Wheat - rejection and editing advice

[Wheat]

Doesn't necessarily hide them, but will make them less obvious than a higher resolution.

Thank you

[dlowwa]

Good afternoon, when it comes to sharpening and softness does saving a photo as 1200 pixels really hide the soft parts?

Doesn't necessarily hide them, but will make them less obvious than a higher resolution.

[Wheat]

Good afternoon, when it comes to sharpening and softness does saving a photo as 1200 pixels really hide the soft parts?

[dlowwa]

I took it out of the queue and lowered the exposure and raised the sharpening though I already know the damage has been done

Exposure was unchanged (histograms identical), I would not have claimed so unless I had checked carefully. And if the sharpening was adjusted, it also was imperceptible. It's more of a pattern of behavior from you that makes me lose interest in offering any more help. How many times has that close up of the Aeroflot at LAX been rejected for soft (after I told you it was much too soft, even blurry)? And yet it's back in the queue? You are allowed to do submit it as many times as you want, of course, but what's the point of me (or anyone) offering advice if you're going end up doing your own thing anyway? And then the appeals - you appeal things that are not even close to acceptable, without checking here first, which is one of the things we ask you to do if you'd like to benefit from direct feedback from the crew.

If you haven't already, please read here, especially #9, and the general requests that are made:

https://forums.jetphotos.com/forum/a...ning-from-crew

Might help you figure out where we're coming from.

[Wheat]

I think I'm done offering advice to you. Made it pretty clear here if you decided to ignore my advice, it won't be available any more:



That DL 350 is in the queue with no change to the exposure or softness to the one I told you would be rejected. Your call of course, but also my call to bail out at this point. Good luck.

I took it out of the queue and lowered the exposure and raised the sharpening though I already know the damage has been done

[dlowwa]

I think I'm done offering advice to you. Made it pretty clear here if you decided to ignore my advice, it won't be available any more:

I might comment, but I've found you tend to ignore such advice anyway. I'd be willing to try again, on the condition that you actually follow the recommendations,

That DL 350 is in the queue with no change to the exposure or softness to the one I told you would be rejected. Your call of course, but also my call to bail out at this point. Good luck.

[Wheat]

Soft, overexposed, and part of dust spot below the tail.

Thank you,now with that can you please take a look at these photos

[dlowwa]

I've edited it more can you please take a look

Soft, overexposed, and part of dust spot below the tail.

[Wheat]

Not really, and honestly 1 & 3 are not really fixable, so maybe better to give up on those two. #2 is still soft, overexposed, and with a slight red/orange tint.

I've edited it more can you please take a look

[dlowwa]

Are these edits any better?

Not really, and honestly 1 & 3 are not really fixable, so maybe better to give up on those two. #2 is still soft, overexposed, and with a slight red/orange tint.

[Wheat]

2-3. color, soft, overexposed, contrast
4. color, soft, overexposed, dirty

Are these edits any better?

[dlowwa]

Oh well, thanks for taking a look I'll look back at it tomorrow with that being said can I get a pre-screening for these images too?

2-3. color, soft, overexposed, contrast
4. color, soft, overexposed, dirty

[Wheat]

Unfortunately, not much. All of the same issues are still present.

Oh well, thanks for taking a look I'll look back at it tomorrow with that being said can I get a pre-screening for these images too?

[dlowwa]

Is this better?

Unfortunately, not much. All of the same issues are still present.

[Wheat]

Both images have very weak contrast (due to the overcast conditions) and are somewhat soft. The second may be fixable with a better edit (also needs a little CCW rotation); the first is not fixable.

Is this better?