john1024 - prescreening request / editing advice

[john1024]

Dear JP Crew
Again I would ask you for help for the following pictures: They are photographed jst after sunset. Presonally I realy like the colors, they were incredible.

What do I have to do to get that accepted? As nightshot shoud be ok, or what have to be done.

All the best, John.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Dear JP Crew
Again I would ask you for help for the following pictures: They are photographed jst after sunset. Presonally I realy like the colors, they were incredible.

What do I have to do to get that accepted? As nightshot shoud be ok, or what have to be done.

All the best, John.

1) dark tonnes are a bit underexposed.

2) Sky is very compressed

Regards
Alex

[john1024]

Thanks a lot Alex.

I'm not sure what it means with the 'compressed sky'. ButI tried a new version with less adjustments (brightness, and a bit of contrast and sharpening).

Thanks in adwance for further feedback.
John

[crisquijano]

Thanks a lot Alex.

I'm not sure what it means with the 'compressed sky'. ButI tried a new version with less adjustments (brightness, and a bit of contrast and sharpening).

Thanks in adwance for further feedback.
John

Hi john,
I am not a screener. On #2 there are "artifacts" still visible in the bottom, like small "blocks" in the gradient from lighter to darker tones. They are quite visible when zoomed in. Try a different method for saving the jpg. I hope his helps.
cq

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Hi john,
I am not a screener. On #2 there are "artifacts" still visible in the bottom, like small "blocks" in the gradient from lighter to darker tones. They are quite visible when zoomed in. Try a different method for saving the jpg. I hope his helps.
cq

+1 I can only agree there.

[Oojiflip]

Hi john,
I am not a screener. On #2 there are "artifacts" still visible in the bottom, like small "blocks" in the gradient from lighter to darker tones. They are quite visible when zoomed in. Try a different method for saving the jpg. I hope his helps.
cq

This happened all the time when I shot JPEG back in the day so it could be that the photo is doomed to begin with

[crisquijano]

Correct. Possible the original file lacks enough info for the jpg to render smoothly.

[john1024]

Dear JP community

I try to add a new aircraft, but got not accepted (there was also no comment form the screener).Could you help me to add following aricraft:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DFS_SG_38_Schulgleiter

Thanks for help.

John

[john1024]

Dear all

I wonder what do I have to set for following shot of the DC6 from flying bulls. It was rejected to missing categories.

Second rejection was horizont unlevel.
Personally I do not understand, all the poles are vertically, WHY it's 'unlevel'? Shut I rotate it, so the vertical poles are not correct?
also consider: It's a wide anlgel shot and so there is a distortion.

PLEASE help.

[dlowwa]

Dear all

I wonder what do I have to set for following shot of the DC6 from flying bulls. It was rejected to missing categories.

Second rejection was horizont unlevel.
Personally I do not understand, all the poles are vertically, WHY it's 'unlevel'? Shut I rotate it, so the vertical poles are not correct?
also consider: It's a wide anlgel shot and so there is a distortion.

Poles are not vertical. Needs CW rotation.

[john1024]

Thakns dlowwa.

What is the missing categorie?

[dlowwa]

Thakns dlowwa.

What is the missing categorie?

I don't know, you didn't post the link to the rejection, only the image.

[john1024]

I don't know, you didn't post the link to the rejection, only the image.

Sorry for that, here is the rejected photo-link:

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11300163

Thanks in advance.

[dlowwa]

Sorry for that, here is the rejected photo-link:

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=11300163

Thanks in advance.

Vintage/Warbird.

[john1024]

what special specification do i have to chek for following type of plane:

lighter than air,
private?

I do not want to loose some slots just of missing check.

thanks in advance.