Tom Smart - prescreening request / editing advice

[[email protected]]

Hi there. New Jetphotos user here, trying to get a sense for what makes a good submission. The lighting, contrast and overall fidelity look good to me. I do see some jagged edges after resizing, but only if I view it large. The tail, cockpit and engine look sharp to me, but is the fuselage soft anyway? Is it appropriate to keep the shadow of the wing? Should I also keep the nose shadow?

[arseni628]

Overall, the photo looks good to me, maybe a bit Low In Frame but I think that's acceptable. Yes, the fuselage looks a bit soft, espacially pax windows. Try some lower resolutions like 1200px.

Is it appropriate to keep the shadow of the wing? Should I also keep the nose shadow?

But what do you mean by "keep"? I don't quite understand.

Best regards, Arseni.

[dlowwa]

Hi there. New Jetphotos user here, trying to get a sense for what makes a good submission. The lighting, contrast and overall fidelity look good to me. I do see some jagged edges after resizing, but only if I view it large. The tail, cockpit and engine look sharp to me, but is the fuselage soft anyway? Is it appropriate to keep the shadow of the wing? Should I also keep the nose shadow?

Maybe a touch soft, but otherwise don't see any major issues. Nit-picking, might want a slightly wider crop on the left to avoid cutting the static discharge rod on the stabilizer.

[[email protected]]

Thanks. Regarding “keep” I mean treating the shadow as part of the subject and not cropping into it.

Regarding the softness; do you think the depth of focus just didn’t keep the windows sharp, and maybe I could “hide” that flaw with a smaller image size?

I appreciate the nitpick about the tail too.

[arseni628]

Thanks. Regarding “keep” I mean treating the shadow as part of the subject and not cropping into it.

Regarding the softness; do you think the depth of focus just didn’t keep the windows sharp, and maybe I could “hide” that flaw with a smaller image size?

I appreciate the nitpick about the tail too.

Don't worry about the shadow, yes, try a bit lower resolution maybe.

Best regards, Arseni.

[dlowwa]

Thanks. Regarding “keep” I mean treating the shadow as part of the subject and not cropping into it.

Regarding the softness; do you think the depth of focus just didn’t keep the windows sharp, and maybe I could “hide” that flaw with a smaller image size?

Minor issue really. A touch more sharpening should fix it.

[[email protected]]

Thanks for the feedback. Do you have any insights as to the quality of these selections. (I guess I’m seeing some Denise artifact in the tower on one of them.)

[dlowwa]

Thanks for the feedback. Do you have any insights as to the quality of these selections. (I guess I’m seeing some Denise artifact in the tower on one of them.)

1. soft/blurry, too far, centering, contrast
2. soft/blurry, too far
3. horizon, centering, compression
4. soft/blurry, centering, borderline backlit
5. too far, centering, contrast

[[email protected]]

Hi there. Can anybody comment on these “similar” photos. There are things I’m not sure about when selecting submissions, like: Does the reflection off a wing tip lower the quality? Does glare on windows matter? Also I’m trying to find balance between “too soft” and “over processed/compression.” When I makes the final step of resizing and exporting I often get jagged lines in the livery details. Is that evident? Thanks a lot.

[Delta95Heavy]

Hi there. Can anybody comment on these “similar” photos. There are things I’m not sure about when selecting submissions, like: Does the reflection off a wing tip lower the quality? Does glare on windows matter? Also I’m trying to find balance between “too soft” and “over processed/compression.” When I makes the final step of resizing and exporting I often get jagged lines in the livery details. Is that evident? Thanks a lot.

Dana will likely ask you to choose only one of those three because they are in a series. The second one looks to be the best out of the three. Like the beacon catch!

[dlowwa]

Hi there. Can anybody comment on these “similar” photos. There are things I’m not sure about when selecting submissions, like: Does the reflection off a wing tip lower the quality? Does glare on windows matter? Also I’m trying to find balance between “too soft” and “over processed/compression.” When I makes the final step of resizing and exporting I often get jagged lines in the livery details. Is that evident? Thanks a lot.

1-2. similar
3. soft, contrast, borderline horizon (CCW)

[[email protected]]

Hi there. I'm tweaking a rejected submission and would appreciate feedback. The rejection was for "underexposed/contrast." I've adjusted the exposure and contrast on this edit - does it look correct? Should I bring the shadows down? Also, is it acceptable to resubmit it as "hot" again (updated livery)?

[dlowwa]

Hi there. I'm tweaking a rejected submission and would appreciate feedback. The rejection was for "underexposed/contrast." I've adjusted the exposure and contrast on this edit - does it look correct? Should I bring the shadows down? Also, is it acceptable to resubmit it as "hot" again (updated livery)?

Borderline (weak) contrast, and light editing halos visible. Couldn't say about qualifying for hot without more information.

[[email protected]]

Thank you. I made some curve adjustments to this attempt. Soon I won't need help seeing, but does this look better? Regarding "hot" - I submitted it as hot because the livery had changed since the plane was last uploaded in 2015 by another photographer . Since my upload was rejected, should I try again as "hot" or keep it in the regular queue (assuming I get an worthy edit).

P.S. I accidentally chose a different image in the sequence for this edit

[jakerepp]

If there is still no photo of it in that livery then yes, keep uploading as hot.

What was the photo previously rejected for?