Sergio - Editing advice

[Sergio Canobbio]

Hello. I got this photo rejected:



with the following reason: "Part of aircraft cut off"

I already uploaded successfully a couple of other "wing view" photos, with a lesser amount of wing visible:



Is the problem keyed to the fact that the winglet is cut off? In a broader sense, is there anywhere in the forum a topic about rules such as "at least 3 aircrafts on a ramp" or "the winglet must not be cut off in a wing view" which are not included in the guidelines? Thank you for your help.

[dlowwa]

Hello. I got this photo rejected:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]18883[/ATTACH]

with the following reason: "Part of aircraft cut off"

Is the problem keyed to the fact that the winglet is cut off?

Yes.

In a broader sense, is there anywhere in the forum a topic about rules such as "at least 3 aircrafts on a ramp" or "the winglet must not be cut off in a wing view" which are not included in the guidelines?

You will not find any guidelines for such things, as they are subjective, just as you will not find any guidelines on exactly how much contrast is correct.

[Sergio Canobbio]

Yes.
You will not find any guidelines for such things, as they are subjective, just as you will not find any guidelines on exactly how much contrast is correct.

Thank you, dlowwa, for the explanation. This make sense.

In your opinion, would the photo work, if I crop out the upper and left sides so that the visible part of the wing is only the rear one?

[dlowwa]

Thank you, dlowwa, for the explanation. This make sense.

In your opinion, would the photo work, if I crop out the upper and left sides so that the visible part of the wing is only the rear one?

I'm not sure any crop of the end of the wing that doesn't include the winglet completely would work, but I'd need to see to be more certain.

[Sergio Canobbio]

I'm not sure any crop of the end of the wing that doesn't include the winglet completely would work, but I'd need to see to be more certain.

Yes, sorry about not thinking of showing you the idea. BTW, I would like to say that your assiduous help is really really really appreciated. Thank you.

[dlowwa]

Yes, sorry about not thinking of showing you the idea. BTW, I would like to say that your assiduous help is really really really appreciated. Thank you.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]18952[/ATTACH]

That crop doesn't work for me personally, but I can't speak for everyone. If I had to guess, I'd say most likely it would be a cut off/motive rejection.

[Sergio Canobbio]

I'm sorting out my old photos.

Would these be ok? I thought about "terminal" for photos 1 and 2; "cabin" for 3 (DPRK crew in a Tu-204) and the plane for 4.



Thank you in advance for the help.

[dlowwa]

I'm sorting out my old photos.

Would these be ok? I thought about "terminal" for photos 1 and 2; "cabin" for 3 (DPRK crew in a Tu-204) and the plane for 4.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]19123[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]19125[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]19124[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]19126[/ATTACH]

Thank you in advance for the help.

Most, if not all, would be a motive or obstruction rejection.

[Sergio Canobbio]

Hello! I'm back with some new photos, thank you for the nice help & advice!

[dlowwa]

Hello! I'm back with some new photos, thank you for the nice help & advice!

[ATTACH=CONFIG]21140[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21141[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21142[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21143[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21144[/ATTACH]

1. blurry, oversharpened
2. blurry, heat haze
3. blurry, backlit, heat haze
4. blurry, backlit, oversharpened, heat haze, obstruction, noisy
5. blurry, oversharpened

[Sergio Canobbio]

1. blurry, oversharpened
2. blurry, heat haze
3. blurry, backlit, heat haze
4. blurry, backlit, oversharpened, heat haze, obstruction, noisy
5. blurry, oversharpened

Thank you, dlowwa!

Wow, this is bad news indeed, I applied the same workflow I used for my photos in ZRH that got accepted, and used a sharper lens this time

I can easily fix the oversharpen issue, but is the blurry issue fixable in your opinion? I thought I used a good exposure time (1/250 - 1/320)... Too bad.
Would you also, please, teach me the way you use to check if a photo is blurred? Some of them seemed good to me (not the A380, to be honest).

Thank you for your patience.

[dlowwa]

Wow, this is bad news indeed, I applied the same workflow I used for my photos in ZRH that got accepted, and used a sharper lens this time

I can easily fix the oversharpen issue, but is the blurry issue fixable in your opinion? I thought I used a good exposure time (1/250 - 1/320)... Too bad.
Would you also, please, teach me the way you use to check if a photo is blurred? Some of them seemed good to me (not the A380, to be honest).

#5 might not be blurry, but it's hard to tell with the oversharpening. The A380 would have no chance at acceptance (due to obstruction), but in that case the blur is caused by heat haze, and not any technique/hardware problems like the other images.

What do you think of these other photos?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]21167[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21168[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21169[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21170[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21171[/ATTACH]

Please see #3

https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthread.php?61627-Suggestions-when-asking-for-editing-advice-prescreening-from-crew

[Sergio Canobbio]

Please see #3

https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthr...ning-from-crew

Sorry, it is another day here and I did not realize it was not 24h yet.

[Sergio Canobbio]

Hello dlowwa and crew. Sorry again for not having checked the time yesterday.

I tried to enhance the workflow, and I saw that one way to lessen the amount of oversharpening and jaggies is not to apply the presharpening before downsizing. What do you think of the photos shown at the bottom of this message? Are they better if compared to the one you had a look the they before yesterday and, btw, are they acceptable for submission?

Also, do you have a tric to understand if a photo is too much blurry before starting the postproduction? i usually look to the serial numbers and windows, but it does not seem I managed to understand properly if a shot has too much blur

Thank you in advance for your opinion and suggestions.

[dlowwa]

Hello dlowwa and crew. Sorry again for not having checked the time yesterday.

I tried to enhance the workflow, and I saw that one way to lessen the amount of oversharpening and jaggies is not to apply the presharpening before downsizing. What do you think of the photos shown at the bottom of this message? Are they better if compared to the one you had a look the they before yesterday and, btw, are they acceptable for submission?

Also, do you have a tric to understand if a photo is too much blurry before starting the postproduction? i usually look to the serial numbers and windows, but it does not seem I managed to understand properly if a shot has too much blur

Thank you in advance for your opinion and suggestions.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]21185[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21186[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21187[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21188[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21189[/ATTACH]

1-2 borderline soft
3. soft. not sure if cloud or bad edit above titles.
4. dirty
5. borderline dark/overprocessed (lines in sky)

No trick for determining if an image is too soft/blurry, just use my eyes