pauwelsc - Editing advice

[pauwelsc]

Thanks for the continued support here, it's really useful! Here I have some more...

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

[dlowwa]

Thanks for the continued support here, it's really useful! Here I have some more...

1. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12054[/ATTACH] 2. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12055[/ATTACH] 3. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12056[/ATTACH] 4. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12057[/ATTACH] 5. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12058[/ATTACH]

1-2 borderline dark
3. overprocessed
4. overprocessed, soft
5. soft

[pauwelsc]

Hey team, could you have a look on this? Thanks a lot!

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

[LX-A343]

Hey team, could you have a look on this? Thanks a lot!

1. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12381[/ATTACH] 2. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12382[/ATTACH] 3. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12383[/ATTACH] 4. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12384[/ATTACH] 5. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12385[/ATTACH]

1 borderline soft
2 soft
3 borderline soft
4 OK
5 soft

[pauwelsc]

Hey crew! I updated the pictures from my previous pre-screen. Are they acceptable now? Also I want to thank you because due to the advice you gave me etc., I have reached my goal to have 50 (now 51) pictures accepted in the database! Huge thanks! My best wishes for 2018, happy spotting and keep up the good work!

1. 2. 3. 4.

[pdeboer]

Hey crew! I updated the pictures from my previous pre-screen. Are they acceptable now? Also I want to thank you because due to the advice you gave me etc., I have reached my goal to have 50 (now 51) pictures accepted in the database! Huge thanks! My best wishes for 2018, happy spotting and keep up the good work!

1. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12492[/ATTACH] 2. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12493[/ATTACH] 3. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12494[/ATTACH] 4. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12495[/ATTACH]

2 and 3 look somewhat soft, rest seems ok

[pauwelsc]

My last pre-screening of 2017. Thanks a lot team!!

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

For the last one, whenever it would get a 'yes', should this be considered as a ramp picture? I don't think it's allowed to upload one like this in aircraft category. Just being curious about this one as my goal was to capture all the work that happens around the aircraft to prepare it for its next journey.

[pdeboer]

My last pre-screening of 2017. Thanks a lot team!!

1. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12547[/ATTACH] 2. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12548[/ATTACH] 3. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12549[/ATTACH] 4. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12550[/ATTACH] 5. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12551[/ATTACH]

For the last one, whenever it would get a 'yes', should this be considered as a ramp picture? I don't think it's allowed to upload one like this in aircraft category. Just being curious about this one as my goal was to capture all the work that happens around the aircraft to prepare it for its next journey.

no. 1 isborderline acceptable, no.2 and 3 look backlit, no. 4 dark and obstructed. And no. 5 obstructed, furthermore a detailed shot of an obstructed a/c will not be accepted as ramp shot.

[pauwelsc]

Hey team! Could you please pre-screen these? Thanks!!

1. 2. 3.

Would number 2 be considered as a ramp shot?

[dlowwa]

Hey team! Could you please pre-screen these? Thanks!!

1. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12583[/ATTACH] 2. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12584[/ATTACH] 3. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12585[/ATTACH]

Would number 2 be considered as a ramp shot?

1. contrast, soft, maybe compression
2. obstruction, soft, contrast
3. borderline soft

[pauwelsc]

Hey team, what do you think of these shots? Thanks a lot!

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

[dlowwa]

Hey team, what do you think of these shots? Thanks a lot!

1. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12634[/ATTACH] 2. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12635[/ATTACH] 3. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12636[/ATTACH] 4. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12637[/ATTACH] 5. [ATTACH=CONFIG]12638[/ATTACH]

1. horizon, contrast, soft
2. borderline soft
3-4 soft, contrast
5. contrast

[pauwelsc]

This one just got rejected: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6276083

Any idea how to fix this? Is it fixable? Imho it is not that bad but I might be a bit subjective Maybe too much contrast?
(I checked the rejection mail and no reason was given)

Thanks!

[dlowwa]

This one just got rejected: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6276083

Any idea how to fix this? Is it fixable? Imho it is not that bad but I might be a bit subjective Maybe too much contrast?
(I checked the rejection mail and no reason was given)

Thanks!

The light is generally just too poor. You could try adding contrast, but I doubt it would help much.

[pauwelsc]

Hey team! This one got rejected recently. I understand the ratio (was 675px, now adapted to 706px) but I don't understand the compression artefacts. I don't 'see' that problem on the picture. Could you help me?

Link: rejected picture: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6320378

'New' edit of the picture; acceptable or not?


Thanks a lot!