ErmakDimon - Prescreen

[ErmakDimon]

Hi again, please prescreen:

[ErmakDimon]

Post Screening help

Hi, so today i got this photo rejected

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6825577

It's rejected for dust and soft.

However the dust is not visible to the naked eye, only when a filter is applied, so what difference does it make?

Secondly I can't find where this photo is soft. I'd say the opposite, that this is one of my sharpest photos, but the screener seems to think otherwise.

What do I do now? Can I appeal it?

Regards,
Dmitrii

[LX-A343]

Hi, so today i got this photo rejected

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6825577

It's rejected for dust and soft.

However the dust is not visible to the naked eye, only when a filter is applied, so what difference does it make?

Secondly I can't find where this photo is soft. I'd say the opposite, that this is one of my sharpest photos, but the screener seems to think otherwise.

What do I do now? Can I appeal it?

Regards,
Dmitrii

Of course you can appeal it, chances would be close to nil though. The aircraft is indeed a bit soft and the dust spot is too prominent, even on the uploaded photo without adding any filter at all.

[ErmakDimon]

Of course you can appeal it, chances would be close to nil though. The aircraft is indeed a bit soft and the dust spot is too prominent, even on the uploaded photo without adding any filter at all.

Alright, thanks! One more question: how do I make my photos sharper? I shoot in CR2 at F8-11 and 1/200-1/300, however almost every single one of my photos comes out soft, even after applying lots of sharpening in Lightroom.

[Julian S.]

Alright, thanks! One more question: how do I make my photos sharper? I shoot in CR2 at F8-11 and 1/200-1/300, however almost every single one of my photos comes out soft, even after applying lots of sharpening in Lightroom.

Hi.

Probably try to use a faster shutter. 1/500 would be good.
As rule of a thumb you can use the focal range in mm as shutter speed: e.g if you shoot with 300mm you need a minimum of 1/300 to get sharp results.

If you had a steady hand and want to try pannings or show prop blur, you can use a longer shutter speed up to 1/160 or slower.

[ErmakDimon]

Hi.

Probably try to use a faster shutter. 1/500 would be good.
As rule of a thumb you can use the focal range in mm as shutter speed: e.g if you shoot with 300mm you need a minimum of 1/300 to get sharp results.

If you had a steady hand and want to try pannings or show prop blur, you can use a longer shutter speed up to 1/160 or slower.

thank you! will try it next time

[ErmakDimon]

Hi everyone again, this time i played around with levels. Are these any good?









Also, on the 25th ULLI will have its first ever A380, Emirates will be testing it on the route for a few days. Would it be considered a hot photo? (I plan on shooting it on the runway, not apron)

[dlowwa]

Hi everyone again, this time i played around with levels. Are these any good?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19174[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19175[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19176[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19177[/ATTACH]

1-2 contrast, compression
3. horizon, contrast, compression, color
4. contrast, soft

Also, on the 25th ULLI will have its first ever A380, Emirates will be testing it on the route for a few days. Would it be considered a hot photo?

No.

[ErmakDimon]

Hi, so today a brand new 737 MAX came here. As soon as I found out about it I got to the airport as fast as possible and waited 40 minutes in the cold only to find out that the MAX took off from 10R which is against the sun.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6890620

Is there anything I can do to correct the photo? I thought that it being hot would compensate for it being backlit, since i tried my best to reduce it to a minimum and I think it's fine to look at.

Regards.

[dlowwa]

Is there anything I can do to correct the photo?

Unfortunately no, and in any case, the image is no longer hot.

[ErmakDimon]

Hello again, did I miss something? My photos suddenly started getting rejected for "part of aircraft cut off". As far as I understand, the guidelines say that some parts of the aircraft may be cut off but the essential ones shouldn't.

These two shots of mine have been rejected for it:

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6882872

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6882873

As you can see, those are 777-300 and A330-200 aircraft and both are massive. It's barely possible to fit them in one shot. For the A330 I tried to fit it and, as you can see, when cropping angle the elevator had to be cut off. For the 777 I don't understand how it's cut off at all since the most essential parts are there, and even more, there are accepted photos in the database at a very similar angle.

Could someone clear up the whole cutting off thing to me please? Thanks.

[dlowwa]

Hello again, did I miss something? My photos suddenly started getting rejected for "part of aircraft cut off". As far as I understand, the guidelines say that some parts of the aircraft may be cut off but the essential ones shouldn't.

These two shots of mine have been rejected for it:

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6882872

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6882873

As you can see, those are 777-300 and A330-200 aircraft and both are massive. It's barely possible to fit them in one shot. For the A330 I tried to fit it and, as you can see, when cropping angle the elevator had to be cut off. For the 777 I don't understand how it's cut off at all since the most essential parts are there, and even more, there are accepted photos in the database at a very similar angle.

Could someone clear up the whole cutting off thing to me please? Thanks.

While it is a rather subjective choice, I do agree with these two decisions. The First is rather awkward, as it is neither a close up, nor a wider angle view, and the second is just your own inattentiveness at getting the whole aircraft in the frame. You shot it at 106mm, which means you could have easily zoomed out a bit to include the whole tail.

[ErmakDimon]

While I understand what you're saying, at the time that I took those shots, for some reason going below 100mm (or similar) my autofocus didn't work. Now it seems that it's fixed but that time I tried my best to fit the whole aircraft in frame.

[ErmakDimon]

Hi again, i have had this photo rejected for "bad info":

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6939714

Could anyone please point me to where the "bad info" is? It was autofilled when i put in the reg, and i selected the "small prop" category.

Thanks!

[dlowwa]

Hi again, i have had this photo rejected for "bad info":

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6939714

Could anyone please point me to where the "bad info" is? It was autofilled when i put in the reg, and i selected the "small prop" category.

Thanks!

Previously accepted image had info incorrect as well. Even if autofill works, you still need to check the info, as the previous info may be wrong (as it is here). 'Unknown' is not acceptable as an airline; 'Private' would be appropriate if privately operated. If not, then the name of the airline operating the aircraft should be used.