wkd001- Editing advice

[wkd001]

Both would be ok for me.

Thanks a lot for that Dana.

Unfortunately I ran into some issues and uncertainties now, so I would like a prescreen on the following photos.

Is this one backlit? Sun was between me and the aircraft on the right side, but closer to the aircraft as to me. If not, unsure about the contrast then, and also horizon.
Unsure about contrast and color here, but as it's an unusual visitor to airport, I would like to upload it. Maybe sharpness could also be an issue here.
The aircraft was rolling through a small ditch on the entrance way here. Would this be obstruction? Unfortunately other snaps of it had worse quality. Also worried about contrast and exposure here. Contrast, with a little bit of sun and almost hazy conditions

If there are other things . I would like to know as well.

Thanks in advance.

[dlowwa]

Thanks a lot for that Dana.

Unfortunately I ran into some issues and uncertainties now, so I would like a prescreen on the following photos.

1. soft, (harsh) contrast
2. soft, (harsh) contrast, color (cyan tint)
3. borderline soft, but ok for me
4. dark/contrast, soft. not fixable.

[wkd001]

1. soft, (harsh) contrast
2. soft, (harsh) contrast, color (cyan tint)
3. borderline soft, but ok for me
4. dark/contrast, soft. not fixable.

Dana thanks a lot for your opinion. I've dropped one and four. Third got accepted and I'll see what to do with the second.

Now I would like a prescreen on these three photos.

Unsure here about contrast, horizon, shaprness and horizon at least. Note here that the photo was taken around 15 minutes after sunrise.

Same story as the first. Extra note also here is that the entire aircraft was not included in the RAW-file so I had to cut here.


Biggest worries here are contrast, heat haze and sharpness.

Thanks in advance and regards.

[dlowwa]

Dana thanks a lot for your opinion. I've dropped one and four. Third got accepted and I'll see what to do with the second.

Now I would like a prescreen on these three photos.

1. dark/contrast
2. dark/contrast, soft
3. soft, borderline heat haze

[wkd001]

1. dark/contrast
2. dark/contrast, soft
3. soft, borderline heat haze

Dana, thank you again for your opinion.

Thought I'd fixed the dark/contrast issue on the first one, but a recent (totally right) underexposed reject, brought me to delete some queued photos and now I would like to offer them for prescreen.

As said, tried to fix the dark/contrast issue here. Personally I think, contrast is too weak now. also I think it's pointing to overexposure now.
At least for exposure/contrast here. Also maybe the sharpening.

As final one. not related to the two before. Another snap from the #3 from previous post.

At least for harsh contrast/ exposure, heathaze/softness.

Thanks in advance and regards.

[dlowwa]

Dana, thank you again for your opinion.

Thought I'd fixed the dark/contrast issue on the first one, but a recent (totally right) underexposed reject, brought me to delete some queued photos and now I would like to offer them for prescreen.

As said, tried to fix the dark/contrast issue here. Personally I think, contrast is too weak now. also I think it's pointing to overexposure now.
At least for exposure/contrast here. Also maybe the sharpening.

As final one. not related to the two before. Another snap from the #3 from previous post.

At least for harsh contrast/ exposure, heathaze/softness.

Thanks in advance and regards.

1. soft, borderline dark/contrast
2. ok for me
3. borderline (harsh) contrast.

[wkd001]

1. soft, borderline dark/contrast
2. ok for me
3. borderline (harsh) contrast.

Thank you for that Dana,

I've tried to rework the first one again and would like to offer for prescreen again as I'm still not sure of it and even have increasing doubts of getting it even accepted here.

I've tried to address the exposure and softness issue here, but as i mentioned. By far not sure about it.

Aslo another issue appeared today:

I've received this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9329622 but I'm confused about this one.
The contrast issue I disagree on, for me the contrast should be good here.
The horizon is at least doubtful for me here, don't see any clear references here, the small runway sign maybe as both small poles are not right and I'm not straight in line with the runway here, but I don't know , which way to go with it.

Any guidance would be appreciated here.

Thanks in advance.

[dlowwa]

I've tried to rework the first one again and would like to offer for prescreen again as I'm still not sure of it and even have increasing doubts of getting it even accepted here.

Borderline soft, dark/contrast

Aslo another issue appeared today:

I've received this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9329622 but I'm confused about this one.
The contrast issue I disagree on, for me the contrast should be good here.
The horizon is at least doubtful for me here, don't see any clear references here, the small runway sign maybe as both small poles are not right and I'm not straight in line with the runway here, but I don't know , which way to go with it.

Any guidance would be appreciated here.

Probably rejected for harsh contrast and the runway sloping slightly to the right. Can't say I necessarily agree, but I can see those were probably the issues.

[wkd001]

Borderline soft, dark/contrast




Probably rejected for harsh contrast and the runway sloping slightly to the right. Can't say I necessarily agree, but I can see those were probably the issues.

Thanks for that Dana.

I think I found the horizon point and I tried to reduce the contrast on the KLM Cargo
And now I would like a prescreen on it and also on some other images I'm unsure about.

At first the KLM Cargo for at least an extra eye on the contrast and the horizon This one gives me a lot of doubts about harsh contrast, sharpness and horizon.

Same story as the previous but for this one I'm also afraid about potential heat haze

One final question at last.
I would like to upload this one
But is it too similar compared to this one https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9298874 ?

I know one is taxiing and he other taxing off , but the angle is quite the same.

Thanks in advance and regards.

[dlowwa]

Thanks for that Dana.

I think I found the horizon point and I tried to reduce the contrast on the KLM Cargo
And now I would like a prescreen on it and also on some other images I'm unsure about.

At first the KLM Cargo for at least an extra eye on the contrast and the horizon This one gives me a lot of doubts about harsh contrast, sharpness and horizon.

Same story as the previous but for this one I'm also afraid about potential heat haze

One final question at last.
I would like to upload this one
But is it too similar compared to this one https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9298874 ?

I know one is taxiing and he other taxing off , but the angle is quite the same.

Thanks in advance and regards.

1. horizon, soft
2. borderline soft
3. borderline heat haze
4. different enough for me, but I'll say borderline similar to be safe

[wkd001]

1. horizon, soft
2. borderline soft
3. borderline heat haze
4. different enough for me, but I'll say borderline similar to be safe

Thanks for your time Dana.

Unfortunately I ran into a personal issue.
I received this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9408290
The contrast note I can deal with and acceptt it, however the backlit note surprises me.
I know the tail is not that great lit, but AFAIK, the tail should be completely dark in this case for a backlit reject.
The China Eastern CIIE 773 also got a backlit call above other (understandable) reasons.
Has there anything changed about that by screening by the crew.

Would that mean that photos like


Would get rejected for backlit or only contrast
I would like to submit these photos, but as I got unsure about them following the mentioned reject ( I even had the ABC in queue but i deleted it.) So I would like a prescreen on these two.

I would also like a prescreen on these two photos




Both were taken with a new lens. So I would like have at least sharpness, color, white balance and contrast double checked.

Thnaks in advance and regards

[dlowwa]

Unfortunately I ran into a personal issue.
I received this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9408290
The contrast note I can deal with and acceptt it, however the backlit note surprises me.

Maybe technically not completely backlit, but close enough that the rejection is not totally unreasonable. Nothing has changed on the screening team. To avoid such issues in the future, perhaps choose images where there light is more clearly on one side of the aircraft.

Would that mean that photos like


Would get rejected for backlit or only contrast
I would like to submit these photos, but as I got unsure about them following the mentioned reject ( I even had the ABC in queue but i deleted it.) So I would like a prescreen on these two..

Borderline backlit yes, especially the first. Contrast also borderline for both.

I would also like a prescreen on these two photos




Both were taken with a new lens. So I would like have at least sharpness, color, white balance and contrast double checked.

Both images are soft. Color is fine.

[wkd001]

Hello everyone,

Today I recieved this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9547815 ,but I disagree on this one.
Don;t see really the entire softness, all the hard lines are visible and I do not see the vignetting either.
I'm aware of the dark corner in the RH bottom, which could point to vignetting, but the grass is not overall green alongside this runway and the weather was challenging that day, with several huge clouds passing by.

I also would like a prescreen on this photo,


I think the contrast is too weak and also there could be softness here.

Thanks in Advance and Regards.

[MarkLawrence]

I am not a screener - but - personally - I think the sharpness is just slightly off. I think, when you use the "check for dust" feature, you see the dark portion down the left hand side of the image, and I would guess that that is what the vignetting is referring too (screen shot attached).

[wkd001]

OK, I agree there was vignetting on the original, but I thought I 've cropped it out here and applied lens correction also. The aircraft was in the center of the original image. I only brought it to the center of the image. But I will go back to drawing board here. Thanks anyway.