Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Felipe Garcia - Editing Help

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

  • Felipe Garcia
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    You could certainly try, but not sure how successful you would be.
    Thanks for the input, sorry about the late response. I'll leave that on the backburner for now.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Felipe Garcia View Post

    Hm ok, thanks for the input. Do you think the contrast issue is salvageable (for the whole batch)?
    You could certainly try, but not sure how successful you would be.

    Leave a comment:


  • Felipe Garcia
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    The similar rejection is a bit harsh, but technically any shot same side in the air/on the ground could be considered similar. Contrast because the washed out sky in the background is making the aircraft difficult to see, though this is also a subjective (and aesthetic) thing.
    Hm ok, thanks for the input. Do you think the contrast issue is salvageable (for the whole batch)?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Felipe Garcia View Post
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=7808988

    For this one, a bunch of images taken around the same time/same light got rejected with contrast. Should I add or reduce contrast? These were taken right as the sun was setting

    Also are there any clear guidelines on what is similar? It says it's similar to https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8909450

    Means that you have a similar photo already in the database. Please upload only your best photos, try to be creative. Similar refers to:
    - a photo taken from the same sequence the same day e. landing, taxiing, ramp parking or take off
    or
    - same registration, similar angle or composition or same background taken on different dates.
    - Close up views and full or partial views of an a/c taken at the same angle, are generally considered similar.

    If a new upload is of a significantly better quality, we may consider accepting it.

    We will only accept a certain number of cockpit or window shots taken in the same aircraft (normally no more than two).


    Contrast issue aside, the angles aren't similar, neither is the light, and they're not even the same kind of sequence (one is a takeoff and one a landing), so I'm at a loss as to how to prevent similar rejections.
    The similar rejection is a bit harsh, but technically any shot same side in the air/on the ground could be considered similar. Contrast because the washed out sky in the background is making the aircraft difficult to see, though this is also a subjective (and aesthetic) thing.

    Leave a comment:


  • Felipe Garcia
    replied
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=7808988

    For this one, a bunch of images taken around the same time/same light got rejected with contrast. Should I add or reduce contrast? These were taken right as the sun was setting

    Also are there any clear guidelines on what is similar? It says it's similar to https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8909450

    Means that you have a similar photo already in the database. Please upload only your best photos, try to be creative. Similar refers to:
    - a photo taken from the same sequence the same day e. landing, taxiing, ramp parking or take off
    or
    - same registration, similar angle or composition or same background taken on different dates.
    - Close up views and full or partial views of an a/c taken at the same angle, are generally considered similar.

    If a new upload is of a significantly better quality, we may consider accepting it.

    We will only accept a certain number of cockpit or window shots taken in the same aircraft (normally no more than two).


    Contrast issue aside, the angles aren't similar, neither is the light, and they're not even the same kind of sequence (one is a takeoff and one a landing), so I'm at a loss as to how to prevent similar rejections.

    Leave a comment:


  • Felipe Garcia
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Day vs. night shots are usually not considered similar.
    Sweet. Thanks!

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Felipe Garcia View Post

    Thanks for the feedback. That's a lot more restrictive than it used to be, sucks for those of us who normally shoot at airports with limited angles.

    That does explain why I couldn't find any mention of the 45 degree rule. Is there still a difference between daylight/sunrise-sunset/night shots of similar angles, or was that eliminated as well?
    Day vs. night shots are usually not considered similar.

    Leave a comment:


  • Felipe Garcia
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    45-degree rule was removed almost two years ago. Images from the same side/sequence can be considered similar regardless of date taken, although if the images are more than 6-7 years apart, we can be a bit more lenient. In this case, only a year separates the images, so yes, similar.
    Thanks for the feedback. That's a lot more restrictive than it used to be, sucks for those of us who normally shoot at airports with limited angles.

    That does explain why I couldn't find any mention of the 45 degree rule. Is there still a difference between daylight/sunrise-sunset/night shots of similar angles, or was that eliminated as well?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Felipe Garcia View Post
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=7782512

    Rejected for similar to https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9234288


    Now, there's more than a 45 degree angle difference, and it's not a sequence (first photo was taken on 08 Dec 2018, rejected one on 08 Dec 2019, so I can see that it could have been mistakenly considered a sequence). Is it worth appealing or did I miss a change in the rules?

    Thanks and happy new year!
    45-degree rule was removed almost two years ago. Images from the same side/sequence can be considered similar regardless of date taken, although if the images are more than 6-7 years apart, we can be a bit more lenient. In this case, only a year separates the images, so yes, similar.

    Leave a comment:


  • Felipe Garcia
    replied
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=7782512

    Rejected for similar to https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9234288


    Now, there's more than a 45 degree angle difference, and it's not a sequence (first photo was taken on 08 Dec 2018, rejected one on 08 Dec 2019, so I can see that it could have been mistakenly considered a sequence). Is it worth appealing or did I miss a change in the rules?

    Thanks and happy new year!

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Felipe Garcia View Post
    Can I get some pointers on this one? Can't tell if it's got too much or too little contrast (2nd time it gets rejected for contrast)

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6937337
    Too little. Overcast light, may or may not be fixable.

    Leave a comment:


  • Felipe Garcia
    replied
    Can I get some pointers on this one? Can't tell if it's got too much or too little contrast (2nd time it gets rejected for contrast)

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6937337

    Leave a comment:


  • Felipe Garcia
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    Perception issue perhaps, but the 'equipment limitation' might just be that you're expecting your gear to be able to overcome all situations (low light, distance, etc..), which simply may not always be possible.
    Could be, doesn't feel like I'm pushing things further than before, but who knows. I am starting to think that the background haze could be one of the big problems I'm having, something I wasn't used to dealing with on such a regular basis.

    Perception, for sure. I'll probably stop doing my final edits late at night when my eyes are tired/strained, see if that improves things.

    Thank you for bringing a more level-headed assessment of my problems. I do apologize for taking forever to reply, between being out of town with almost no internet and power outages, didn't get a chance to reply.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Felipe Garcia View Post
    See, to me the second one looks like it's bordering on over contrast.

    This one was taken under perfect light, yet still has still contrast issues (and again, to my eyes, it's fine, and actually checked on another computer, also with a calibrated display)
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6501207
    Contrast (and centering) look acceptable to me, but the heat haze would have been an issue.

    Originally posted by Felipe Garcia View Post
    Sunset, no clouds, histogram is fine, got it bounced for underexposure and noise. About as much noise as some cameras (ahem, Canon 18MP sensors) at ISO 160, I can probably tackle some noise but that will soften it or result in bad processing rejection.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6501216
    This one I agree with; there may not have been clouds in front of the sun, but the grey hazy background gives the image a very washed out look, and the noise in the sky (and shadows) is quite noticeable. I'm sure you're aware that the number of megapixles is not a good indication of how much noise a camera produces, and in fact higher MP count usually means more noise, as the actual pixel size needs to be reduced to fit them all on the sensor - if that's what you were hinting at

    Originally posted by Felipe Garcia View Post
    Thank you for all your help, but at this point I think I have a serious perception issue as well as equipment limitations.
    Perception issue perhaps, but the 'equipment limitation' might just be that you're expecting your gear to be able to overcome all situations (low light, distance, etc..), which simply may not always be possible.

    Leave a comment:


  • Felipe Garcia
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    1. I see very little difference between the two, so not much surprise the second was again rejected. It looks like there may have been a thin cloud layer in front of the sun, which would account for the lack of contrast.

    2. While not terrible, the nose area is noticeably softer than the rest of the aircraft. This is not uncommon at all, as we often see images that get softer towards the edges, either due to lens softness, motion blur, or what have you. It is also not surprising that the sharpened re-edit showed more noise, as that is a typical byproduct of increased sharpening. Is the front of the aircraft sharp at full resolution on the original? If yes, then you obviously just need a better edit. If not, you'll probably want to try and figure what's causing that softness.

    Both images were taken in light that, while not terrible, I certainly wouldn't call ideal, and that is likely contributing to the issues you're having.
    See, to me the second one looks like it's bordering on over contrast.

    This one was taken under perfect light, yet still has still contrast issues (and again, to my eyes, it's fine, and actually checked on another computer, also with a calibrated display)
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6501207

    Sunset, no clouds, histogram is fine, got it bounced for underexposure and noise. About as much noise as some cameras (ahem, Canon 18MP sensors) at ISO 160, I can probably tackle some noise but that will soften it or result in bad processing rejection.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6501216


    Thank you for all your help, but at this point I think I have a serious perception issue as well as equipment limitations.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X