Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

wkd001- Editing advice

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    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.

    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    Would that mean that photos like
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1791-2.JPG
Views:	24
Size:	355.7 KB
ID:	1122808
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1826.JPG
Views:	19
Size:	313.6 KB
ID:	1122809
    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.

    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    I would also like a prescreen on these two photos

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2468.JPG
Views:	18
Size:	349.6 KB
ID:	1122810
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2483.JPG
Views:	16
Size:	353.1 KB
ID:	1122811

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    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
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1791-2.JPG
Views:	24
Size:	355.7 KB
ID:	1122808
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1826.JPG
Views:	19
Size:	313.6 KB
ID:	1122809
    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

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2468.JPG
Views:	18
Size:	349.6 KB
ID:	1122810
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2483.JPG
Views:	16
Size:	353.1 KB
ID:	1122811

    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

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post

    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 Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1897-4.JPG
Views:	38
Size:	516.9 KB
ID:	1121780Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2376.JPG
Views:	26
Size:	632.3 KB
ID:	1121781 This one gives me a lot of doubts about harsh contrast, sharpness and horizon.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2385.JPG
Views:	27
Size:	507.2 KB
ID:	1121782
    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
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2348.JPG
Views:	27
Size:	660.3 KB
ID:	1121783 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

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    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 Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1897-4.JPG
Views:	38
Size:	516.9 KB
ID:	1121780Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2376.JPG
Views:	26
Size:	632.3 KB
ID:	1121781 This one gives me a lot of doubts about harsh contrast, sharpness and horizon.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2385.JPG
Views:	27
Size:	507.2 KB
ID:	1121782
    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
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2348.JPG
Views:	27
Size:	660.3 KB
ID:	1121783 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.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    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


    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    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.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1973-3-2.JPG
Views:	45
Size:	340.4 KB
ID:	1120799
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post

    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.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1973-2-4.JPG
Views:	59
Size:	438.4 KB
ID:	1120586 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.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2009-2.JPG
Views:	47
Size:	294.7 KB
ID:	1120587 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.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1844.JPG
Views:	47
Size:	493.8 KB
ID:	1120588 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.

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    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.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1973-2-4.JPG
Views:	59
Size:	438.4 KB
ID:	1120586 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.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_2009-2.JPG
Views:	47
Size:	294.7 KB
ID:	1120587 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.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1844.JPG
Views:	47
Size:	493.8 KB
ID:	1120588 At least for harsh contrast/ exposure, heathaze/softness.

    Thanks in advance and regards.


    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post

    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

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    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.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1973-2.JPG
Views:	56
Size:	423.8 KB
ID:	1119749 Unsure here about contrast, horizon, shaprness and horizon at least. Note here that the photo was taken around 15 minutes after sunrise.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1981.JPG
Views:	51
Size:	439.9 KB
ID:	1119750 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.


    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1847.JPG
Views:	50
Size:	477.4 KB
ID:	1119751 Biggest worries here are contrast, heat haze and sharpness.

    Thanks in advance and regards.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    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.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1584.JPG
Views:	79
Size:	527.4 KB
ID:	1118667 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.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1594.JPG
Views:	63
Size:	443.2 KB
ID:	1118668 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.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1231.JPG
Views:	63
Size:	500.7 KB
ID:	1118669 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. Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1473.JPG
Views:	63
Size:	439.5 KB
ID:	1118670 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.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post

    Thanks again for that Dana.

    I've read the guidelines. they say that blurring car plates is a little bit allowed.
    Is this too much blurring? I also lifted the aircraft a little, but if the blurring is too much, I will take another snap of this aircraft without the other stuff included. Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1203-3.JPG
Views:	45
Size:	521.3 KB
ID:	1117601 And another question/prescreen.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1167.JPG
Views:	37
Size:	496.0 KB
ID:	1117602 Is the contrast also too harsh here? Also worried about the glare and maybe softness.

    Thanks in advance and regards.
    Both would be ok for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    A bit low, but acceptable for me. Motive rejection for the readable car plate.



    Slightly soft but otherwise ok for me.
    Thanks again for that Dana.

    I've read the guidelines. they say that blurring car plates is a little bit allowed.
    Is this too much blurring? I also lifted the aircraft a little, but if the blurring is too much, I will take another snap of this aircraft without the other stuff included. Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1203-3.JPG
Views:	45
Size:	521.3 KB
ID:	1117601 And another question/prescreen.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_1167.JPG
Views:	37
Size:	496.0 KB
ID:	1117602 Is the contrast also too harsh here? Also worried about the glare and maybe softness.

    Thanks in advance and regards.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    I would like a prescreen on these two photos.
    Would this composition work? Also curious on contrast, sharpening, horizon and exposure.
    A bit low, but acceptable for me. Motive rejection for the readable car plate.

    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    Not sure on Contrast, color, sharpening, horizon and exposure here.
    Slightly soft but otherwise ok for me.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X