Who needs help with their scans / rejects?? We can help you!

[Jan-Jasinski]

1) Cant be fixed IMO< the background is just to far gone on the blown out spectrum.

2) SLight green/bue cast, can be fixed easily.

3)As above but needs some more sharpening

4)If you have edited the brightness in, it may be spareable.

Thanks a lot! I'll try to get these edited tonight or tomorrow!

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Jan,
1) clearly nothing you can do, except exposing the pic correctly next time.

On a side note, Jan please watch your appeal messages. These were really clear rejections and you should try to learn from them instead of appealing, and comparing our database to A.net is not the best idea as we differ in many points when it comes to the informations.

regards
Alex

[Jan-Jasinski]

Jan,
1) clearly nothing you can do, except exposing the pic correctly next time.

On a side note, Jan please watch your appeal messages. These were really clear rejections and you should try to learn from them instead of appealing, and comparing our database to A.net is not the best idea as we differ in many points when it comes to the informations.

regards
Alex

Roger that

[BangaloreAviation]

Can I request some help with these two rejects, as I am unable to see the reason.

1. Blurry. I did not sharpen the wings due to jaggies which happen due to the high dew content at night in BLR.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3253688

2. Cannot understand the undersharpened and contrast issue. Even the grain, I can see little bit below the wing, but is anywhere else ?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3252156

TIA

Devesh

[LX-A343]

1) for example wing, engine, tail and windows look very blurry as also witsnessed by the rejected appeal
2) whole photo looks a bit soft, aircraft and background definitely lack contrast which even adds to an overall soft look, despite the lack of contrast there is noise visible for example under the wings or on the lower side of the fuselage.

[Siegi N.]

Hi,

What problems there are in each picture?
I used Photoshop CS5 ruler tool, will as the roof level behind the plane
1. http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254789

And it has already a second time Over Processed / Bad postprocessing


2. http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254795

Best regards
Siegi.

[brianw999]

Hi,

What problems there are in each picture?

1. http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254789

And it has already a second time Over Processed / Bad postprocessing


2. http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254795

Best regards
Siegi.

Siegi,
Both seem to suffer from heat distortion.

[Siegi N.]

Siegi,

Both seem to suffer from heat distortion.

Really, every time a new excuse, I begin lose patience...
I recived in mail resault
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254795
strange processing on the sharpening...

There's no a strange process of refinement, I do sharpening as any picture, Nothing more.

[Rtyrpics]

Really, every time a new excuse, I begin lose patience...
I recived in mail resault
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254795
strange processing on the sharpening...

There's no a strange process of refinement, I do sharpening as any picture, Nothing more.

Siegi, is there any need to attack Brian? He is trying to help you.

In the second picture look at the cheatline, it looks like it's been attacked with a flymo. Oversharp/Heathaze could be either or.

Ryan

[ntduong]

For these two rejections I have too much/too little contrast:
1) http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254682
2) http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254634
3)http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254684

Are they too much or too little and are there a chance to correct them? And for 3) without the technicians, will it be corrected for motive?
Thank you and merry Xmas

[BDUB]

Quite Confused

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254456

Hi Guys

I'm just wondering what the rejection for bad info was ? I used the automatic database to upload this one and am certain that it was VH-VOZ i was on, that it was the 22nd and that i had selected "cabin" before uploading. I have had a number of photos already uploaded from this flight using the same information, so i'm curious as to why this one was rejected ?

Many thanks

Ben

[Siegi N.]

Siegi, is there any need to attack Brian? He is trying to help you.

In the second picture look at the cheatline, it looks like it's been attacked with a flymo. Oversharp/Heathaze could be either or.

Ryan

So maybe there is a problem in software Photoshop CS5, retrieving an old version, Which way to turn a photo of the NCA, CW or CCW and how much?

Siegi.

[BDUB]

Feel Free to disregard my post it would seem somehow the CN for VH-VPD instead of VH-VOZ has been uploaded

[LX-A343]

Siegi, there is absolutely no problem with Photoshop. But if the original photo has for example heat haze distortions, any sharpening will cause strange effects, as pointed out above.

And to be honest:...

Really, every time a new excuse, I begin lose patience...

... such posts lead to nowhere, because:
a) these ar not excuses, but genuine reasons to reject a photo
b) guess, who is also losing patience with you and your mails!

[LX-A343]

For these two rejections I have too much/too little contrast:
1) http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254682
2) http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254634
3)http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3254684

Are they too much or too little and are there a chance to correct them? And for 3) without the technicians, will it be corrected for motive?
Thank you and merry Xmas

All 3 lack contrast and on all 3 the washed out light grey sky is a killer.
1) I don't know, if you used some JPG compression, but parts of the photo look soft/fuzzy
2) lacks a lot of contrast, mostly due to the weather conditions
3) is in my opinion too much focussed on the mech, instead of the aircraft, which resulted in a weird cropped photo.