Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Eduardo Paix„o Silva - Editing Advice

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

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    I appreciate your answer dlowwa, it's the respectful way we speak to each other that makes all the difference.

    When possible, about this 2 rejections due to "Dark / Underexposed" and "Too much or too little contrast" ( https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7671822 ; https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7671166 ), are they acceptable now? Thanks

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]29666[/ATTACH]
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]29667[/ATTACH]
    Contrast is a little harsh on both, although the first (rejected) would have been ok for me (if you appealed as well). The second is a bit more borderline so I would pass on that one if appealed. The improved versions are brighter, but still have harsh contrast, especially the second.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello dlowwa and other JP Screeners. About this rejection: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=7690802
    One of the reasons to select "Hot photo" is, according to JP upload guidelines, "3. First appearance of a new airline colour scheme". As it happened with registrations CS-TRD,CS-TRG and CS-TRF, this rejected photo has indeed a different color scheme, same major design but the blue tones are not the same and there are also different details, so it does aplyes for "Hot Photo".
    All these years i've been trying my best to get my photos accepted on your database, always respecting your decisions even when i don't agree with some of them, but always with the necessary respect.
    Today, after appeal for this rejection, the admin comment was just "Right......". This is not an acceptable way to speak with no one, even less with someone who have contribute with JP for so long.
    I understand the light conditions weren't the best but the feeling i have is that this admin was, at least, calling me a liar. I felt offended and I think I deserve an apology by that administrator and i kindly ask this appeal to be analyze by other screener, please.
    I didn't handle the original rejection or the appeal, and maybe it's just the light in your image, but I personally can't see any noticeable difference between this and the previously accepted, and I guess neither did the other screeners.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello JP, about this photo, is it considered backlit?
    No.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello JP Crew, please pre-screen this photo:

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]29064[/ATTACH]

    Thanks!
    Borderline for contrast/glare, and maybe soft.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello JP Crew, please pre-screen these 2 photos:

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28695[/ATTACH]

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28696[/ATTACH]

    About the last one, is this crop acceptable? objective is to focus on the fixed damages on the fuselage.

    Thanks!
    1. probably want to place it a bit higher in the frame
    2. some chromatic aberration visible, but probably not enough for a rejection

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Also, can you please pre-screen this one too:

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28566[/ATTACH]

    Thanks!
    Borderline contrast, but ok for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello JP Crew, this one (https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7563874) rejected due to Dark / Underexposed and Undersharpened (Soft), is it acceptable now:

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28534[/ATTACH]

    Thanks!
    Borderline for the contrast/exposure, and actually looks like it might be a bit blurry. How is the original?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello dlowwa, i've worked again these 2 photos, please pre-screen them when possible. Thanks!

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28423[/ATTACH]
    Looks nearly identical to the rejected image.

    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28424[/ATTACH]
    Color would be ok for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello JP Crew, this one ( https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7555015 ) was rejected due to Contrast too strong. Is it enough my correction:

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28374[/ATTACH]
    Don't see a big difference between the two, tbh.

    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Also, this one ( https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7552710 ) was rejected due to Bad Color (Over/Under Saturation, Hue) and Too much or too little contrast, is it acceptable now:

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28375[/ATTACH]
    Again, not a huge difference, and the color actually seems a bit worse (more green).

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello JP Crew, when possible, please pre-screen these 2 photos. Thanks again!

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28315[/ATTACH]

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28316[/ATTACH]
    Would be ok for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello JP Crew, this one (https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=7546773) was rejected due to Undersharpened (Soft), is it acceptable now:

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28228[/ATTACH]

    Thanks!
    No, noisy and still soft/blurry. Doesn't look like the quality is there for this one.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello JP Crew, when possible, please pre-screen these 2 photos. About the first one, can i upload it as an apron photo? The motive is to catch the 3 neos. Thanks again!

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28166[/ATTACH]

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28167[/ATTACH]
    Both borderline for contrast. First does not qualify as Ramp view.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello, about this rejection (https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7528862), is it really considered similar to the other photo i have on JP database? The other one is on runway, this one is on apron and different angle/motive. This B757 suffered serious structure damages on the fuselage and front landing gear due to a hard landing and now is being repaired.
    About the contrast issues, is it better:

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28111[/ATTACH]
    Borderline, but does generally fall within the guidelines for similar.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello JP Crew, when possible, please pre-screen this photo. Thanks again!

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]28033[/ATTACH]
    Soft/heat hazed, overexposed, contrast.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Eduardo Paix„o Silva
    Hello JP crew,

    This photo (https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9421744) is it considered similar to this one:
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]27841[/ATTACH]

    Also, please pre-screen this one:
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]27842[/ATTACH]

    Thanks!
    1. not similar
    2. borderline contrast/color/noise

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X