pre-screen photos at dawn

[a.m.]

Yeah, that's pretty soft. Still, at nearly 5000pix, you should be able to hide it well enough when sizing down to 1280 or so.

Here's something I consider decently sharp, straight out of the camera, only cropped to show more of the aircraft:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]25743[/ATTACH]

Thx dlowwa.
Well if this "..I consider decently sharp" is just "decent" I can't imagine what is a good sharp.
That image is in a complete different league. I don't have HW to match that. Game over.
My stuff is indeed soft stuff. Need to reconsider the hobby. Starts to get to stressful.
Not having the right tools for the job. Wait for a week for the decision. Not been able to control the quality, always with the heart in the hands..
ah.. there must be a better way.
Thanks again for your time and help
/rgds
a.m.

[dlowwa]

Thx dlowwa. Well, it looks , the "soft" plague just land on my photos and I can't get rid of it.
Can you help me understand it ? is it a HW or SW problem ?
I'm including an original out off the camera file. is it soft already at origin ?

thanks for your time and help
/rgds
a.m.

Yeah, that's pretty soft. Still, at nearly 5000pix, you should be able to hide it well enough when sizing down to 1280 or so.

Here's something I consider decently sharp, straight out of the camera, only cropped to show more of the aircraft:

[a.m.]

1. soft, centering
2-5 borderline soft, but no major issues

Thx dlowwa. Well, it looks , the "soft" plague just land on my photos and I can't get rid of it.
Can you help me understand it ? is it a HW or SW problem ?
I'm including an original out off the camera file. is it soft already at origin ?

thanks for your time and help
/rgds
a.m.

[dlowwa]

Hi dlowwa
can you please review these ? thx
/rgds

1. soft, centering
2-5 borderline soft, but no major issues

[a.m.]

Hi dlowwa
can you please review these ? thx
/rgds

[a.m.]

In the air vs. on the ground. Both are in the air = similar.

Thx dlowwa. Putted this way, there's no margin for debate. Reading the guidelines, I would never saw them as restrict as this. But rules are rules and things are what they are.
thx again for your time and help
/rgds
a.m.

[dlowwa]

#Same side, same stage of flight.
What I should consider as "same stage of the flight" ?

In the air vs. on the ground. Both are in the air = similar.

[a.m.]

#You have an empty area on the right side of the histogram : "scientifically" underexposed…
#Indeed, the gap on the right edge clearly shows underexposure.

Thx zomeu, dlowwa. Ah.. finally a "scientific" way to measure/identify darkness. Just great. thx.


#Same side, same stage of flight. Similar guidelines were updated a few years ago, you might want to review them.

I've review the rules :

2.6 Similar

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).

#Same side, same stage of flight.
What I should consider as "same stage of the flight" ?

One is landing, the other is taking off
One is accelerating, the other is decelerating
One is level, the other is 30º up

/rgds
a.m.

[dlowwa]

Hi dlowwa

Can you give me some guidance on this rejection : https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7359336

1) Dark: Is there any practical method to identify a dark photo ? any histogram that shows that ?

Indeed, the gap on the right edge clearly shows underexposure.

what make these photos similarly ?

Same side, same stage of flight. Similar guidelines were updated a few years ago, you might want to review them.

[zomeu]

You have an empty area on the right side of the histogram : "scientifically" underexposed...




+1/4 Stop would probably fix it...

[a.m.]

Hi dlowwa

Can you give me some guidance on this rejection : https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7359336

1) Dark: Is there any practical method to identify a dark photo ? any histogram that shows that ? what's the line between personal preferences and a "scientific approach" ?
2) Similarly photo :

This photo was taken
a) when the planning was in a landing attitude
b) from a position below the plane
c) in a 90º
d) in the beginning of the runway
e) different days, time of the day and backgrounds

the other which may have been considered as similarly : https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9269991

a) was taken when the plane was in a take off attitude
b) from a position above the plane
c) in the end of the runway
d) from a angle behind the plane
e) different days, time of the day and backgrounds

what make these photos similarly ?

/rgds
a.m.

[a.m.]

Thx dlowwa

didn't knew that. Always learning.

/rgds
a.m.

[dlowwa]

Hi dlowwa

I've this photo https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9336517 , which don't show up in FR.
Is this because of that specific angle/framing isn't allowed in FR ?

Correct.

[a.m.]

Hi dlowwa

I've this photo https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9336517 , which don't show up in FR.
Is this because of that specific angle/framing isn't allowed in FR ?

thx for your time and help
/rgds
a.m.

[a.m.]

Personal preference of course, but if you're hoping to get it accepted here, #2 would be the way to go.

Thx dlowwa

#2 would be the way to go
ok.

#Personal preference of course,
ah... there's no personal preferences here... acceptance is the goal

/rgds
a.m.