ThatOneFish- Prescreening/Editing Advice

[ThatOneFish]

anywhere close to being borderline for too little contrast? Thanks.

[dlowwa]

Hello, i believe I have 2 new registrations, would they be considered "hot?" Is the quality good enough to be accepted?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26459[/ATTACH]
Worried about obstruction/contrast on this one

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26460[/ATTACH]
same worries.

No obstruction on the first, but indeed contrast is quite poor. That is the only one that might be worth working on. Second is indeed obstructed.

May I also get a prescreen on these? Thanks

Are any of them worth continuing to edit due to poor contrast

Probably not.

[ThatOneFish]

Hello, i believe I have 2 new registrations, would they be considered "hot?" Is the quality good enough to be accepted?


Worried about obstruction/contrast on this one


same worries.

May I also get a prescreen on these? Thanks

Worried about contrast on all of them.






Are any of them worth continuing to edit due to poor contrast

[dlowwa]

Does this mean ok for you?Thanks.

Sorry, yeah, should have read '1-2 ok for me'

[ThatOneFish]

1-2

Does this mean ok for you?Thanks.

[ThatOneFish]

Thank you. Location isn’t the same so I will find some editable shots from that flight.

[dlowwa]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26361[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26362[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26363[/ATTACH]

any better? thanks.

also would these be acceptable?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26383[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26384[/ATTACH]

1-2
3. borderline overexposed
4. borderline contrast
5. contrast

also dlowwa, if I have wing pictures from the same registration and almost the exact same crop (taken from the same seat on different days) but with different scenery, would one of them be rejected as similar?

Possibly, much more likely if the location is the same.

[ThatOneFish]

also dlowwa, if I have wing pictures from the same registration and almost the exact same crop (taken from the same seat on different days) but with different scenery, would one of them be rejected as similar?

[ThatOneFish]

any better? thanks.

also would these be acceptable?

[ThatOneFish]

Thank you. Will try to fix as much as possible

[dlowwa]

Hello, may i get a prescreen? Thanks.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]26320[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26321[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26322[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]26323[/ATTACH]

1. soft, borderline contrast
2. overexposed
3. soft
4. overexposed, borderline soft

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7412539

also, this was rejected for underexposed, do you think it’s worth an appeal? Thanks.

Borderline. As I said, I think the issue is more with the contrast than the exposure itself, though it doesn't help that most of the aircraft is relatively dark.

[Michael Rodeback]

There is a large section of the histogram very close to touching the left edge of the histogram, indicating that there are a lot of very dark shadows. Not quite solid blacks, but very dark. This might be the cause of the rejection, I'm not sure. But bringing the shadows up in Lightroom or another program should do the trick. Dlowwa did say that this same photo was acceptable for him, so it may be worth an appeal. I would make the small adjustment in post processing if you can.

[ThatOneFish]

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7412539

also, this was rejected for underexposed, do you think it’s worth an appeal? Thanks.

[ThatOneFish]

Hello, may i get a prescreen? Thanks.

[dlowwa]

I had to re edit china airlines because i forgot to save the psd. Did I correctly fix the horizons?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]26067[/ATTACH]

I tried to fix the darkness/contrast issue on the wing view, do you think its not worth trying to continue to fix?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]26068[/ATTACH]

1. ok for me
2. very borderline contrast