FACO since this particular aircraft is no longer active as such.
However, my point of view, the screeners will always decide if HOT or not.

[thebigdog360]

As N443QS registration is not in the DB, it is definitely hot, the hot text field should not even be filled as such a shot is hot automatically, regardless of whether the airframe is 1 year old, or 20.
This C-FACO livery is also not present yet, so it most likely is hot either.

Yes I was basing the claims of these being hot off of these points as well as what AKH mentioned about C-GSAT in an earlier reply.

[thebigdog360]

I mean to tick the "HOT" box when uploading. So N443QS would qualify and also C-GSAT for sure. I still woudl doubt C-FACO since this particular aircraft is no longer active as such.
However, my point of view, the screeners will always decide if HOT or not.

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by FACO not being active? All the photos in the database show FACO as being a CN560 since the very first photo, and I am no expert in private jets, but the FACO I photographed does seem to be a CN560 as well?

[thebigdog360]

Not a screener, but
All 3 soft
1 borderline noisy
2 aircraft not centered (too low)

Thank you, I know you are not a screener but I have made some adjustments based on your feedback:

[AKH]

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by FACO not being active? All the photos in the database show FACO as being a CN560 since the very first photo, and I am no expert in private jets, but the FACO I photographed does seem to be a CN560 as well?

You are right...ignore my comment regarding C-FACO...need glasses

[thebigdog360]

Also have this, which I am less confident in, but would coincidentally be new to the database .

[dlowwa]

Thank you, I know you are not a screener but I have made some adjustments based on your feedback:

All images slightly soft and show editing halos to various extents (overprocessed).

Also have this, which I am less confident in, but would coincidentally be new to the database .

Soft, blurry, too low, overprocessed.

[thebigdog360]

All images slightly soft and show editing halos to various extents (overprocessed).

Is there anything specific when editing that causes the halos or is it overall an issue? Thanks.

[dlowwa]

Is there anything specific when editing that causes the halos or is it overall an issue? Thanks.

Without knowing your exact workflow, couldn't tell you, but usually the result of settings related to shadow/highlight, dehaze, vibrance, clarity, etc..

[thebigdog360]

Without knowing your exact workflow, couldn't tell you, but usually the result of settings related to shadow/highlight, dehaze, vibrance, clarity, etc..

Ok thanks, I don't want to dwell on these three photos but here I hopefully fixed the issues they had:

[dlowwa]

Ok thanks, I don't want to dwell on these three photos but here I hopefully fixed the issues they had:

1. soft, dirty
2-3. soft, overprocessed