Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pre-screening Advice

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by DominicHall View Post

    That’s fair enough, it is quite prominent in the frame. Apart from that is the framing/motive acceptable? If so I’ll persevere and get a clean shot when conditions permit.
    It's a subjective thing, so can't say definitively, but the potential for an acceptable image is there I think.

    Leave a comment:


  • DominicHall
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Would be a motive rejection for me. The fire truck is too distracting/poorly frame, imho.
    That’s fair enough, it is quite prominent in the frame. Apart from that is the framing/motive acceptable? If so I’ll persevere and get a clean shot when conditions permit.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by DominicHall View Post
    Good Evening,

    I'm having another bash at an airport overview, hoping this one will be deemed acceptable. I've decided to focus on the tower and the western extension of the terminal building. Hopefully the fire tender will not be deemed detrimental to the image, sun only appeared briefly today and it just so happened that a runway inspection was taking place.
    Would be a motive rejection for me. The fire truck is too distracting/poorly frame, imho.

    Leave a comment:


  • DominicHall
    replied
    Good Evening,

    I'm having another bash at an airport overview, hoping this one will be deemed acceptable. I've decided to focus on the tower and the western extension of the terminal building. Hopefully the fire tender will not be deemed detrimental to the image, sun only appeared briefly today and it just so happened that a runway inspection was taking place.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_8048.jpg
Views:	22
Size:	1.04 MB
ID:	1076173

    As always, your thoughts are much appreciated.

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by DominicHall View Post

    Thanks for the reply, I’ll have a play with #2 and see if I can sort the exposure.

    Am i correct in thinking night shot would apply to #1 or not?
    Correct! #1 needs Night Shot category.

    Leave a comment:


  • DominicHall
    replied
    Originally posted by LX-A343 View Post

    I like #1 and #3 and would accept them. #2 is borderline overexposed.
    Thanks for the reply, I’ll have a play with #2 and see if I can sort the exposure.

    Am i correct in thinking night shot would apply to #1 or not?

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by DominicHall View Post
    Hi all,

    I'd be grateful if the following could be pre-screened

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6418.jpg
Views:	25
Size:	734.4 KB
ID:	1076115 Because of the lighting, I'm just generally unsure if this one is acceptable. If it is, am I correct in thinking night shot would apply to this one?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6765.jpg
Views:	22
Size:	910.4 KB
ID:	1076116 Possibly too soft at the nose.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6994.jpg
Views:	27
Size:	961.6 KB
ID:	1076117 Exposure

    Of course, please point out if there are issues apart from the ones I am concerned about which I have missed.

    Thanks
    I like #1 and #3 and would accept them. #2 is borderline overexposed.

    Leave a comment:


  • DominicHall
    replied
    Hi all,

    I'd be grateful if the following could be pre-screened

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6418.jpg
Views:	25
Size:	734.4 KB
ID:	1076115 Because of the lighting, I'm just generally unsure if this one is acceptable. If it is, am I correct in thinking night shot would apply to this one?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6765.jpg
Views:	22
Size:	910.4 KB
ID:	1076116 Possibly too soft at the nose.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6994.jpg
Views:	27
Size:	961.6 KB
ID:	1076117 Exposure

    Of course, please point out if there are issues apart from the ones I am concerned about which I have missed.

    Thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • DominicHall
    replied
    Originally posted by Julian S. View Post


    Hi!

    The close up is indeed too soft, also i would crop tighter too the wing. The 2nd Image would be acceptable for me - the glare isnīt an issue.

    Regards.
    Thanks,

    Still working on the tight crops, trying to figure out what is acceptable and what isn't. I'll have another go when the weather improves in these parts.

    Leave a comment:


  • Julian S.
    replied
    Originally posted by DominicHall View Post
    Good Evening,

    Would you be so kind as to pre screen the following

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6024.jpg
Views:	28
Size:	858.1 KB
ID:	1075623

    not sure about the crop on this one as well as it possibly being too soft.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6032.jpg
Views:	28
Size:	1.11 MB
ID:	1075624

    Unsure about this one maybe being too soft and also it the glare would cause a rejection.

    Thanks as always



    Hi!

    The close up is indeed too soft, also i would crop tighter too the wing. The 2nd Image would be acceptable for me - the glare isnīt an issue.

    Regards.

    Leave a comment:


  • DominicHall
    replied
    Good Evening,

    Would you be so kind as to pre screen the following

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6024.jpg
Views:	28
Size:	858.1 KB
ID:	1075623

    not sure about the crop on this one as well as it possibly being too soft.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6032.jpg
Views:	28
Size:	1.11 MB
ID:	1075624

    Unsure about this one maybe being too soft and also it the glare would cause a rejection.

    Thanks as always



    Leave a comment:


  • DominicHall
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Generally same side, same phase of flight (in the air/on the ground) will be considered similar, so you could theoretically get 4 images of the same aircraft/location (2x air r/l side, 2x ground r/l side).
    Great thanks for letting me know, means I don't have to bother you for prescreening for similars.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by DominicHall View Post
    Good Evening,

    I have a question with regard to similar images (saves me asking every time I have one I think may be similar).
    Where do you call the line on this? My local airport is a single runway 09/27 so I'm assuming that any activity on one of these will be considered similar, but how about a take off from 27 and a landing on 09? (taken from the same spotting point) Are these different enough or is the fact that the airframe/airport combination is the same enough to render it similar?

    Many Thanks

    Dominic
    Generally same side, same phase of flight (in the air/on the ground) will be considered similar, so you could theoretically get 4 images of the same aircraft/location (2x air r/l side, 2x ground r/l side).

    Leave a comment:


  • DominicHall
    replied
    Good Evening,

    I have a question with regard to similar images (saves me asking every time I have one I think may be similar).
    Where do you call the line on this? My local airport is a single runway 09/27 so I'm assuming that any activity on one of these will be considered similar, but how about a take off from 27 and a landing on 09? (taken from the same spotting point) Are these different enough or is the fact that the airframe/airport combination is the same enough to render it similar?

    Many Thanks

    Dominic

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by DominicHall View Post

    Thanks, I hope it is to do with the new format, as heavy compression isn't normally something I suffer from. I've attatched an image again image but left it at its natural upload size just to see if that makes a difference on the compression side for future reference.
    Through other research, I have found out that it is due to the new forum settings. We're working on that, and hope to have it fixed in the next few days.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X