wkd001- Editing advice

[wkd001]

Rejected image was a touch dark, which was reinforced by the harsh contrast. The newer version looks fine to me.

Thanks a lot for that Dana, I've queued the revised version.

Now I would like a pre-screen for the following photos,


This one came in with a bit sunlight in the fog.Biggest potential issues for me here are contrast, sharpness. processing and horizon.
Biggest potential issue for me here is especially contrast. Should I flag small prop and business jet here? Not really used to this kind of aircraft.

Biggest potential issues for me here are sharpness, horizon, glare, compression and processing.

Same story as previous, but here the glare, sharpness and horizon especially.
The last two were also taken with actually a wrong lens .So I would like to know if they are passable/fixable

If there is anything I've missed I would like to know as well.

Thanks in advance and regards.

If there is anything I've missed I would like to knw as well

[dlowwa]

Thanks for both Dana

I have to learn how to deal with vignetting apparently, because I made changes in my gear
Final result was that I took another snap for that one for uploading and that one got accepted

Yesterday I got this reject for Dark/underexposed https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9612746
The normal histogram says it is good only the RGB Histogram gives a huge spike to the left which is translated into the dark Main Landing gear/shadows.
Don't really know which one is leading here. I made some changes to itI can't really brighten up the main landing gear here properly even I added some exposure here and lifted up the shadows also.
To me the nose is here pointing to overexposure.now
Would appreciate some guidance here.

Rejected image was a touch dark, which was reinforced by the harsh contrast. The newer version looks fine to me.

[wkd001]

Sharpness ok for me, but vignetting is noticeable.



Would be rejected for dark/contrast.

Thanks for both Dana

I have to learn how to deal with vignetting apparently, because I made changes in my gear
Final result was that I took another snap for that one for uploading and that one got accepted

Yesterday I got this reject for Dark/underexposed https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9612746
The normal histogram says it is good only the RGB Histogram gives a huge spike to the left which is translated into the dark Main Landing gear/shadows.
Don't really know which one is leading here. I made some changes to it
I can't really brighten up the main landing gear here properly even I added some exposure here and lifted up the shadows also.
To me the nose is here pointing to overexposure.now
Would appreciate some guidance here.

Thanks in advance

[dlowwa]

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.

Sharpness ok for me, but vignetting is noticeable.

I also would like a prescreen on this photo

Would be rejected for dark/contrast.

[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.

[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]

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.

[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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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. 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.