Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Rafael Freitas - Editing advice
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by rafaelfreitas View PostHelo! I kindly ask for your opinion regarding these photos:
2-3. borderline soft/contrast
Originally posted by rafaelfreitas View PostCould the following two be framed as artistic photos?
Comment
-
Hi friends, how are you?
I had this photo rejected, it focused on the vertical stabilizer of the A350, in a 3x2 ratio, so as not to cut the part of the wing and the elevator that are in the context of the photo. The rejection was for "Part of aircraft cut off":
JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!
See, I had this photo accepted a few years ago following the same path, focusing on the stabilizer, but without cutting the elevator: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8441936
Well, I would like to understand the objective criteria for this type of photo and where I went wrong in the clipping. Should I have shown the rest of the warping more, even if it impairs the 3x2 cut, considering another proportion?
Comment
-
Originally posted by rafaelfreitas View PostHi friends, how are you?
I had this photo rejected, it focused on the vertical stabilizer of the A350, in a 3x2 ratio, so as not to cut the part of the wing and the elevator that are in the context of the photo. The rejection was for "Part of aircraft cut off":
JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!
See, I had this photo accepted a few years ago following the same path, focusing on the stabilizer, but without cutting the elevator: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8441936
Well, I would like to understand the objective criteria for this type of photo and where I went wrong in the clipping. Should I have shown the rest of the warping more, even if it impairs the 3x2 cut, considering another proportion?
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
This is subjective, but my personal preference is for the crop on the accepted image. Much less dead space/clutter in the frame, and no awkward crop of the wing + fuselage. Just nice composition overall.
Comment
-
Helo! I kindly ask for your opinion regarding these photos:
Was it bad motive?
Disregarding any defects, I have doubts about the location. Could it be the name of the airport itself or the "name of the city - other location" or even "country - in flight"?
Finally, correcting any defects, both are considered nocturnal, would it be the case that they are similar even in different light conditions?
tks!
Comment
-
Originally posted by rafaelfreitas View PostHelo! I kindly ask for your opinion regarding these photos:
Was it bad motive?
Originally posted by rafaelfreitas View PostDisregarding any defects, I have doubts about the location. Could it be the name of the airport itself or the "name of the city - other location" or even "country - in flight"?
Originally posted by rafaelfreitas View PostFinally, correcting any defects, both are considered nocturnal, would it be the case that they are similar even in different light conditions?
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Hi friends, how are you?
Yesterday I had this photo rejected by "bad info: aircraft, location": https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9064896. I imagined it was an error, I appealed and the appeal was refused, the screener said that there really was a bug regarding bad info, but that the photo was also dark, justifying the rejection. So far, ok.
But today I had this photo rejected for the same reason "bad info: aircraft, location", but the data is correct: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9066020. Before appealing, I ask you if this was a bug again and why this is happening. I wonder if there are any more problems in the photo that have not been mentioned in the reasons for the rejection.
Grateful for the attention
Rafael Freitas
Comment
-
Originally posted by rafaelfreitas View PostHi friends, how are you?
Yesterday I had this photo rejected by "bad info: aircraft, location": https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9064896. I imagined it was an error, I appealed and the appeal was refused, the screener said that there really was a bug regarding bad info, but that the photo was also dark, justifying the rejection. So far, ok.
But today I had this photo rejected for the same reason "bad info: aircraft, location", but the data is correct: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9066020. Before appealing, I ask you if this was a bug again and why this is happening. I wonder if there are any more problems in the photo that have not been mentioned in the reasons for the rejection.
Grateful for the attention
Rafael Freitas
- Likes 1
Comment
-
Helo! Dana, on this photo, was rejected because of the cut. I took care to take into account only the aircraft's cigar, since the vertical stabilizer would not be able to remain whole due to the leveling of the photo. Claiming this in the appeal is there any chance or should I forget?
I take this opportunity and ask you if these photos can be considered similar or is it preferable to exchange the second for one that shows the left side of the plane completely?
tks!
Comment
-
Originally posted by rafaelfreitas View PostHelo! Dana, on this photo, was rejected because of the cut. I took care to take into account only the aircraft's cigar, since the vertical stabilizer would not be able to remain whole due to the leveling of the photo. Claiming this in the appeal is there any chance or should I forget?
Originally posted by rafaelfreitas View PostI take this opportunity and ask you if these photos can be considered similar or is it preferable to exchange the second for one that shows the left side of the plane completely?
- Likes 1
Comment
Comment