wkd001- Editing advice

[wkd001]

Slightly dark/harsh contrast, but quality looks ok.

Excellent Dana thank you for your time.

Brought improved versions from all tot the queue and first two also already accepted, thanks a lot for that.

Now I would like prescreen/advice on these four shots.

finally I had time to do an evening session, but it gave me also some challenges.

especially curious about the exposure and i'm also afraid it's too soft, especially towards the nose.
Especially curious about the exposure and it's overall sharpness. Otherwise i do also have a 1280 version, but Iwon't include that here.
I do have this one, https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8992966, but the scheme is different, does the similar rule apply then?
This was the final one, before the sun disappeared, it gave a lot of yellow, very afraid of colour and exposure.

Thanks in Advance.

Best Regards

[dlowwa]

Excellent Dana thank you for your time.

Brought improved versions from all tot the queue and first two also already accepted, thanks a lot for that.

Now I would like prescreen/advice on these four shots.

finally I had time to do an evening session, but it gave me also some challenges.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]27710[/ATTACH] especially curious about the exposure and i'm also afraid it's too soft, especially towards the nose.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]27711[/ATTACH] Especially curious about the exposure and it's overall sharpness. Otherwise i do also have a 1280 version, but Iwon't include that here.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]27712[/ATTACH] I do have this one, https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8992966, but the scheme is different, does the similar rule apply then?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]27713[/ATTACH] This was the final one, before the sun disappeared, it gave a lot of yellow, very afraid of colour and exposure.

Thanks in Advance.

Best Regards

Quality would be ok for me; #4 is not similar.

[wkd001]

Quality would be ok for me; #4 is not similar.

Thanks a lot Dana

Now I received a reject for the 5th. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7539129#

The Softness I can understand, although I think it's not that soft, but I can understand the meaning.
But I disagree with the underexposure. It was the final touch of un before it left behind the clouds.
Some whites are also to the point of being blown out IMHO.
Could you (or someone else ofcourse) guide me a litlle to the exposure

Thanks in advance!

Best Regards.

[dlowwa]

Thanks a lot Dana

Now I received a reject for the 5th. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7539129#

The Softness I can understand, although I think it's not that soft, but I can understand the meaning.
But I disagree with the underexposure. It was the final touch of un before it left behind the clouds.
Some whites are also to the point of being blown out IMHO.
Could you (or someone else ofcourse) guide me a litlle to the exposure

Thanks in advance!

Best Regards.

Obviously looks fine to me; you can appeal if you'd like, but I'd only promise a successful result if I was the one that got it of course

[wkd001]

Obviously looks fine to me; you can appeal if you'd like, but I'd only promise a successful result if I was the one that got it of course

Thanks Dana,

Obviously you weren't the one who handled the appeal, as the appeal failed. No problem ofcourse.
The message in the answer was a little vague to me. I quote : i agree with the screeners, you can easily fix the flaws.
I was also wrong with a litlle strange message in the appeal, my apologies for that, but it gave not a great guidance especially to the exposure.
Now i went to work on it, but I still remain with questions.
I reworked the image, Bumped the exposure and resized it to 1280 for surance.
For me it seems even softer now even to the bumped exposure



What's a way to go with it? as I want to include this one, because it's a new airline to me.
At the end it seems the best RAW file to me.

Thanks in advance.

[wkd001]

Thanks Dana,

Obviously you weren't the one who handled the appeal, as the appeal failed. No problem ofcourse.
The message in the answer was a little vague to me. I quote : i agree with the screeners, you can easily fix the flaws.
I was also wrong with a litlle strange message in the appeal, my apologies for that, but it gave not a great guidance especially to the exposure.
Now i went to work on it, but I still remain with questions.
I reworked the image, Bumped the exposure and resized it to 1280 for surance.
For me it seems even softer now even to the bumped exposure

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28124[/ATTACH]

What's a way to go with it? as I want to include this one, because it's a new airline to me.
At the end it seems the best RAW file to me.

Thanks in advance.

I Figured this out myself apparently. I've read a hidden message in the appeal explanation.

I would like prescreen/advice on these two images.

Afraid for sharpness on both
For the second also on contrast and processing (It was a real tough one, but a very nice visitor to our airport). It arrived around only round sunset with no direct light.




Thanks in advance!

[dlowwa]

I Figured this out myself apparently. I've read a hidden message in the appeal explanation.

I would like prescreen/advice on these two images.

Afraid for sharpness on both
For the second also on contrast and processing (It was a real tough one, but a very nice visitor to our airport). It arrived around only round sunset with no direct light.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28390[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]28391[/ATTACH]

Thanks in advance!

Both would be ok for me in terms of sharpness/contrast/processing, though we've seen that doesn't necessarily guarantee anything

[wkd001]

Both would be ok for me in terms of sharpness/contrast/processing, though we've seen that doesn't necessarily guarantee anything

Thank you again Dana. In my opinion you earn a statue for the work you do here for me and all others.
I am absolutely aware of the screeners discretion. Already had to deal with on several occasions.
I still disagree and I disappointed about that reject, but I have to deal with it. So I'll try my luck with the re-edit.
The other two I will also try, but I'm also aware of the fact that the especially the LOT 789 will be a tough one.

Best Regards

[wkd001]

Hello

I am struggling with this photo at this moment.



I think it's underexposed.
But the nose and especially the wing are overexposed as I receive a highlight warning in my Lightroom.
Toying with the sliders doesn't help and the whites are also causing a highlight warning.
Should I just increase the exposure or is there another solution.
Maybe there is even more going on.

Thanks in advance.

PS, please ignore the thumbnail. don't know how that happened

[LX-A343]

Hello

I am struggling with this photo at this moment.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28975[/ATTACH]

I think it's underexposed.
But the nose and especially the wing are overexposed as I receive a highlight warning in my Lightroom.
Toying with the sliders doesn't help and the whites are also causing a highlight warning.
Should I just increase the exposure or is there another solution.
Maybe there is even more going on.

Thanks in advance.

PS, please ignore the thumbnail. don't know how that happened

The whole photo looks great, with exception of the darkest shadows on the wheels and parts of the right wing. If that was shot in RAW, then there is no problem to adjust it with the raw converter to brighten up just the shadows. If you only have a JPG, it's more difficult, but not impossible. That said, before you give up, upload it. Acceptance chances are way above 50% ... in my humble opinion

[wkd001]

The whole photo looks great, with exception of the darkest shadows on the wheels and parts of the right wing. If that was shot in RAW, then there is no problem to adjust it with the raw converter to brighten up just the shadows. If you only have a JPG, it's more difficult, but not impossible. That said, before you give up, upload it. Acceptance chances are way above 50% ... in my humble opinion

Thanks a lot Geri,

A revised version, in which I tried to follow your advice, is in the queue

I received this reject yesterday https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7597176# and it gave me some questions.

At first- Is the contrast fixable? There was no direct sunlight, but a pretty heavy sort of gloomy light and dark clouds
second- Is this a civil one I assume, due of the fact it's under its civil registration in the database (would also explain the bad info)
third- I'm almost sure I added business jet, if not please apologise me for stating, or is there something more?

I also have a prescreen request for this one.



I tried a panning shot on this one.
My biggest concerns are the contrast, sharpness (especially to the right side) and the crop. (maybe there is more)
Please note that the original one was quite similar to this one. I tried to include complete parts and not to cut off too much.
If it fails so be it.

Thanks in advance.

[LX-A343]

Thanks a lot Geri,

A revised version, in which I tried to follow your advice, is in the queue

I received this reject yesterday https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7597176# and it gave me some questions.

At first- Is the contrast fixable? There was no direct sunlight, but a pretty heavy sort of gloomy light and dark clouds
second- Is this a civil one I assume, due of the fact it's under its civil registration in the database (would also explain the bad info)
third- I'm almost sure I added business jet, if not please apologise me for stating, or is there something more?

I also have a prescreen request for this one.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]29005[/ATTACH]

I tried a panning shot on this one.
My biggest concerns are the contrast, sharpness (especially to the right side) and the crop. (maybe there is more)
Please note that the original one was quite similar to this one. I tried to include complete parts and not to cut off too much.
If it fails so be it.

Thanks in advance.

regarding https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7597176 : Contrast is tricky, as it shows a white aircraft against an overcast sky. If the clouds had some structure in it, then chances would be better. I would upload it as Business Jet and Civilian. If you're not sure, just leave a note to the screeners.

The KLM looks good. Sure, the right side is a bit soft, but I would upload it. Cropping looks good.

[wkd001]

regarding https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7597176 : Contrast is tricky, as it shows a white aircraft against an overcast sky. If the clouds had some structure in it, then chances would be better. I would upload it as Business Jet and Civilian. If you're not sure, just leave a note to the screeners.

The KLM looks good. Sure, the right side is a bit soft, but I would upload it. Cropping looks good.

Thanks a lot Geri,

I keep the Dubai Amiri personal. contrast is far worse as I thought.
KLM is in the queue.

I received this reject today. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7611956 which brought questions to me.

-What are JPG Compression artefacts? Don't see anything weird in the check for dust tool at the reject page?
-Jaggies( oversharpen) are clear to me in the same tool.
Should I just less sharpen, or could this be one for a 1920 pix attempt after fix, as the original RAW-file was also quite sharp of his own.

Any guidance would be appreciated, as I've never had a reject with this reasons.

Thanks in Advance.

[dlowwa]

Thanks a lot Geri,

I keep the Dubai Amiri personal. contrast is far worse as I thought.
KLM is in the queue.

I received this reject today. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7611956 which brought questions to me.

-What are JPG Compression artefacts? Don't see anything weird in the check for dust tool at the reject page?
-Jaggies( oversharpen) are clear to me in the same tool.
Should I just less sharpen, or could this be one for a 1920 pix attempt after fix, as the original RAW-file was also quite sharp of his own.

Any guidance would be appreciated, as I've never had a reject with this reasons.

Thanks in Advance.

There are no issues with jpeg compression on this image. It has now been accepted. Sorry for the inconvenience.

[wkd001]

There are no issues with jpeg compression on this image. It has now been accepted. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Thanks a lot Dana.

Highly appreciated.

Best Regards.