Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NEW Editing advice thread

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

  • pawelm
    replied
    Hi guys,

    How can I fix this one?
    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • vcruvinel
    replied
    Hi! I did not understand this rejection I got:

    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!



    Reason(s) For Rejection:
    - Categories wrong or missing
    - Bad Info in the following field(s): Genre

    I've already appeal and got reject again but did not get any comments to correct. I've put a text clarifying the points of rejection.

    This registration has both Military and Civilian genres in the website (search), but the correct one is only Civilian. Just need to know what I did wrong to not do the same mistake again.

    Many thanks.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paixão Silva View Post
    Hello JP Team. Can i get your opinion about compression artifacts on these 2 photos. Thanks again
    Don't see compression being an issue for either of these.

    Originally posted by Eduardo Paixão Silva View Post
    Hello.
    About this one: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6094470

    I reduced the size to x1024 and sharped a bit more. Any of these acceptable? Thanks again!

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]9412[/ATTACH]
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]9411[/ATTACH]
    Still seems a little soft.

    Leave a comment:


  • Eduardo Paixão Silva
    replied
    Hello.
    About this one: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6094470

    I reduced the size to x1024 and sharped a bit more. Any of these acceptable? Thanks again!

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4632ps7x1024.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	912.9 KB
ID:	1017349
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4632ps6x1024.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	926.0 KB
ID:	1017348

    Leave a comment:


  • Eduardo Paixão Silva
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paixão Silva View Post
    Hello pdeboer, i reduced the size of the photo, can you please tell me if the compression artifacts are still relevant? Thanks for your time.

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]9336[/ATTACH]

    Can i also get your opinion on this one rejected in the past due also to compression artifacts?

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]9337[/ATTACH]
    Hello JP Team. Can i get your opinion about compression artifacts on these 2 photos. Thanks again

    Leave a comment:


  • 71sbeetle
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    Light editing halos visible around tail and gear. Likely from clarity/shadow-highlight/similar tool use.
    Thank you! I just looked at the original file and for some reason it's 2 stops under-exposed I guess those came from bringing the exposure back up. Lesson learned for next time

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by YULplanespotting View Post
    Hi,
    These pictures got rejected a little over a week ago for a few reasons. I've tried fixing the Air Canada 787 picture and would like to know if the one attached below is better than the one rejected. As for the other two pictures, I would like to know what to fix and how to fix the issues (if possible).

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6077831 (Over Processed / Bad postprocessing, Blurry, Too much or too little contrast)
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6077829 (Over Processed / Bad postprocessing, Undersharpened (Soft), Too much or too little contrast)
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6077820 (Dark / Underexposed, Undersharpened (Soft)

    Improved 787: [ATTACH=CONFIG]9363[/ATTACH]

    Thanks in advance for all the help and expertise!
    As with above editing halos visible (even stronger in your case). Try turning off the D-Lighting in your D90, or avoid the clarity/shadow-highlight/similar tool use mentioned above. For softness, add more sharpening. Although soft, I don't see any blurry spots, so maybe ignore that rejection.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by 71sbeetle View Post
    I'm curious about this one:
    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    Over Processed / Bad postprocessing is the rejection reason, it was edited just like every other one I upload. What am I looking for?
    Light editing halos visible around tail and gear. Likely from clarity/shadow-highlight/similar tool use.

    Leave a comment:


  • 71sbeetle
    replied
    I'm curious about this one:
    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    Over Processed / Bad postprocessing is the rejection reason, it was edited just like every other one I upload. What am I looking for?

    Leave a comment:


  • YULplanespotting
    replied
    Hi,
    These pictures got rejected a little over a week ago for a few reasons. I've tried fixing the Air Canada 787 picture and would like to know if the one attached below is better than the one rejected. As for the other two pictures, I would like to know what to fix and how to fix the issues (if possible).

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6077831 (Over Processed / Bad postprocessing, Blurry, Too much or too little contrast)
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6077829 (Over Processed / Bad postprocessing, Undersharpened (Soft), Too much or too little contrast)
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6077820 (Dark / Underexposed, Undersharpened (Soft)

    Improved 787: Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0711 (2)-1.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	863.9 KB
ID:	1017306

    Thanks in advance for all the help and expertise!

    Leave a comment:


  • Eduardo Paixão Silva
    replied
    Originally posted by pdeboer View Post
    It still has compression artifacts.
    You missed the airport code in the regi field , you need to follow the upload guidelines, see 1.2.3: https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthr...ES-New-version
    Hello pdeboer, i reduced the size of the photo, can you please tell me if the compression artifacts are still relevant? Thanks for your time.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2816ps2x1024.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	660.6 KB
ID:	1017280

    Can i also get your opinion on this one rejected in the past due also to compression artifacts?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_5731psbx1024.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	651.4 KB
ID:	1017281

    Leave a comment:


  • pdeboer
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paixão Silva View Post
    Hello.
    This one - https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6085031 - was rejected the first time due to oversharp; the second time due to "Too much or too little contrast; JPG compression artefacts and Bad Info".

    I edited the photo again is it ok?
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]9317[/ATTACH]

    About the "bad info" i've read the general guidelines and because i was not clarified i did what was written here: https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthr...ght=enter+myef

    So can any JP member explain me what i did wrong and what's the right info for Santa Cruz (Flores Island)- LPFL Portugal - Azores airport overview?

    Thanks again.
    It still has compression artifacts.
    You missed the airport code in the regi field , you need to follow the upload guidelines, see 1.2.3: https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthr...ES-New-version

    Leave a comment:


  • Eduardo Paixão Silva
    replied
    Hello.
    This one - https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6085031 - was rejected the first time due to oversharp; the second time due to "Too much or too little contrast; JPG compression artefacts and Bad Info".

    I edited the photo again is it ok?
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2816ps2x1280.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	997.9 KB
ID:	1017262

    About the "bad info" i've read the general guidelines and because i was not clarified i did what was written here: https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthr...ght=enter+myef

    So can any JP member explain me what i did wrong and what's the right info for Santa Cruz (Flores Island)- LPFL Portugal - Azores airport overview?

    Thanks again.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by ninadranade View Post
    Hi Team,

    The below shot was rejected due to oversharpened. Please let me know this is ok.

    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    [ATTACH=CONFIG]9277[/ATTACH]

    Thanks for the time.

    Thanks,
    Ninad
    Sharpening looks ok, though it is also a bit darker.

    Leave a comment:


  • ninadranade
    replied
    Hi Team,

    The below shot was rejected due to oversharpened. Please let me know this is ok.

    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    Click image for larger version

Name:	N365NW_09_22.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	725.9 KB
ID:	1017226

    Thanks for the time.

    Thanks,
    Ninad

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X