Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

To much or to little contrast comment!!! Let`s vote to split this in two comments !!

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

  • 777MAN
    replied
    Key issue for me is to take a look at whats said with a a 'fresh pair of eyes"

    You haven't posted(as requested, the images and comments from screeners?)

    I can only go off the link Dana posted - Halos are there . Common (known) issue Nikon camera d lightning and fair comment from Dana.

    If I were you I would pick an image (s) and try to un pick it in the (now) good screening forum

    T

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by marc1201 View Post
    No i did not, but i will post some links to ask for some explanation.
    But still i don't understand how you can judge a picture the correct way. Who says for example that your monitor is good enough and giving the correct colors. I work on a calibrated eizo monitor which gives me 99% srgb colors. Screening is something just about how somebody likes a picture or not.
    I think it's just a matter about personal taste. For example, one screener could accept a picture with high contrast while another screener would reject it for the same reasons.
    I had 4 pictures for bad processing, well i can honestly say that i don't see any bad processing on my monitor... So how will i know the picture is good enough for the site?
    And again, yes the comments given could be much clearer. Just say what's wrong instead of giving vague comments like bad processing. If i don't know the exact reason what's wrong, how can i improve myself then?

    Marc
    It is true that some screening decisions are subjective, which is why there is a voting system in place. Who is to say which colors are correct? Again, the system as it is set up has a team of people highly experienced with photography and digital editing trying to make objective decisions. Some of the more experienced screeners have seen 100k+ images, so we have a pretty good idea of what we're talking about. Is it a perfect system? No, but it has obviously been working well enough that the site has grown and thrived as it has.

    As for your recent rejections, there are some easily noticeable editing halos around the aircraft.

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6558022

    Quite obvious on that one especially. Given you use a Nikon DSLR, my first suggestion would be to turn off the 'D-lighting' feature, as that is notorious for causing such halos. As for the sharpening, your images just need a little more to make then suitable. It might be time to finally read the guidelines that you seemed to think were useless After that, you are welcome to come back to the forum for any further advice that may be needed.

    Leave a comment:


  • flying Doc
    replied
    Please provide a link of your rejections and we can work it out.

    Leave a comment:


  • ErwinS
    replied
    Please show us you rejects. Othetwise it is quite difficult to reply...

    Leave a comment:


  • marc1201
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    Did you check your rejection emails? Comments are often left there regarding specifics. Alternatively, that's what this forum is for, asking for feedback after rejections, or before submitting. Have you done either of those?
    No i did not, but i will post some links to ask for some explanation.
    But still i don't understand how you can judge a picture the correct way. Who says for example that your monitor is good enough and giving the correct colors. I work on a calibrated eizo monitor which gives me 99% srgb colors. Screening is something just about how somebody likes a picture or not.
    I think it's just a matter about personal taste. For example, one screener could accept a picture with high contrast while another screener would reject it for the same reasons.
    I had 4 pictures for bad processing, well i can honestly say that i don't see any bad processing on my monitor... So how will i know the picture is good enough for the site?
    And again, yes the comments given could be much clearer. Just say what's wrong instead of giving vague comments like bad processing. If i don't know the exact reason what's wrong, how can i improve myself then?

    Marc

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by marc1201 View Post
    It's not only the contrast comment, there are lots more. I think all of these rules can be stated much more clearly..
    My last 4 pictures are rejected for bad processing, but i hardly touch anything in camera raw. So why not telling us what is processed badly then. Giving just a comment of bad processing can be anything.
    Also, screeners should keep in mind that rejected photos can look good at the uploaders pc, and not judge only on their own screen..
    Did you check your rejection emails? Comments are often left there regarding specifics. Alternatively, that's what this forum is for, asking for feedback after rejections, or before submitting. Have you done either of those?

    Leave a comment:


  • marc1201
    replied
    Originally posted by Alphasix View Post
    I would like to thank you all for posting and thanks to all photographers who voted about this contrast issues.
    There were not that many votes but result is more than obvious, 80% of votes are for that this contrast comment
    should be divided in two separate comments. So if someone of key people are reading this I hope they will make
    some changes regarding this contrast comment and make photographers life a bit easier.

    Best regards from Alpha SiX
    It's not only the contrast comment, there are lots more. I think all of these rules can be stated much more clearly..
    My last 4 pictures are rejected for bad processing, but i hardly touch anything in camera raw. So why not telling us what is processed badly then. Giving just a comment of bad processing can be anything.
    Also, screeners should keep in mind that rejected photos can look good at the uploaders pc, and not judge only on their own screen..

    Leave a comment:


  • Alphasix
    replied
    I would like to thank you all for posting and thanks to all photographers who voted about this contrast issues.
    There were not that many votes but result is more than obvious, 80% of votes are for that this contrast comment
    should be divided in two separate comments. So if someone of key people are reading this I hope they will make
    some changes regarding this contrast comment and make photographers life a bit easier.

    Best regards from Alpha SiX

    Leave a comment:


  • crisquijano
    replied
    Originally posted by snddim01 View Post
    I was going to appeal this photo, but as it ties up with the topic in hand I'll post it here. I don't post very often so apologies if I'm putting this query in the wrong place.

    This one just got rejected for "too much or too little contrast".

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6549732

    Fair enough. The sunlight was very hazy that day, so I pushed the contrast as far as I could before submitting.

    When I look at the luminosity histogram on Photoshop CC (current version) there is no clipping of either blacks or whites. However, when I look at the histogram on the rejections page it clearly shows that the whites are clipped.

    How can this be?
    Hello,
    I donīt think PS and and the screening tool may be calibrated between them or with any other for that matter; but they are very close. I see the clipping in PS. I get a value of 52 at 255, probably the flare at the front.

    If I may, your image looks washed up, it needs more contrast to also bring out those colors. I gave it a try using the curves and came up with this version. I hope this helps.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	HA-LYN.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	647.3 KB
ID:	1027932

    Leave a comment:


  • snddim01
    replied
    I was going to appeal this photo, but as it ties up with the topic in hand I'll post it here. I don't post very often so apologies if I'm putting this query in the wrong place.

    This one just got rejected for "too much or too little contrast".

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6549732

    Fair enough. The sunlight was very hazy that day, so I pushed the contrast as far as I could before submitting.

    When I look at the luminosity histogram on Photoshop CC (current version) there is no clipping of either blacks or whites. However, when I look at the histogram on the rejections page it clearly shows that the whites are clipped.

    How can this be?

    Leave a comment:


  • thyago
    replied
    Being more specific in what is missing, it gets better. Just saying "too much or too little contrast" is extremely vague

    Leave a comment:


  • brianw999
    replied
    You do have a valid point. However, it is a fact that 99% of contrast rejections are for low contrast.

    Leave a comment:


  • To much or to little contrast comment!!! Let`s vote to split this in two comments !!

    16
    YES
    81.25%
    13
    NO
    18.75%
    3

    The poll is expired.

    I have one proposal for Jetphotos.net as we all know one of rejecting comments is To much or to little contrast!!

    How many of you is for that this comment should be divided in two first To much contrast and second To little contrast??

    Let`s vote about this!!


    That comment is very confusing to many photographers you never know what screener mean with that is there
    to much or to little contrast on rejected photo. When we talk about sharpness we know exactly either is Soft or
    Oversharpen. Matter of contrast is very subjective from person to person. I believe that many of you have the same
    problem with this particular comment on your photos. So let`s try to solve this by split in two comments!!
Working...
X