n94504 rejection advice

[n94504]

Hi - first post on the forums. Having trouble with some recent contrast rejections, too much or too little?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6950266

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6937559

Any help or advice would be appreciated, thanks in advance.

[Benjamin]

Hi - first post on the forums. Having trouble with some recent contrast rejections, too much or too little?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6950266

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6937559

Any help or advice would be appreciated, thanks in advance.

Think it's the light conditions. Overcast sky and not enough direct light on the aircraft. Not sure if these would be workable tbh, but best wait for a screener

[dlowwa]

Indeed, don't think these are fixable.

[n94504]

Thanks for the feedback guys.

On a separate note, I have the following rejection for the 'part of aircraft cut off' reason. I appealed and it was still rejected, stating 'It shows too much of the aircraft for a closeup'. Harsh or not?

http://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6968955

Thanks!

[dlowwa]

Thanks for the feedback guys.

On a separate note, I have the following rejection for the 'part of aircraft cut off' reason. I appealed and it was still rejected, stating 'It shows too much of the aircraft for a closeup'. Harsh or not?

http://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=6968955

Thanks!

...honestly, it looks like you couldn't get a better angle due to obstruction/whatever, and came up with this crop. I don't think it technically breaks any rules as such, but I'd tend to agree the crop doesn't have a strong motivation. At least, in my opinion

[n94504]

Contast issue?

HI - please can I get some advice on three recent contrast rejections:

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7624686

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7624697

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7624707

Too much or too little? Thanks

[mahagonny]

Hi, I'm not a screener, but in this case the problem is highlighted in the upload guide.
Awever, if you make a postproduction by photoshop camera raw or lightroom, there is a function, "reduce fog", that is a eletronic polarysed. This function helping you to reduce the fog effect that cause the "little contrast".
Exuse my bad english

[n94504]

Thanks for the feedback Mahagonny. I have resubmitted these images now, I know asking for feedback on queued images is not given, so thanks for helping whilst you could.

[n94504]

Hi all. It has been a while since I have sought rejection advice/feedback, but my biggest annoyance about this website strikes again - too much OR too little contrast.
I appreciate the personal time the screeners give up to run the site, and especially the occasional detailed rejection feedback. Uploaders also spend a lot of time editing and re-editing images to make the site a more complete and relevant source of information. We specifically have oversharp AND soft rejections (not singular too sharp OR too soft) / underexposed AND overexposed (not singular underexposed OR overexposed), and yet the too much OR too little contrast issue keeps being brought up by many uploaders on the site as something that would be a massive improvement if separated into different rejection reasons. Anyway, rant over. Some image feedback would be much appreciated please, opinions sought on what needs to happen to the contrast on my latest rejection? Thanks in advance guys.
n94504

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9852509

[n94504]

If the link doesn't work, this is the image.

[dlowwa]

Hi all. It has been a while since I have sought rejection advice/feedback, but my biggest annoyance about this website strikes again - too much OR too little contrast.
I appreciate the personal time the screeners give up to run the site, and especially the occasional detailed rejection feedback. Uploaders also spend a lot of time editing and re-editing images to make the site a more complete and relevant source of information. We specifically have oversharp AND soft rejections (not singular too sharp OR too soft) / underexposed AND overexposed (not singular underexposed OR overexposed), and yet the too much OR too little contrast issue keeps being brought up by many uploaders on the site as something that would be a massive improvement if separated into different rejection reasons. Anyway, rant over. Some image feedback would be much appreciated please, opinions sought on what needs to happen to the contrast on my latest rejection? Thanks in advance guys.
n94504

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=9852509

Contrast subjective in this case. Cloudy day/flat light, for which there is no specific rejection reason other than 'contrast'. Not sure increasing it, or decreasing it for that matter, will make much of a difference, but you could try. Noticeable noise in the shadows, especially along the bottom of the fuselage.

[n94504]

Cheers for the feedback dlowwa. I read the forum replies quite a lot and know you spend a fair chunk of your time feeding back on screening and upload matters. You guys must get as fed up reading about this particular issue as we do when we get repeat contrast rejections. Sometimes it's obvious to me, but sometimes, like this one, I was puzzled as to how or if it's fixable. I will have one last go and see what happens. Thanks again.