ikeharel - Pre-screen / Pre-upload advice

[JuklicekCZ]

IMHO, of course, you can technically appeal any shot, the appeal is there for cases of an incorrectly rejected shot, but not for brute forcing it through.
However in this case, you have had a rejection, which was afterwards confirmed by a senior screener, thus from my point of view such an appeal is quite unnecessary.
Please try to think about it in a way, that by appealing any rejection you are contributing into prolonging queue times which are already quite long.

[ikeharel]

Good morning,
This picture was rejected for artefacts - and I really do not see where are those artefacts, merely shadows from the hall's illuminations.
Here is the equlaized picture with the outcome photo from inside the museum.
The plane fuselage shown with no faults, in my humble opinion.
Appreciate any answer.
Ike






https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued...al-large-photo

[Wheat]

You can see the compression on the wall.

[ikeharel]

You can see the compression on the wall.

That's shadows.

[TomEPKK]

That's not shadows, whole wall in the background, especially top part is compressed.

[ikeharel]

That's not shadows, whole wall in the background, especially top part is compressed.

Thanks Tomasz,
So if I can crop a tighter image to exclude the top, that's would be OK for acceptance? would this solve it?
Ike

[TomEPKK]

Not sure how you would like to crop it as it would result in cut-off rejection. You may try to use noise removal in the top part of the photo but it needs to be very delicate and you need to be careful not to overprocess it.

[ikeharel]

[QUOTE=TomEPKK;n1141343]Not sure how you would like to crop it as it would result in cut-off rejection. You may try to use noise removal in the top part of the photo but it needs to be very delicate and you need to be careful not to overprocess it.[/QUOTE

Thanks Tomasz, will probably give it up altogether.
ike

[ikeharel]

Good evening,
Once again, a rejection that by far I cannot understand.
A picture of this Mig 21 that the histogram shows a good display of the dark/bright parts, and the plane is well lit against the building on the backdrop.
Also, sharpnes is fair and not even borderline-oversharp, in my humble opinion.

Picture number: .php?id=10308226

I refrain from appealing, not to be scolded for too many appealings.
Please explain.
Sincerely,
Ike Harel

[AKH]

Could you share the reason for rejection?

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Pretty basic here...

Looking at full size the reg is all jagged so over sharpening is correct
And looking at the histogram, dark tones are underexposed and light tones are overexposed which creates a harsh contrast...

So yes, I recommend you really learn to use the histogram, your best friend to understand contrast in photography

Please also add backlit in the rejection reasons, see shadow on ground, sun was clearly on the other side....

and... was the AGAIN really needed in the title....? Not so sure....

Regards
Alex

[ikeharel]

Pretty basic here...

Looking at full size the reg is all jagged so over sharpening is correct
And looking at the histogram, dark tones are underexposed and light tones are overexposed which creates a harsh contrast...

So yes, I recommend you really learn to use the histogram, your best friend to understand contrast in photography

Please also add backlit in the rejection reasons, see shadow on ground, sun was clearly on the other side....

and... was the AGAIN really needed in the title....? Not so sure....

Regards
Alex

“Again” to mean a borderline situation that rejected this picture.
Not always an ideal situation comes along, a bit of flexibility could be implemented on a special situations pictures, this plane would never be shown on FR24, which happened in several museum pictures of mine.
My humble opinion.
Anyway, your decision as a chiff screener would always concludes.
Thanks,
ike

[Alex - Spot-This !]

For us there was really nothing borderline there. Three justified rejections reasons is far from anything borderline.
Ok that not always an ideal situation comes along but the over sharpening AND the contrast rejection were only due to your editing and photography, nothing to do with the situation itself. And the backlit isn't your fault but it was a clear reason not to upload.
Museum airplanes usually don't move much so more opportunities to get that MIG will be there, for you or someone else.

Why do you call this a special situation ? Because we do give a lot of flexibility on special situations but it's really hard to know what was special there....

[Alex - Spot-This !]

https://www.jetphotos.com/aircraft/m.../serial/967708 seems the angle from the other side is doable ...

[ikeharel]

https://www.jetphotos.com/aircraft/m.../serial/967708 seems the angle from the other side is doable ...

Alex, the example given here is a whole different place on the museum premises, not the same place as i taken it. The Mig was moved since to another corner, under trees.
It is a one in a lifetime visit to this location and several pictures were rejected for minor / borderline's issues, like the N540SS, the N51GB and other's - but you are right, maybe I am not as best photographer there is...
Have a nice sunday,
Ike