Prescreening request/advice - Nathaniel R

[Tyler Godfrey]

And also if I could have prescreening on the following two images, sorry I forgot to put them on my last request.
I'm a bit worried they may still be dark overall although the sun is shining from the side of the photographer-I've made my best try in adjusting the contrast, etc. but am still unsure.
Thanks again!

Hi, No photos are visible

[nathanielrusdianto]

Hi, No photos are visible

Weird, they're visible on mine...
Thanks for the heads up. Here's the reuploaded versions.

[dlowwa]

Weird, they're visible on mine...
Thanks for the heads up. Here's the reuploaded versions.

1. soft, noisy, contrast, overexposed, overprocessed
2. soft, compression/noisy

[nathanielrusdianto]

1. soft, noisy, contrast, overexposed, overprocessed
2. soft, compression/noisy

Thank you. I suppose the first one has no chance to be saved(?)

And a quick question, how do you actually determine the "overprocessed" part? To me the image looks just fine, I read the guideline that overprocessing can look like smudgy edges/plastic looks but to me it doesn't. I tried my best not to use any other editing feature other than level/contrast adjustments to reduce overprocessing looks. Or maybe I am missing something else. Thanks again.

[dlowwa]

Thank you. I suppose the first one has no chance to be saved(?)

And a quick question, how do you actually determine the "overprocessed" part?

Top of the fuselage is completely overexposed, while the rest of the aircraft has very muted light. Classic sign of excessive attempt to recover highlights.

[nathanielrusdianto]

Top of the fuselage is completely overexposed, while the rest of the aircraft has very muted light. Classic sign of excessive attempt to recover highlights.

Thank you dlowwa.

Another question, for rejection reason "soft/undersharpened", is there any specific signs that I can use as a guide to tell if a picture is soft?
I've recently had three images rejected (attached) all due to softness, to me the images looked like they were properly sharpened. I was afraid if I add more sharpening, then reupload them, they can get rejected for oversharpening (I've had that too before) instead. Thanks for any input!

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11023789

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11022898

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11022889

[dlowwa]

Thank you dlowwa.

Another question, for rejection reason "soft/undersharpened", is there any specific signs that I can use as a guide to tell if a picture is soft?
I've recently had three images rejected (attached) all due to softness, to me the images looked like they were properly sharpened. I was afraid if I add more sharpening, then reupload them, they can get rejected for oversharpening (I've had that too before) instead. Thanks for any input!

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11023789

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11022898

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11022889

Areas that should have sharp transition lines (text, hard edges, etc.) do.

[nathanielrusdianto]

Hi everyone, I'm back with another rejection question.
A few hours ago I had this image rejected on the grounds of too much or too little contrast. Again, as usual, when I edited this I thought the contrast looks fine. I also tried to pay attention to the histogram to make sure the graph looks as evenly distributed as I can without chipping the edges, etc. Still the picture got rejected.

To be honest, up until now many of my rejected images are usually due to contrast and I have no clue why. I tried browsing through the forum too for discussions on contrast rejections but not a lot of solutions came up. One thing I understand is that contrast issue can be highly subjective, so there isn't a single absolute solution to it and that it depends mostly on editing experience and personal judgment, but having uploaded a number of images here now I still have difficulties judging the proper contrast for acceptance. Sometimes I think the contrast is just fine and it gets accepted, but most other time it isn't despite my thinking that the contrast is okay.

If someone can help me explain the general cues about this contrast issue, I will be very grateful. I have been learning a lot on how to properly edit photos from other rejection reasons like under/overexposed, under/oversharpened, etc. but the contrast issue is the last one I still can't get away with. Thanks!

[dlowwa]

Hi everyone, I'm back with another rejection question.
A few hours ago I had this image rejected on the grounds of too much or too little contrast. Again, as usual, when I edited this I thought the contrast looks fine. I also tried to pay attention to the histogram to make sure the graph looks as evenly distributed as I can without chipping the edges, etc. Still the picture got rejected.

To be honest, up until now many of my rejected images are usually due to contrast and I have no clue why. I tried browsing through the forum too for discussions on contrast rejections but not a lot of solutions came up. One thing I understand is that contrast issue can be highly subjective, so there isn't a single absolute solution to it and that it depends mostly on editing experience and personal judgment, but having uploaded a number of images here now I still have difficulties judging the proper contrast for acceptance. Sometimes I think the contrast is just fine and it gets accepted, but most other time it isn't despite my thinking that the contrast is okay.

If someone can help me explain the general cues about this contrast issue, I will be very grateful. I have been learning a lot on how to properly edit photos from other rejection reasons like under/overexposed, under/oversharpened, etc. but the contrast issue is the last one I still can't get away with. Thanks!

Lack of direct light on the aircraft (overcast skies). Very difficult to fix with editing.

[nathanielrusdianto]

Lack of direct light on the aircraft (overcast skies). Very difficult to fix with editing.

Thank you. So it's actually the lack of lighting on the aircraft creating an illusion of bad contrast on the aircraft rather than the overall contrast of the image?

[dlowwa]

Thank you. So it's actually the lack of lighting on the aircraft creating an illusion of bad contrast on the aircraft rather than the overall contrast of the image?

The aircraft is the subject of the image (this is an aircraft photo database you are trying to upload to), so in most cases it's all that really matters.

[nathanielrusdianto]

The aircraft is the subject of the image (this is an aircraft photo database you are trying to upload to), so in most cases it's all that really matters.

Noted on that. Thank you dlowwa.

[nathanielrusdianto]

Hi everyone,
I had the following image rejected due to bad composition/aircraft not centered.
Not sure if this is not centered? Or is the aircraft still too low in the frame? To me it looks like the center part of the fuselage is placed correctly in the middle of the image.
Thanks for any input.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11102112

[dlowwa]

Hi everyone,
I had the following image rejected due to bad composition/aircraft not centered.
Not sure if this is not centered? Or is the aircraft still too low in the frame? To me it looks like the center part of the fuselage is placed correctly in the middle of the image.
Thanks for any input.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11102112

A little high in the frame.

[nathanielrusdianto]

A little high in the frame.

I see. Thank you for the input.