Do you need any Pre-Screening? - Limited to CREW reply ONLY.

[HB-IHC]

Night or not?

Hullo Chaps and Chappettes


Do you want these in the "Night" category or not?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewqueued_b.php?id=3294893

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewqueued_b.php?id=3295616

TIA

pwf

[afkabruce98]

1- no
2- yes. A bit of oversharpening on the image as well.

[brianw999]

This may have gotten lost...
Is the fuselage too blown-out on this or is it fine? Is it also centered correctly?
http://machimages.com/temp/JP.net/N435QX06102010RNO.jpg

Looks OK to me.

[sst001]

One more attempt at noise reduction on that difficult image - if it were anything other than AN-124, I'd have tossed the image. NoiseNinja seems to work well - it gets rid of the noise without blurring the detail in low contrast areas. Topaz Denoise 5 was unable to do that.

It looks better to my eyes, on the tail especially - where I had lots of trouble before.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

that An-124 shot looks acceptable to me.

[sst001]

It is in the queue, thanks for the feedback.

[Felipe Garcia]

Felipe,
please select civilian Genre - Guidance Helicopter if available and don't forget the Warbird/vintage category.
cheers
Alex

Thanks Alex!

[HB-IHC]

1- no
2- yes. A bit of oversharpening on the image as well.

Thanks Seth.. and for the heads up on the sharpness. Have pulled it from the Q and resharpened for another time.

Cheers

Paul

[Siegi N.]

Hi all

The first time I chose the category Cargo and rejected photo on Harizon unlevel and Missing category.
The second time after photo redit I chose an Cargo category rejected again, what happened again?

http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=3293444

[oe-vap]

Siegi.
1.) This is the wrong thread
2.) You had night shot selected as well, which was not correct.

[Siegi N.]

Hello all

There in photos to chance?
1.


2.


3.


Best regard,
Siegi.

[Jan-Jasinski]

Jan-
1- overexposed, soft, noise/grain and compression
2- overexposed, soft, bad composition/centering
3- soft, overexposed, lack of contrast

Thanks.
Do these ones stand a chance? Thanks again.
Rejected versions here and new ones attached:

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3276952

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3276938

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3276936

[mrFoot]

Dear screeners,

could you please take a look at these 3 pictures.

For the 2 Wingviews, I already have some similar pictures. I hope they are not too similar that they cause a rejection






Thank you,
Lasse

[sst001]

I took this image today. I moved the camera around to portrait mode since the effect was really unusual:



With the moon rising, and the clouds crossing it, the effect was bizarre. Used ISO12,800, 1/4sec at F/4.0 at 9:30pm. How is the cropping on that one. I tried to get the moon in, with the cloud and some of the water. I had not really planned to submit it - since this backlit sort of image isn't the normal kind of photo I prefer to take, but I thought it was worth giving a go.

[PMN]

Dear screeners,

could you please take a look at these 3 pictures.

For the 2 Wingviews, I already have some similar pictures. I hope they are not too similar that they cause a rejection

Hi Lasse,

I think the KLM wing view is possibly bordering on a bit too similar to the two you already have as the view is fairly standard. The Fokker wing view I think is worth uploading because although you already have two accepted the view is quite different and interesting. It could probably do with another kick of sharpening though.

I like the Turkish 737 but it's very much a 'grey area' image. I think it's worth trying but don't be too surprised if it gets a too far/centre rejection.

I took this image today. I moved the camera around to portrait mode since the effect was really unusual:

An interesting image but I'm not quite sure the motive or quality are quite there for JP standards. I don't think showing the clouds above and having the aircraft so low really adds that much to the image so it would be a motive reject for me. Others may well disagree though so perhaps get a few more opinions before making a decision.