wkd001- Editing advice

[dlowwa]

However today I ran into some issues which gave a reason to come back here.

At first this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10170041 for softness and contrast. I don't totally understand this one
I don't see a lot of softness here. All the hard lines are visible however I could imagine that maybe the window areas and the nose might be too soft here.
Contrast I disagree on as I have been careful with it adding due to the conditions. So I left all the areas visible and not washed out in my idea.

Yes, quite soft. Also noisy, imho. Contrast borderline harsh.

At second I had a small evening session but I ran into some photos at the end which I am unsure of, so I would like a prescreen on them.

All images soft/borderline soft, but otherwise ok for me.

[wkd001]

First is soft towards the nose; second I guess a bit soft overall but would have been ok for me.



All three borderline dark/soft.

Thanks for everything about that post Dana.

However today I ran into some issues which gave a reason to come back here.

At first this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10170041 for softness and contrast. I don't totally understand this one
I don't see a lot of softness here. All the hard lines are visible however I could imagine that maybe the window areas and the nose might be too soft here.
Contrast I disagree on as I have been careful with it adding due to the conditions. So I left all the areas visible and not washed out in my idea.

At second I had a small evening session but I ran into some photos at the end which I am unsure of, so I would like a prescreen on them.

Biggest potential issues are here, processing, contrast and softness.

Biggest potential issues here are especially contrast and exposure.Note that the entire aircraft was not included in the original

Biggest potential issues for me here are color/white balance (taken around 30 mins before sunset) heathaze, softness and exposure.

Biggest potential isssue here is softness.

If there is anything I might have missed i would like to know as well

Thanks in advance and regards.

[dlowwa]

Recently I've got some softness rejects where I would like some clarifications on. Also for my own understanding As I still don't seem to get this right
At firsthttps://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10118003 .I see the left side being soft but the right side being acceptable in my eyes .
Could this be rejected for the left side or is this overall softness?

At second https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10121178. This one I don't really understand as i see the most of the hard lines here,
and I have several other photos from this spot and point accepted from this day.Or maybe I'm just missing the point here.

First is soft towards the nose; second I guess a bit soft overall but would have been ok for me.

Also I would like a prescreen on three photos

All three borderline dark/soft.

[wkd001]

1-2. borderline soft
3. ok for me
4-5. soft

Thanks a lot for all Dana. The Delta and the helicopter got accepted.

Recently I've got some softness rejects where I would like some clarifications on. Also for my own understanding As I still don't seem to get this right
At firsthttps://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10118003 .I see the left side being soft but the right side being acceptable in my eyes .
Could this be rejected for the left side or is this overall softness?

At second https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10121178. This one I don't really understand as i see the most of the hard lines here,
and I have several other photos from this spot and point accepted from this day.Or maybe I'm just missing the point here.

Also I would like a prescreen on three photos
Main concerns here are especially crop and softness

Main concerns here are crop and maybe motive. For both these images counts that they were shot in a sort of close up with no complete aircraft included.
Main issue here is sharpening in one part it looks soft, but another part oversharpened to me

Thank you in Advance.

[dlowwa]

Thanks a lot for coming back for those also Dana.

I've lowered the contrast for the first a bit an queued it and will drop the third.

However, I ran again into some again, which I would like a prescreen on.

1-2. borderline soft
3. ok for me
4-5. soft

[wkd001]

Yeah that one was a bit ridiculous. Don't bother appealing, I already accepted it.

Thank you so much for that Dana

1. contrast a bit harsh, but other wise ok for me.
2. soft, borderline overexposure/contrast
3. soft, borderline contrast/backlit

Thanks a lot for coming back for those also Dana.

I've lowered the contrast for the first a bit an queued it and will drop the third.

However, I ran again into some again, which I would like a prescreen on.

This is another snap of the Delta A350 from the previous post. Not sure on Vignetting, contrast , exposure, glare and crop at least.

Very unsure on this one on especially heathaze (apparently causing blurry or very soft) and maybe exposure/contrast

Biggest concerns here are contrast and sharpness. Maybe also horizon and glare (photo taken in my hometown btw)

Biggest concerns here are contrast/exposure and sharpness

Biggest potential issue for me here is heathaze (especially to the nose) causing blurry/softness

Thanks in advance and regards

[dlowwa]

However, today I received a similar reject and again I do not totally accept this one https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10029479.
At least in my opinion this is definetely not underexposed. Top of the aircraft is already very close to blown out. The histogram is not showing underexposure and the contrast is as least debatable in my eyes.

Yeah that one was a bit ridiculous. Don't bother appealing, I already accepted it.

Potential issues for me here are glare, horizon and maybe contrast.

Potential issues for me here are glare ,exposure, contrast and the crop . (Original file had not much more of the aicraft included, at least not the entire aircraft at all)

Potential issues here hare contrast ,exposure and sharpness.

1. contrast a bit harsh, but other wise ok for me.
2. soft, borderline overexposure/contrast
3. soft, borderline contrast/backlit

[wkd001]

More to do with the angle of the aircraft than any technical underexposure as most of the aircraft is in shadow. I don't necessarily agree with that decision, but it was screened by two, and both voted too dark.

Thanks for your explanation Dana.

I'll drop this one,

However, today I received a similar reject and again I do not totally accept this one https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10029479.
At least in my opinion this is definetely not underexposed. Top of the aircraft is already very close to blown out. The histogram is not showing underexposure and the contrast is as least debatable in my eyes.
So I'm curiious if this one stands a chance on appeal as the angle is at least better compared to the previous one and far more of the aircraft is better shown.
Also a would like a prescreen on some photos.


Potential issues for me here are glare, horizon and maybe contrast.

Potential issues for me here are glare ,exposure, contrast and the crop . (Original file had not much more of the aicraft included, at least not the entire aircraft at all)
Potential issues here hare contrast ,exposure and sharpness.

Thanks in advance and regards.
.

[dlowwa]

Thanks for both Dana,

Yesterday I received this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9986343. for underexposed.
If I see the histogram here , I don't really understand that, as to histogram is fully stretched here.
Also adding more exposure would blow out some parts of the aircraft imho.
Though I could inderstand contrast being an issue here, as it's also partially backlit on the tail.
How do I have to understand this one?

Thanks in advance

More to do with the angle of the aircraft than any technical underexposure as most of the aircraft is in shadow. I don't necessarily agree with that decision, but it was screened by two, and both voted too dark.

[wkd001]

Would have been ok for me, but couldn't guarantee a successful appeal.



Soft, dark, and a bit noisy/compressed.

Thanks for both Dana,

Yesterday I received this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9986343. for underexposed.
If I see the histogram here , I don't really understand that, as to histogram is fully stretched here.
Also adding more exposure would blow out some parts of the aircraft imho.
Though I could inderstand contrast being an issue here, as it's also partially backlit on the tail.
How do I have to understand this one?

Thanks in advance

[dlowwa]

Thank you for that Dana.

With a very tiny bit more exposurere at the end it got accepted.

Today I received this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9970014# for I think too much contrast.
I disagree on this one, as the details are visible as much as possible and the light is not that harsh imho.
Is this one worth an appeal, or should I just try to lower something as far as possilbe, without running into other potential issues (dark/exposure)

Would have been ok for me, but couldn't guarantee a successful appeal.

At second i would like a prescreen of this image.

Soft, dark, and a bit noisy/compressed.

[wkd001]

Fine for me, but I could see some as thinking it a bit too dark.

Thank you for that Dana.

With a very tiny bit more exposurere at the end it got accepted.

Today I received this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9970014# for I think too much contrast.
I disagree on this one, as the details are visible as much as possible and the light is not that harsh imho.
Is this one worth an appeal, or should I just try to lower something as far as possilbe, without running into other potential issues (dark/exposure)

At second i would like a prescreen of this image.

I liked this one, but personally I think it's too soft and compression and contrast could also be issues.

Thanks in advance and regards

[dlowwa]

Dana, Of course I understand your opinion is just that and there is also screeners discretion and also discuss between crew.. The little difficult here it got only more distracting for me here...
Anyway.. Time to move on now and I've tried to turn something negative into something positive now.
I reworked another snap form this particular aircraft. and tried to combine the reject note and your comments on it.
Took off some contrast and added some exposure and now I would like a prescreen on it.

Just an extra look on contrast and exposure here would be great.
And aso for sharpness, horizon and dirt here.

Thanks in advance and regards

Fine for me, but I could see some as thinking it a bit too dark.

[wkd001]

That's fine, I'm not going to stop you from venting your frustrations, as long as you understand that my opinion is just that, and needs to be weighed against the crew as a whole

Dana, Of course I understand your opinion is just that and there is also screeners discretion and also discuss between crew.. The little difficult here it got only more distracting for me here...
Anyway.. Time to move on now and I've tried to turn something negative into something positive now.
I reworked another snap form this particular aircraft. and tried to combine the reject note and your comments on it.
Took off some contrast and added some exposure and now I would like a prescreen on it.

Just an extra look on contrast and exposure here would be great.
And aso for sharpness, horizon and dirt here.

Thanks in advance and regards

[dlowwa]

Yes, I meant indeed please reject for the right reasons. My apologies for the misunderstanding. And also for the long discuss, as I didnt want to get rude or unpolite, but went too difficult in making my point.

That's fine, I'm not going to stop you from venting your frustrations, as long as you understand that my opinion is just that, and needs to be weighed against the crew as a whole