Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Henrik Hedde - editing advice

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

  • FRA/ARNspotter
    replied
    Hello! Thanks for your help, hope the screeners like the motive then

    I have tried to improve some rejected shots and would like to have your opinion whether they look better now. I don't quite know what was wrong with the Emirates A380 though. Maybe you can help.

    Thanks a lot in advance!
    Henrik

    ANA 773 https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8059387
    EK 77F https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8051628
    Helicopter https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8051520
    DHL AB6 https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8051509
    EK 388 https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8029397

    Click image for larger version

Name:	JA789A.jpg
Views:	54
Size:	380.8 KB
ID:	1087365
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by FRA/ARNspotter View Post
    Good afternoon and thanks a lot for the advice on the ANZ shot!

    I took a photo of a spotting location and was wondering whether a) the shot is fine as it is? I tried to match all the criteria in the guidelines. and b) how the vehicle license plate should be blurred? I tried two different ways, which would be correct?

    Thanks a lot in advance!

    Henrik
    Click image for larger version  Name:	spottinglocation2.jpg Views:	0 Size:	1.67 MB ID:	1087047
    Motive will be a subjective thing. As long as you provide adequate info about the location, could be acceptable. The other care plates will need to be blurred as well. For quality, image is suffering from oversharpening, and noise/compression.

    Leave a comment:


  • FRA/ARNspotter
    replied
    Good afternoon and thanks a lot for the advice on the ANZ shot!

    I took a photo of a spotting location and was wondering whether a) the shot is fine as it is? I tried to match all the criteria in the guidelines. and b) how the vehicle license plate should be blurred? I tried two different ways, which would be correct?

    Thanks a lot in advance!

    Henrik
    Click image for larger version

Name:	spottinglocation2.jpg
Views:	59
Size:	1.67 MB
ID:	1087047
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by FRA/ARNspotter View Post
    Hi! Thanks for the help! What do you think about this one? Thanks for your advice!

    Best regards,
    Henrik
    Click image for larger version

Name:	ZK-OKQ.jpg
Views:	22
Size:	365.9 KB
ID:	1086433
    Little bit of vignetting visible, but might be ok as-is.

    Leave a comment:


  • FRA/ARNspotter
    replied
    Hi! Thanks for the help! What do you think about this one? Thanks for your advice!

    Best regards,
    Henrik
    Click image for larger version

Name:	ZK-OKQ.jpg
Views:	22
Size:	365.9 KB
ID:	1086433

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by FRA/ARNspotter View Post
    Click image for larger version

Name:	d-hegy.jpg
Views:	27
Size:	410.9 KB
ID:	1086295Hello! I would love to get some advice on the following photos. Thanks a lot in advance.

    This is the link to the rejected ramp photo : https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8029386

    Best regards,
    Henrik

    Click image for larger version

Name:	rampd-aikf.jpg
Views:	27
Size:	577.6 KB
ID:	1086292
    I don't really see anything easily identifiable as dust in the rejected image. The rest would be acceptable to me as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • FRA/ARNspotter
    replied
    Click image for larger version

Name:	d-hegy.jpg
Views:	27
Size:	410.9 KB
ID:	1086295Hello! I would love to get some advice on the following photos. Thanks a lot in advance.

    This is the link to the rejected ramp photo : https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8029386

    Best regards,
    Henrik

    Click image for larger version

Name:	rampd-aikf.jpg
Views:	27
Size:	577.6 KB
ID:	1086292
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by FRA/ARNspotter View Post
    Hi! Thanks for your help, I tried to improve the shot among some other rejections. Would like to have some advice if the photos look better now. I will add the rejections as well to see a difference.
    Thank you very much in advance!
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7991484
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7991485
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8004281
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8005628

    Click image for larger version

Name:	n532vl_new.jpg
Views:	37
Size:	751.4 KB
ID:	1085614


    Best regards,
    Henrik
    1 & 5 borderline horizon (CW)
    2. ok for me
    3. horizon (CW)
    4. soft

    Leave a comment:


  • FRA/ARNspotter
    replied
    Hi! Thanks for your help, I tried to improve the shot among some other rejections. Would like to have some advice if the photos look better now. I will add the rejections as well to see a difference.
    Thank you very much in advance!
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7991484
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7991485
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8004281
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8005628

    Click image for larger version

Name:	n532vl_new.jpg
Views:	37
Size:	751.4 KB
ID:	1085614


    Best regards,
    Henrik
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by FRA/ARNspotter View Post
    Thanks Dana, I uploaded it as „Ramp“
    I‘m a bit confused about this rejection https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8009797 how should the photo be rotated? Note that the reef in the picture is not the horizon so quite difficult to see the horizon to me. Thank you very much for any help

    best regards
    Henrik
    The horizon itself is visible, and not level. It needs a little CW rotation.

    Leave a comment:


  • FRA/ARNspotter
    replied
    Thanks Dana, I uploaded it as „Ramp“
    I‘m a bit confused about this rejection https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8009797 how should the photo be rotated? Note that the reef in the picture is not the horizon so quite difficult to see the horizon to me. Thank you very much for any help

    best regards
    Henrik

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by FRA/ARNspotter View Post
    Thanks Dana, changed it now! Should i also tick "Airport overview" under Categories (photo specific) then?
    Click image for larger version

Name:	rampffm.jpg
Views:	74
Size:	543.5 KB
ID:	1085273
    How should this photo be uploaded? Ramp as well or the first aircraft (D-AINE)? Thanks for your help!

    Henrik
    Usually the cut off is if the aircraft takes up more or less than 50% of the fram. Here looks like just under 50%.

    Leave a comment:


  • FRA/ARNspotter
    replied
    Thanks Dana, changed it now! Should i also tick "Airport overview" under Categories (photo specific) then?
    Click image for larger version

Name:	rampffm.jpg
Views:	74
Size:	543.5 KB
ID:	1085273
    How should this photo be uploaded? Ramp as well or the first aircraft (D-AINE)? Thanks for your help!

    Henrik

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by FRA/ARNspotter View Post
    Thanks a lot for your help! I got a reject for invalid hot and bad info. What should I choose instead of D-AIKF (the first plane in the photo)? Which categories are missing?
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8009254

    Apart of that I can't see the rejection reasons in my screening results mails I get from jp.net anymore. Has anyone else experienced the same thing? How can I change it? Thanks a lot in advance
    //Henrik
    Should be uploaded as Airport Overview - Ramp. Image is also oversharpened.

    Leave a comment:


  • FRA/ARNspotter
    replied
    Thanks a lot for your help! I got a reject for invalid hot and bad info. What should I choose instead of D-AIKF (the first plane in the photo)? Which categories are missing?
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8009254

    Apart of that I can't see the rejection reasons in my screening results mails I get from jp.net anymore. Has anyone else experienced the same thing? How can I change it? Thanks a lot in advance
    //Henrik

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X