Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Need some Backlit help.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Paul Maier
    replied
    Matt, Stefan clarified it for me, i kind of didnt understand what you meant...and was thinking WTF? but all good now.

    Leave a comment:


  • 2C67
    replied
    Which picture are you referring to Paul?



    Matt

    Leave a comment:


  • seahawk
    replied
    When you see the shadow of the tail on the fuselage (or the shadow of the fuselage on the wing), then a backlit rejection is likely - not certain. And it is not a rule, just an advice for pre-screening your own uploads.

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul Maier
    replied
    Originally posted by 2C67
    when the tail is in shadow the image would be considered backlit

    Matt
    Matt, can you expand on this please.
    Are you meaning in this instance, or in general?

    Paul.

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by Greg Wilson
    Thanks Gerardo……that has been a question asked and unanswered on many occasions here,
    You're welcome, but I'm almost 100% sure, that this has been answered already in the past. I could be wrong of course ....

    Leave a comment:


  • Greg Wilson
    replied
    Thanks Gerardo……that has been a question asked and unanswered on many occasions here, although the answer was generally known and accepted. My question was designed to create debate, and I considered on topic as a couple of questions appeared to maybe relate to how different photos may be viewed on different monitors. My personal opinion is that they should be…the accepted requirement of screening, and of course its subjectivity, would suggest the closer tolerances on monitors would be beneficial.

    Mark, if you think I am moaning that is your opinion that you are perfectly entitled to.

    Leave a comment:


  • seahawk
    replied
    Originally posted by ollieholmes
    It was a few months ago but i have been to busy to bring this issue up. It was a photo of a Cub at Old Warden, i uploaded a series of them all taken on the same day and others where accepted. I will find it later when i get a chance.
    It is really hard to say anything constructive if we talk about one photo that was rejected months ago. And when the majority was accpeted nevertheless, then our system does not seem to have an error, you just have to accept the fact that borderline shots will always have a 50:50 chance. It might be the case that this photo was worse then the accpeted ones on one way or the other and the screener found no reason to accpet it.

    Leave a comment:


  • ollieholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by seahawk
    Looking at your current rejections I found no backlit rejection, it makes such a discussion much easier when we can acutally see the photo.
    It was a few months ago but i have been to busy to bring this issue up. It was a photo of a Cub at Old Warden, i uploaded a series of them all taken on the same day and others where accepted. I will find it later when i get a chance.

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Nah, let's wait a little while ...

    Gerardo

    Leave a comment:


  • brianw999
    replied
    Admin.....methinks it's time to lock this one. It's going nowhere and has stepped well away from the original thread subject......and it's also making these forums more like some of the "flaming" diatribes on Anet.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mark Ralph
    replied
    Originally posted by Greg Wilson
    Exactly why there is very little discussion here. As mature posters, most know the limits without constant reminders.
    Can we have one question answered..........are all screeners monitors calibrated to the same standard?
    To be perfectly honest it amazes me the low quality/borderline quality of some photos being accepted here at times.
    Might have guessed you'd jump on the moaning band wagon.

    To be perfectly honest as well, it amazes me why you hang around if you haven't got a good word to say.

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by FatGit
    Ok than if there is no favouritism why was this accepted old high and mighty is it because its good or because you are a screener parts of aircraft are missing no wheels no logo all you see is cockpit window as i say utter bollocks it who you know as i said

    It was probably accepted because a) it's not backlit (remember the main title of this topic?) and b) it meets the standards of this site. But thanks for plugging a photo of mine

    BTW: another example: [photoid=5994975] and I don't know the photog!!!! WOW!!!!!

    Originally posted by Greg Wilson
    Can we have one question answered..........are all screeners monitors calibrated to the same standard?
    To be perfectly honest it amazes me the low quality/borderline quality of some photos being accepted here at times.
    No, our monitors are not calibrated. If you see bad photos here, then mostly because on borderlines we mostly (not always) still will go along our slogan "Look for a reason to accept". Granted, this causes some inconsistencies in borderline areas, but we still think it's better that way, than having fix rules, which itself tend to be too high and too detailed.

    I don't see much of a problem with uncalibrated monitors. If it were so, the photos uploaded by the screeners would show far more differences for example in colors or contrast.

    Leave a comment:


  • seahawk
    replied
    Originally posted by ollieholmes
    I dont whant to cause to much trouble here but i will find the photo that was rejected for backlighting when it was not, the lighting was behind me and maybe a bit to one side. The time and direction of the runway will prove it.
    Looking at your current rejections I found no backlit rejection, it makes such a discussion much easier when we can acutally see the photo.

    Leave a comment:


  • Greg Wilson
    replied
    Originally posted by 2C67
    [photoid=5994978] ............Can I remind you of the first line of the posting guidelines:No "Flaming"
    Please do not post any messages that harrass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest against their wishes. Matt
    Exactly why there is very little discussion here. As mature posters, most know the limits without constant reminders.
    Can we have one question answered..........are all screeners monitors calibrated to the same standard?
    To be perfectly honest it amazes me the low quality/borderline quality of some photos being accepted here at times.

    Leave a comment:


  • 2C67
    replied
    [photoid=5994978]

    No wheels, no wings, not even a logo......but still accepted-and the photographer is not a crew member.

    Can I remind you of the first line of the posting guidelines:

    No "Flaming"
    Please do not post any messages that harrass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest against their wishes.



    Matt

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X