Originally posted by wkd001
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
wkd001- Editing advice
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
Might be fixable. Appealed images are re-screened, so any new issues might be added.
After your answer, I remembered that already happened to me once. An appealed photo got rejected for another reasons, for what i appealed it.
So I leave the ANA 77W for the moment.
Today I got another reject for harsh contrast https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=12002331 ., which dazzles me a little
This one got accepted https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/11427862 , was taken straigth after the rejected photo, and has for me the same contrast,
Probably the reject is overexposed on top? (histogram has also a spike to the right side) Which could lead to the harsh contrast reject?
Do I see this right or is there something else going on?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
OK . Thanks Dana,
This gives me two questions
If I would appeal the last photo (ANA 77W), can it be rejected on appeal for too harsh contrast (or underexposure)?
Other question, are these photos even salvageable, given the lght conditions?
- I want to notice , that with ANA , ths sun is completely in my back.
- With the Virgin it is not, ( on around 90 degrees corner on my RH side) but on my side, but probably the angle is too bad for getting acceptable photos out of it in terms of acceptable contrast.
Thanks in Advance
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
Both dark/harshly contrasted. Don't really see any color issue.
This gives me two questions
If I would appeal the last photo (ANA 77W), can it be rejected on appeal for too harsh contrast (or underexposure)?
Other question, are these photos even salvageable, given the lght conditions?
- I want to notice , that with ANA , ths sun is completely in my back.
- With the Virgin it is not, ( on around 90 degrees corner on my RH side) but on my side, but probably the angle is too bad for getting acceptable photos out of it in terms of acceptable contrast.
Thanks in Advance
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
Thanks Dana,
As I thought.
I've reworkes this one, would this one be better. Especially in terms of contrast.
I also got this one rejected again, but this time for color.
I am stunned by the reason as i really have no idea what's wrong with the color here. So any guidance would be appreciated .
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
Yes.
As I thought.
I've reworkes this one, would this one be better. Especially in terms of contrast.
I also got this one rejected again. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11976546 , but this time for color.
I am stunned by the reason as i really have no idea what's wrong with the color here. So any guidance would be appreciated .
Thank you in advance
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
Contrast, not dark.
It's too harsh I assume?
And i also assume the same story goes up for this one?
JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 6 million screened photos online!
Thank you in Advance?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
Thank you again for your time Dana,
Unfortunately I have a question a bout another reject,
Is this one really too dark ,or does this also haven too harsh contrast. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11938701
Because for me it's not too dark an the histogran does also not point into too dark for me
Thank you in advance
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
1. borderline soft
2. soft, contrast
3. slight magenta cast. would have been ok for me
Unfortunately I have a question a bout another reject,
Is this one really too dark ,or does this also haven too harsh contrast. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11938701
Because for me it's not too dark an the histogran does also not point into too dark for me
Thank you in advance
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by wkd001 View PostI would like to know if this one has a better chance of getting accepted.
Further I would like to have a prescreen for this image, but I think contrast /heathaze./softness will make it a no go.
Final question,
I'm struggling with this reject,
I think it looks too pink ,but I can't really correct it properly.The pink tone remains and i can't really get it while correcting color/ and/or white balance
Any guidance would be appreciated
2. soft, contrast
3. slight magenta cast. would have been ok for me
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
Contrast is too harsh.
I worked on another shot of it just a bit earlier .Tried to tone down the contrast but now it looks underexposed to me
I would like to know if this one has a better chance of getting accepted.
Further I would like to have a prescreen for this image, but I think contrast /heathaze./softness will make it a no go.
Final question,
I'm struggling with this reject,https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11918472
I think it looks too pink ,but I can't really correct it properly.The pink tone remains and i can't really get it while correcting color/ and/or white balance
Any guidance would be appreciated
Thanks in advance
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by wkd001 View PostHello,
I've received this reject, https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11921430 , but I disagree on it.
The histogram shows no underexposure to me ,Adding more exposure would blow out the nose I think
I see almost everything from the aircraft, So I dio not really see the contrast issue also.
Any guidance would be appreciated.
Leave a comment:
-
Hello,
I've received this reject, https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11921430 , but I disagree on it.
The histogram shows no underexposure to me ,Adding more exposure would blow out the nose I think
I see almost everything from the aircraft, So I dio not really see the contrast issue also.
Any guidance would be appreciated.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: