Contrast Rejections: Too much or too little?

[Charlie Chang]

Or we could just add "quality" to any image which has no chance of being accepted ? I would like that solution better than adding an extra rejection reason

- Contrast alone - Room to improvement
- Contrast + quality - No Chance, one for the personal collection

I agree with your opinion, but in most cases when the bad weather photo will be only rejected by contrast rejection. Not contrast + bad quality
Hope this situation will be change in the future

[Charlie Chang]

Too much or too little contrast is the most common rejection in Jetphotos, but from the perspective of photographer, I think this rejection should split to 3 rejections
1:High contrast
2:Low contrast
3:Light condition not good enough or Poor weather condition

Here are the following reasons that I think JP should add extra rejection of contrast.
1:Many photographer confuse about photo's contrast is too high or low, I think giving a high or low contrast will not give more pressure on photo screeners.

2:In JP, some photo with bad weather condition will be rejected by too much or too little contrast as well. But in some cases, the weather is not good, but it is also not very bad. If the photo got rejected for once by too much or too little contrast rejection. The photographer may increase or decrease the contrast of the photo then upload it again. But in fact the photo screener think the weather is bad then giving this photo a contrast rejection. So no matter how photographer change the contrast of this photo, the photo will be always rejected by contrast rejection.
Imagine, if the screener give a light condition not good enough at the first time that this photo being screened, the photographer will not re-edit this photo again for re-uploading. This will save photographers' time and slot, also will save screeners' time.


Jetphotos has a voting system on photo screening, but photographer are only available to see the final result of the screened photo.
If photographer can see the voting process like: (airliners.net provide a very good example of this)
1st screener: soft
2nd screener: ask for second option
3rd screener: Added to HQ (accept)

Let's say that an image is finally accepted in the second or third screen process, but the advice given by the first screener can still help the photographer to avoid this problem in the later shooting or photo editing.

I wish the staff member of Jetphotos could consider my suggestions.

[paulc]

Ok I will respond ( against my better judgement). Read this - https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthr...milar-in-Queue

You do yourself no favours postings such remarks. The Crew give up personal time to screen images. So everyone who genuinely uploads their images within the guidelines have to contend with waiting whilst we reject your “ double” uploads. Quite ridiculous!
T

You obviously do not get english humour. The too much or too little contrast rejection has been a problem for a long time for many people - even using the histogram in Lightroom i still get that rejection. One of several reasons i dont bother uploading here very often

[llpilch]

I saw a lot of rejections due to contrast on cloudy days, is impossible to have blue skies always and overcast sky is part of the aviation too, I think that is a good idea be a little flexible on that cases.

I agree with that!

I must say that the rejections by "too much or too little constrast" are the more frustrating, and the reason is: I received this rejection sometimes with shots that REALLY didn't have any issue with contrast, or are very borderline, while I see accepted pictures with very low contrast.

Lets not forget: contrast is the "difference" (not the proper word, but my English is very poor, sorry) between the whites and the blacks, with a reference on the midtones. If what is meant to be white is pure white and what is meant to be black is pure black, then you have the perfect contrast, if the white is a little gray, OR/AND the blacks are a little gray, then you have low contrast issue. But of course it has to be balanced, in the opposite hand, if the clear areas have TOO MUCH white and the dark areas have TOO MUCH black, the mid tones will be going to be white or black and then you'll have high contrast.

That's EXACTLY what is shown on the first post of this topic with that 747 example, which was PERFECTLY described using the histogram explaining what it says with that gaps and spikes.

So, if it is so easy to identify the constrast issues, why are so many good photos rejected and so many photos with low contrast being accepted?

I totally agree that there are some conditions when the picture will never be acceptable for JP or any other site that requests a higher quality standart. Specially when the problem is not only the overcast sky, but plus a umid or even dry haze in the air, like few fog or pollution. Or when the overcast is due to very heavy clouds that turns everything on ground too much dark, but I see rejected photos with very nice weather, just without the sun, but pictures with nice light, nice colors, nice exposure, nice contrast, nice dark areas, pure whites (not overexposed, not gray), etc... photos that the only difference to a nice sunny-blue_sky photo is the fact that there is no shadow on the ground and the sky is white not blue, but the lighting is fine.

I'm having rejections that the histogram is pretty fine, not possible to say if it was rejected by too much or too little, so I agree with all the people who claims to separate it into two different rejections: "too much contrast" and "too little contrast".

I have respect for the job that the screeners do voluntarily to make the site possible for us, but if the screener will reject the picture, then will have to search in the rejection reasons list and click on the one that aply, it doesn't add extra work for him/her!

please check my thoughts on the attached photos bellow.

Best regards

[LX-A343]

Can anyone explain to me how this photo was accepted: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10008540
but my photo was rejected for contrast reasons https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8791554

I personally fail to see any contrast in the accepted photo.

Both photos are borderline and can go either way. You just were less lucky.

[Boscgnspotter]

Can anyone explain to me how this photo was accepted: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10008540
but my photo was rejected for contrast reasons https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8791554

I personally fail to see any contrast in the accepted photo.

[dlowwa]

Just curious as to why too little and too much contrast aren't separate rejections, sometimes its actually very hard to tell whether your image requires more or less contrast, it would probably save lots of your time from people appealing contrast

It would also save time if you actually read the whole thread..

[Joel Baverstock]

Just curious as to why too little and too much contrast aren't separate rejections, sometimes its actually very hard to tell whether your image requires more or less contrast, it would probably save lots of your time from people appealing contrast

[dlowwa]

I would like to ask the expert screeners in this forum few queries related to both these images.

2.) Is the un-edited version image not editable at all because of the poor light?

That is correct.

Also, in the future, please start your own thread for any editing advice questions.

[Sreenivas123]

Hi all,

Most of my previous 15 images were rejected due to 'Too Much or Too Little Contrast' as a reason.

One of the recent upload that was rejected for the very same reason is the shown below.

Now, I'm sharing the non-edited version of the same image below.

I would like to ask the expert screeners in this forum few queries related to both these images.

1.) Does the edited image requires more or less contrast?

2.) Is the un-edited version image not editable at all because of the poor light?

Request you all to kindly help on this so that it will help me improve my editing.

Awaiting a positive response.

Thanks and Best Regards,
Sreenivas Subramaniam

[777MAN]

If you get a too much or too little contrast rejection just re-upload 2 images one with more contrast and one with less contrast to give yourself a fighting chance

Ok I will respond ( against my better judgement). Read this - https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthr...milar-in-Queue

You do yourself no favours postings such remarks. The Crew give up personal time to screen images. So everyone who genuinely uploads their images within the guidelines have to contend with waiting whilst we reject your “ double” uploads. Quite ridiculous!
T

[paulc]

If you get a too much or too little contrast rejection just re-upload 2 images one with more contrast and one with less contrast to give yourself a fighting chance

[mahagonny]

I saw a lot of rejections due to contrast on cloudy days, is impossible to have blue skies always and overcast sky is part of the aviation too, I think that is a good idea be a little flexible on that cases.

I agree with the idea to find another rejection reason, because, when I see the contrast rejection the first thing that comes to my mind is Ok, I can fix it, but if the rejection is beyond of the contrast should be good idea add another rejection category, to avoid double upload.

Hi Diego. I can say my thoughts on this.
I believe that anyone is free to photograph an airplane in all weather conditions, but if you decide to upload them to share them here, I think it is right to stick to the community guidelines. I think this makes work more tidy and leaves no room for discussions on the quality of the shots.
Excuse my bad English.

[Gandalf]

Simply... when clouds are out stay at home or do not upload photos to JP. Personally i don't agree, but this is only my opinion.

[Brenden S]

I agree that there needs to be some guidance from the screeners on contrast as it is majority of rejections. I have not changed my processing ways however I appear to be getting more contrast rejections as time goes on.