Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pre-screening Help

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

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Would there be any issues with exposure and contrast with these two photos? If there are any other issues that you may see, please let me know. Thank you

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07754 N918FX 070920.jpg
Views:	165
Size:	527.2 KB
ID:	1094155Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07579 N604KW 070920.jpg
Views:	148
Size:	549.7 KB
ID:	1094156
    Contrast maybe on the second. Color for both. Borderline oversharpened/compression on both as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    Would there be any issues with exposure and contrast with these two photos? If there are any other issues that you may see, please let me know. Thank you

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07754 N918FX 070920.jpg
Views:	165
Size:	527.2 KB
ID:	1094155Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07579 N604KW 070920.jpg
Views:	148
Size:	549.7 KB
ID:	1094156

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Would this be in the same boat as the rejection we talked about with the glare on the rear panel by the wing?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04219 N8540V 020220.jpg
Views:	172
Size:	423.0 KB
ID:	1093925
    I don't find this one nearly as distracting, so I would be surprised if it caused a rejection.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    Would this be in the same boat as the rejection we talked about with the glare on the rear panel by the wing?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04219 N8540V 020220.jpg
Views:	172
Size:	423.0 KB
ID:	1093925

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Looking for feedback on this photo. I want to know if contrast, exposure, and sharpness are sufficient. If any other issues are visible please let me know. Thank you

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC06305 N758SS 021020.jpg
Views:	149
Size:	407.8 KB
ID:	1093882
    Borderline for vignetting/contrast, though acceptable for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    Looking for feedback on this photo. I want to know if contrast, exposure, and sharpness are sufficient. If any other issues are visible please let me know. Thank you

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC06305 N758SS 021020.jpg
Views:	149
Size:	407.8 KB
ID:	1093882

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Got it. Additional clarification had cleared things up. I must've wizzed thru guidelines. Apologies. With that being said, what what you suggest be the best way to counteract this type of glare on the aircraft?
    Shoot when the aircraft is not at such an angle to the sun as to cause such glare.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    Got it. Additional clarification had cleared things up. I must've wizzed thru guidelines. Apologies. With that being said, what what you suggest be the best way to counteract this type of glare on the aircraft?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    I do believe the guidelines explicitly have it as the glare/dirt section, but focus on a glare through a window. It does not build on why a photo may be rejected of just the glare of the sun directly on the aircraft versus through a window. Thank you for your clarification, although I am still unclear why this rejection is under 'window glare/dirt' when it should be more elaborate under a specific glare category.
    Ok.. let's try this again:

    4.4 Glare/Dirt

    Glare from the sun and reflections on windows are the main culprits here...

    Glare from the sun (off of the surface of the aircraft) and reflections on windows (including glare from the sun) are two different things. The former may cause a rejection because it is distracting, and quite frankly, kind of ugly, not to mention avoidable - the same as with reflections/glare on images taken through a window. In the same way, we may reject an image taken at night if there is lens flare visible due to light entering the lens from a certain angle even if the photo was taken outside with no window in the frame.

    Hopefully you can understand now that this rejection reason doesn't apply only to images taken through a window.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    I do believe the guidelines explicitly have it as the glare/dirt section, but focus on a glare through a window. It does not build on why a photo may be rejected of just the glare of the sun directly on the aircraft versus through a window. Thank you for your clarification, although I am still unclear why this rejection is under 'window glare/dirt' when it should be more elaborate under a specific glare category.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    What I don't understand is how it can be designated as a window glare/dirt if I am standing outside and there is no dirt visible in the photo? If there is harsh light, wouldn't that be more of a contrast or exposure rejection?
    Maybe the guidelines aren't clear enough, but it does say "Glare from the sun and reflections on windows are the main culprits here.."

    Clearly your example is of the former rather than the latter, so being outside has no bearing on this decision.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    What I don't understand is how it can be designated as a window glare/dirt if I am standing outside and there is no dirt visible in the photo? If there is harsh light, wouldn't that be more of a contrast or exposure rejection?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8247178

    Before I appeal the photo I wanted to reach out and understand what was the issue with this photo. I measured the fuselage in the photo and I didn't not get an unequal amount for 'bad composition' and as for the window glare/dirt. There were two C-130s that took off before this aircraft which may account for the added stuff underneath the aircraft.

    Please let me know your thoughts before I submit an official appeal. Thank you.
    Centering is fine. I will talk to the screener involved, since he is still in training. The glare rejection is for the harsh reflections off the nose and winglet and is within reason.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    Before I appeal the photo I wanted to reach out and understand what was the issue with this photo. I measured the fuselage in the photo and I didn't not get an unequal amount for 'bad composition' and as for the window glare/dirt. There were two C-130s that took off before this aircraft which may account for the added stuff underneath the aircraft.

    Please let me know your thoughts before I submit an official appeal. Thank you.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Would these re-edits be more sufficient? I decreased the amount of shadows while attempting to not hinder the contrast on each aircraft. Please let me know if these fixed the issues from above. Thank you.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01318-2 N531JL 092919.jpg
Views:	152
Size:	736.6 KB
ID:	1093542Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01464-2 EILBT 092919.jpg
Views:	132
Size:	845.3 KB
ID:	1093543
    With the light as it was in both images, don't think you will be able to get better than borderline now matter much more editing you do.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X