Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NEW Editing advice thread

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • B7772ADL
    replied
    Originally posted by pawelm View Post
    One more question. Can appealed photo be rejected by Senior Screener for reasons different than in original rejection? For instance, if SS wouldn't mind chopped off stab and level, but he wouldn't like the contrast, can he reject that appeal? Just curious.

    Thanks
    Just to expand on what Brian replied, yep the seniors can most definitely reject an appeal for other reasons. There are times for example someone will send an appeal in but when the appeal comes through there are other very evident reasons to reject the photo. Whilst the initial screeners do their best to give all reasons, sometimes things get missed like a dust spot, bad cropping or a category is missed and the info is incorrect. For example you might send a Cargo aircraft through on appeal for soft, but you forgot to select the cargo category. The appeal screener would notice that the category is missing and then reject the appeal as there is no way in the appeal system to change any information. All we get is an accept or reject option. In these cases we would do our best to make sure you're given a reason why the appeal was rejected.
    Last edited by B7772ADL; 2017-05-23, 12:36.

    Leave a comment:


  • brianw999
    replied
    Originally posted by pawelm View Post

    ..........One more question. Can appealed photo be rejected by Senior Screener for reasons different than in original rejection? For instance, if SS wouldn't mind chopped off stab and level, but he wouldn't like the contrast, can he reject that appeal? Just curious.

    Thanks
    Basically, Yes.

    Leave a comment:


  • pawelm
    replied
    Originally posted by LX-A343 View Post
    My first question: why do you upload if you expect a rejection?

    Anyway ... the chopped off stab looks distracting, for some maybe acceptable, for others not. Had I screened it, it would have been an instant rejection for dark and lack of contrast
    What I meant was, that I thought if it's gonna be rejected, it's gonna be, as always, because of contrast. And if it was a contrast rejection, I wouldn't say a word. But "cut off" rejection really suprised me, espacially that there's a lot of accepted photos of aircraft with various parts chopped off.

    One more question. Can appealed photo be rejected by Senior Screener for reasons different than in original rejection? For instance, if SS wouldn't mind chopped off stab and level, but he wouldn't like the contrast, can he reject that appeal? Just curious.

    Thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by pawelm View Post
    Hi guys, I need your help with this one:
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5863515

    In this case I was expecting contrast, under/overexposure rejection. Maybe even soft/oversharpen, overproccesed. But really, the last reasons I would think of were cut off and unlevel. Is it woth to appeal this one? It maybe wasn't a steady approach, but it was taken like 3 minutes after a hail storm, so there was a possibility pretty strong crosswind. And cut off? I really don't know what to say, most of my recently accepted shots from LHR were "almost wingless", and I have many more similar "cut off" shots accepted in the past.

    What do you guys think?

    edit: I tried to appeal, but it got rejected without any comments. Can you please point out what's actually wrong with this photo? Is it because of cut flap? Should I crop it tighter or wider? I really don't get it...
    My first question: why do you upload if you expect a rejection?

    Anyway ... the chopped off stab looks distracting, for some maybe acceptable, for others not. Had I screened it, it would have been an instant rejection for dark and lack of contrast

    Leave a comment:


  • pawelm
    replied
    Originally posted by pawelm View Post
    Hi guys, I need your help with this one:
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5863515

    In this case I was expecting contrast, under/overexposure rejection. Maybe even soft/oversharpen, overproccesed. But really, the last reasons I would think of were cut off and unlevel. Is it woth to appeal this one? It maybe wasn't a steady approach, but it was taken like 3 minutes after a hail storm, so there was a possibility pretty strong crosswind. And cut off? I really don't know what to say, most of my recently accepted shots from LHR were "almost wingless", and I have many more similar "cut off" shots accepted in the past.

    What do you guys think?

    edit: I tried to appeal, but it got rejected without any comments. Can you please point out what's actually wrong with this photo? Is it because of cut flap? Should I crop it tighter or wider? I really don't get it...
    Guys...?

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by crisquijano View Post
    Hello,
    Photo ID 5865438 was rejected for "Too much or too little contrast". I would like please to understand how to fix it in the photo. I donīt understand the cause as I see a fine contrast in it.

    Thank you,

    cq[ATTACH=CONFIG]7701[/ATTACH]

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5865438
    Main issue is simply the lack of contrast between the aircraft and the light grey background. In these conditions there is simply not enough contrast available. The result in your photo is a lack of shadows, making the whole photo look kind of "flat".

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by iranair777 View Post
    Hi all,

    Can someone explain where my postproccessing has gone wrong in this one please? https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5866304

    Furthermore, the following SQ `380 was rejected for bad composition even though (if i recall correctly) I stated in the screeners comment box that the aircraft was unstable on approach hence why it's wonky. Furthermore, as there is no indication of the position of the horizon, I don't see how the horizon is unlevel; its the aircraft which was unstable on it's approach. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5867208
    Regarding the SQ A380, apart from the aircraft itself looking unlevel, also the cloud line and the gradients in the sky look unlevel.

    Leave a comment:


  • crisquijano
    replied
    Hello,
    Photo ID 5865438 was rejected for "Too much or too little contrast". I would like please to understand how to fix it in the photo. I donīt understand the cause as I see a fine contrast in it.

    Thank you,

    cqClick image for larger version

Name:	CONDOR_D-ABUH_ID6_01MAYO17_1600_34s.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	676.2 KB
ID:	1015821

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5865438

    Leave a comment:


  • HarryLi
    replied
    Originally posted by iranair777 View Post
    Hi all,

    Can someone explain where my postproccessing has gone wrong in this one please? https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5866304

    Furthermore, the following SQ `380 was rejected for bad composition even though (if i recall correctly) I stated in the screeners comment box that the aircraft was unstable on approach hence why it's wonky. Furthermore, as there is no indication of the position of the horizon, I don't see how the horizon is unlevel; its the aircraft which was unstable on it's approach. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5867208
    Hello,
    I have seen your photos link. The first link photo has very serious Halo Problem and that is the problem of postproccessing. You can check it with the function in JP.com which called Check for Dust.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	procimages (1).jpg
Views:	1
Size:	799.9 KB
ID:	1015817

    Besides, regarding to the SQ 380. It is indeed unlevel i think you should CW maybe you can give it 1-1.2. Well, i had the same situation before and also have rejected like this before. If there no indication of the position of the Horizon u can make the whole aircraft as an indication. And i also can understand that the aircraft was unstable on approach but as you said there is no indication so nobody can know if the aircraft is unstable in the sky because you don't have any indication for people to see if you have a pillar or building can show that this one is level so i think the screener will let it pass although the aircraft is not level.

    Cheers,
    Harry

    Leave a comment:


  • iranair777
    replied
    Hi all,

    Can someone explain where my postproccessing has gone wrong in this one please? https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5866304

    Furthermore, the following SQ `380 was rejected for bad composition even though (if i recall correctly) I stated in the screeners comment box that the aircraft was unstable on approach hence why it's wonky. Furthermore, as there is no indication of the position of the horizon, I don't see how the horizon is unlevel; its the aircraft which was unstable on it's approach. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5867208

    Leave a comment:


  • pawelm
    replied
    Originally posted by pawelm View Post
    Hi guys, I need your help with this one:
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5863515

    In this case I was expecting contrast, under/overexposure rejection. Maybe even soft/oversharpen, overproccesed. But really, the last reasons I would think of were cut off and unlevel. Is it woth to appeal this one? It maybe wasn't a steady approach, but it was taken like 3 minutes after a hail storm, so there was a possibility pretty strong crosswind. And cut off? I really don't know what to say, most of my recently accepted shots from LHR were "almost wingless", and I have many more similar "cut off" shots accepted in the past.

    What do you guys think?

    edit: I tried to appeal, but it got rejected without any comments. Can you please point out what's actually wrong with this photo? Is it because of cut flap? Should I crop it tighter or wider? I really don't get it...
    Can anyone check this one?

    Leave a comment:


  • ErezS
    replied
    Originally posted by HarryLi View Post
    Hi, Erezs
    First of all, i think knowing how to recognize if the contrast is low or high is more important than knowing the way to adjust the contrast. Well, there is a post here you can have a look. " http://www.focusonflight.net/forum/v....php?f=16&t=12 "
    Besides, i use curve to adjust the contrast of photos sometime when you open curve you will see three different colors straw there and then using the black one to click the black part of the whole photo. You need to click many times sometime might click different parts to find the most suitable contrast. When i finish all steps of the processing i will check the whole photo if the photo has high or low contrast . If not, i will save if low or high i will use the " Contrast " function to adjust them again but that will be slight adjustment. Anyway, recognize contrast is more important than the way to adjust contrast.
    Hope can help you !
    And here is your photo. [ATTACH=CONFIG]7693[/ATTACH]

    Best wishes,
    Harry
    Originally posted by brianw999 View Post
    Give it +30 contrast and some low level USM sharpening. Be careful that you don't create any jaggies on the cheat lines.
    OK many thanks Harry and Brian.

    Leave a comment:


  • brianw999
    replied
    Originally posted by B7772ADL View Post
    Ok, as you say that you have no email, it was rejected for soft which IMO is the correct decision and not worth appealing. The aircraft is soft, especially around the tail area. If you want to upload photos at 1920px you must upload only your best quality images. 1920px will make flaws even more noticeable and make it easier to reject. You need to either sharpen it more or downsize it which can have a similar effect.

    Hope this helps
    To back up James' answer. As I say in the acceptance email that I send to all photographers when granting large size permission. "1600 and 1920 images must be perfect. Any faults will attract a rejection".

    Leave a comment:


  • brianw999
    replied
    Quote Originally Posted by ErezS View Post
    Thanks Harry,
    I'll appreciate it if you could explain to me please what you did with each photo.
    I'll appreciate also an opinion from the team members.
    Thanks in advance.

    PS: also needs help please for this photo.
    Thanks in advance.
    Give it +30 contrast and some low level USM sharpening. Be careful that you don't create any jaggies on the cheat lines.

    Leave a comment:


  • brianw999
    replied
    Originally posted by PeterB View Post
    Got that one back for 'bad info':
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5864546

    Is this not a spotting location? Because there are similar pictures of the terrace in ZRH in this catergory.
    Thanks,
    Peter
    A spotting location needs some text describing where it is. In this case it needs which terminal it is, is it accessible from landside or airside only and any signs to follow to get there. The very best way to identify a location is a GoogleEarth lat/long location.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X