Compressed Upload

[sluger020889]

I recently had this pic rejected......

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=1028881

Problem is that the pic was compressed, or something, on upload because the image I uploaded was very crisp and no where near as soft.

Here is the pic I uploaded...

[Greg]

Look at the KLM/Air France logo and the name of the plane. Looks soft or blurry on both pics. Thats where I notice it. Sorry man.

[E-Diddy!]

From the outset, the photo appears to need a bit of USM.

[Will M]

Looks nice and crisp and clear to me !

[brianw999]

I had the same problem a little while ago. I uploaded a Cameron hot air balloon which was perfectly crisp and sharp. This is the pic as uploaded to JPnet and as it successfully uploaded to ImageShack.



When I looked at it in the upload preview it was horrible. I know there may be some oversharpening in the above pic.....but I mean, IT WAS HORRIBLE. Very blurred and looking like it had been overcompressed big time.
The only difference in my workflow was that the pic was originally shot in .jpg fine format whereas I normally shoot in Nikon RAW. I'm wondering whether the fact that there was just one more save in the .jpg process (i.e. the upload ) was enough to destroy the picture by the time it arrived at JPnet ?

Your pic looks perfectly acceptable to me as well.

[MaxPower]

There's no difference between the one you uploaded and the one rejected. Like everyone have said, its equally soft on both !

[Crism]

There's no difference between the one you uploaded and the one rejected. Like everyone have said, its equally soft on both !

I can see a difference. The one uploaded is clearly more blurry/soft.

[Greg Wilson]

Clearly see the difference......
File sizes..........804kb and 242kb.

[AlanF]

Can i ask a question without being flamed do all screeners have the same calibration and colour settings on there monitors ? if not there willl be differences between what each screener see's this is in noway way a dig a screeners i think they do a fantasic job with the amount of uploads they handle
thx
Alan

ps the image shack one does look a lot better to me

[MaxPower]

I can see a difference. The one uploaded is clearly more blurry/soft.

You got a point there which is partly what I was pointing out too. They are both soft, one way or the other, Just didnt state that clear enough.

[sluger020889]

Wel I clearly see a difference, mostly on the upper edge of the fuselage.

[MaxPower]

Wel I clearly see a difference, mostly on the upper edge of the fuselage.

I see it. On the edge like you said, it's more softer there. Sorry my bad on my previous post.

[Greg]

do all screeners have the same calibration and colour settings on there monitors ?

Unfortunately no.

i think they do a fantasic job with the amount of uploads they handle

Thank you, I've seen some of your pics pass through, they look quite nice.

-Greg

[Greg Wilson]

Unfortunately no.

You are kidding me......

[AlanF]

Thank you, I've seen some of your pics pass through, they look quite nice.
-Greg

Thx Greg i'm relativley new to photography and its took a lot of rejections and advice from members to start getting them accepted

Alan