RobertLN - prescreening request

[RobertLN]

Thank you for the feedback so far! I learned a lot. I took some new ones. How are these?

[dlowwa]

Thank you for the feedback so far! I learned a lot. I took some new ones. How are these? [ATTACH=CONFIG]24398[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]24399[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]24400[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]24401[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]24402[/ATTACH]

Slight red cast on 1-3 & 5; 4 has editing halos visible.

[RobertLN]

Thanks a ton! I have learned so much and I have finally somewhat of a success here on this site. I got 4 more for prescreen ( specially in regards to contrast). Thanks

[dlowwa]

Thanks a ton! I have learned so much and I have finally somewhat of a success here on this site. I got 4 more for prescreen ( specially in regards to contrast). Thanks [ATTACH=CONFIG]24623[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]24624[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]24625[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]24626[/ATTACH]

1. contrast
2-3 ok
4. borderline dark

[RobertLN]

Yesterday I got a rejection which I still dont understand. Appeal got rejected. 'Needs clockwise rotation, everything is leaning to the left'. Thoughts about this? I disagree that everything is leaning to the left. I see much worse on the DB and I know thats not a valid argument here. I still find it frustrating. No chance for a late approval? Thanks for your time
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7316363

[dlowwa]

Yesterday I got a rejection which I still dont understand. Appeal got rejected. 'Needs clockwise rotation, everything is leaning to the left'. Thoughts about this? I disagree that everything is leaning to the left. I see much worse on the DB and I know thats not a valid argument here. I still find it frustrating. No chance for a late approval? Thanks for your time
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7316363

I will be the fourth senior screener to look at this (two original screeners, plus one who handled the appeal) and I also agree there is a slight lean to the left with the background verticals. A small amount of CW rotation should fix this.

[RobertLN]

Ok thanks for your time. I used the chimneys as vertical reference and using your horizon checker I can see that they are almost perfectly parallel to the yellow grid lines. The image horizon must be therefore perpendicular to them and so parallel to the real horizon. I want to know if my approach is not correct and if I am doing something systematically wrong. Thanks again, much appreciated.

[dlowwa]

Ok thanks for your time. I used the chimneys as vertical reference and using your horizon checker I can see that they are almost perfectly parallel to the yellow grid lines. The image horizon must be therefore perpendicular to them and so parallel to the real horizon. I want to know if my approach is not correct and if I am doing something systematically wrong. Thanks again, much appreciated. [ATTACH=CONFIG]24718[/ATTACH]

Better to use the buildings themselves, but honestly, the horizon check function is not that reliable for very short vertical references like that because the way pixel extrapolation works at such a low resolution will make almost anything look straight.

[RobertLN]

I added 0.2 CW Rotation in Lightroom. Would that be okay now? Thanks

[dlowwa]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]24722[/ATTACH] I added 0.2 CW Rotation in Lightroom. Would that be okay now? Thanks

Levelling would be ok for me.

[RobertLN]

Hey there, I took some sunrise shots, would these be considered backlit? Any other issues with the images? Thanks a lot for your time

[dlowwa]

Hey there, I took some sunrise shots, would these be considered backlit? Any other issues with the images? Thanks a lot for your time [ATTACH=CONFIG]25022[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]25023[/ATTACH]

Yes, those are both backlit.

[RobertLN]

Thanks so this photo too would have zero chance of acceptance?

[dlowwa]

Thanks so this photo too would have zero chance of acceptance? [ATTACH=CONFIG]25054[/ATTACH]

Correct.

[RobertLN]

Alright, thanks for the confirmation! I am very thankful for your advice and work in the forum.