Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NEW Editing advice thread

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

  • #31
    Hi,

    Can I please get some help for these two rejects.

    1. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5687145
    The angle is such that if add more sharpening the decals will show jaggies and that's what happened with the first upload. Should I apply more USM passes?

    2. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5686273
    I thought the exposure was ok on this one.


    Regards,
    Siddarth

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Siddarth.Bhandary View Post
      Hi,

      Can I please get some help for these two rejects.

      1. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5687145
      The angle is such that if add more sharpening the decals will show jaggies and that's what happened with the first upload. Should I apply more USM passes?

      2. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5686273
      I thought the exposure was ok on this one.


      Regards,
      Siddarth
      1. not too bad, just needs a little more sharpening, imho.
      2. aircraft in center (main subject) is blown out along the side.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
        A touch oversharpened in places, but generally looks ok.
        I'll look into the sharpening stuff. Thanks for the help!
        Newbie to JP, view my photos here:
        http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=87690

        Comment


        • #34
          Got a rejection today for this one:
          Click image for larger version

Name:	2017_02_05_Wien_Flughafen_0066.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	559.0 KB
ID:	1015394

          Reason: Over Processed / Bad postprocessing

          As the light was pretty good on this morning I haven't done any crazy experiments regarding editing. In addition, I basically didn't crop the image. So I don't see where a flaw can be found here.
          Did the screener maybe refer to the dark fence? If so, this kind of fence doesn't reflect but rather absorbs light when seen from this angle.

          Many thanks in advance.
          Peter

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by PeterB View Post
            Got a rejection today for this one:
            [ATTACH=CONFIG]7190[/ATTACH]

            Reason: Over Processed / Bad postprocessing

            As the light was pretty good on this morning I haven't done any crazy experiments regarding editing. In addition, I basically didn't crop the image. So I don't see where a flaw can be found here.
            Did the screener maybe refer to the dark fence? If so, this kind of fence doesn't reflect but rather absorbs light when seen from this angle.

            Many thanks in advance.
            Peter
            I can't really see anything either. The Over Processed rejection is most commonly used when editing halos are present, but I don't really see anything like that. Perhaps the screener selected the wrong rejection reason by accident, but beyond that, I can only guess - sorry!

            Comment


            • #36
              Hello, I do not understand why I have been discarded, Last Time One of the causes was alone for the dust, now I Correct the image and has been ruled out for another reason.
              Thank you.

              Photo ID Airline Aircraft Date Screened LINK
              5718617 Terminal Airport February 20, 2017 http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=5718617
              5718609 Terminal Airport February 20, 2017 http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=5718609

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Rik86 View Post
                Hello, I do not understand why I have been discarded, Last Time One of the causes was alone for the dust, now I Correct the image and has been ruled out for another reason.
                Thank you.

                Photo ID Airline Aircraft Date Screened LINK
                5718617 Terminal Airport February 20, 2017 http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=5718617
                5718609 Terminal Airport February 20, 2017 http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=5718609
                The first one is not showing the terminal, just some fence and a gate. Think to yourself, have you ever seen a similar image on Jetphotos?

                The second one actually shows part of the terminal, but is not a very good crop or angle.

                Comment


                • #38
                  https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=5736337

                  Rejected for identifiable face, am I allowed to blur a face, or is that not allowed either?
                  [SIGNATURE GOES HERE]

                  Felipe Garcia

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Felipe Garcia View Post
                    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=5736337

                    Rejected for identifiable face, am I allowed to blur a face, or is that not allowed either?
                    Blurring the face will result in a manipulation rejection. Please select another shot without the person facing the camera.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Hi,

                      Is this not an acceptable crop? Its a tight crop with substantial part of stabilizer not in the frame. We do see such composition in the JP database. Pic - https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5713633

                      Regards,
                      Siddarth

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by Siddarth.Bhandary View Post
                        Hi,

                        Is this not an acceptable crop? Its a tight crop with substantial part of stabilizer not in the frame. We do see such composition in the JP database. Pic - https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5713633

                        Regards,
                        Siddarth
                        Unless there is good reason to crop the stabilizer, those types of images do indeed typically get rejected. Also, if you do go for a wider crop, maybe try at a lower resolution as had I screened it, I would have added Heat Distortion as a rejection reason.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Thanks!
                          [SIGNATURE GOES HERE]

                          Felipe Garcia

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Please Help

                            Hello, please someone help.

                            https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5721561

                            where should i turn the photo, because i try to turn the photo for horizontal unlevel rejection and get rejected again.



                            thank you
                            Last edited by ganevo; 2017-02-23, 02:43. Reason: repair the link that doesn't work.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by ganevo View Post
                              Hello, please someone help.

                              https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5721561

                              where should i turn the photo, because i try to turn the photo for horizontal unlevel rejection and get rejected again.



                              thank you
                              please check the link. I only get "No input file specified. "
                              My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by LX-A343 View Post
                                please check the link. I only get "No input file specified. "
                                http://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=5721561

                                maybe try this.


                                thank you.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X