Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pre-screening Help

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

  • Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Here are the fixes for the previous photos that I had posted in 2 of my previous posts. Your insights on these changes will be greatly appreciated.Thank you.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01789-3 HP1841CMP 011020.jpg
Views:	64
Size:	383.2 KB
ID:	1079481Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC02194-3 CGHRJ 071719.jpg
Views:	55
Size:	1,013.2 KB
ID:	1079482Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC06796-4 N871UA 120719.jpg
Views:	54
Size:	596.1 KB
ID:	1079483Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC06962-2 N763CK 121919.jpg
Views:	52
Size:	519.4 KB
ID:	1079484Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07302-3 N768SK 121919.jpg
Views:	52
Size:	526.4 KB
ID:	1079485
    1. oversharpened
    2. oversharpened, overexposed, noisy, contrast
    3. oversharpened, contrast
    4-5 oversharpened

    Comment


    • The ones without contrast issues, I have corrected the sharpening. Please let me know if these photos are sufficient.Thank you for your assistance.

      Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01789-4 HP1841CMP 011020.jpg
Views:	60
Size:	373.4 KB
ID:	1079563Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC06962-3 N763CK 121919.jpg
Views:	51
Size:	488.6 KB
ID:	1079564Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07302-4 N768SK 121919.jpg
Views:	48
Size:	490.9 KB
ID:	1079565

      Comment


      • Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
        The ones without contrast issues, I have corrected the sharpening. Please let me know if these photos are sufficient.Thank you for your assistance.

        Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01789-4 HP1841CMP 011020.jpg
Views:	60
Size:	373.4 KB
ID:	1079563Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC06962-3 N763CK 121919.jpg
Views:	51
Size:	488.6 KB
ID:	1079564Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07302-4 N768SK 121919.jpg
Views:	48
Size:	490.9 KB
ID:	1079565
        1. borderline contrast
        2-3 ok for me

        Comment


        • These aircrafts are already in the database

          The helicopter no longer has the DHL decal on it https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8197322

          Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01835 N226NR 011220.jpg
Views:	55
Size:	766.5 KB
ID:	1079756

          The gulfstream no longer has the Caesars Palace emblem on the tail https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9261280

          Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC02536-2 N168CE 011320.jpg
Views:	44
Size:	698.4 KB
ID:	1079757

          Would these photos be considered hot or not?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
            These aircrafts are already in the database

            The helicopter no longer has the DHL decal on it https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8197322

            Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC01835 N226NR 011220.jpg
Views:	55
Size:	766.5 KB
ID:	1079756

            The gulfstream no longer has the Caesars Palace emblem on the tail https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9261280

            Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC02536-2 N168CE 011320.jpg
Views:	44
Size:	698.4 KB
ID:	1079757

            Would these photos be considered hot or not?
            Yes, both would qualify for hot screening.

            Comment


            • Attempted to see if I could rectify the issues for this photo. This was pre-screened and it was determined that this had these issues: overprocessed, compression, borderline soft

              With this new edit, are these problems fixed? Thank you in advance

              Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC02108 N2946S 011220.jpg
Views:	55
Size:	371.7 KB
ID:	1079778

              Comment


              • Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
                Attempted to see if I could rectify the issues for this photo. This was pre-screened and it was determined that this had these issues: overprocessed, compression, borderline soft

                With this new edit, are these problems fixed? Thank you in advance

                Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC02108 N2946S 011220.jpg
Views:	55
Size:	371.7 KB
ID:	1079778
                I would reject it for contrast and compression. Compression either from a heavy crop, or poor editing.

                Comment


                • Would contrast be an issue with this photo?

                  Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03379 N313XA 020120.jpg
Views:	47
Size:	454.3 KB
ID:	1079911

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
                    Would contrast be an issue with this photo?

                    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03379 N313XA 020120.jpg
Views:	47
Size:	454.3 KB
ID:	1079911
                    Yes it would.

                    Comment


                    • Could you provide some feedback on these photos? These are potential hot photos for paint scheme and first registration and would like your feedback. Thank you in advance.

                      Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03970 N43SF 020220.jpg
Views:	36
Size:	534.2 KB
ID:	1079958Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03898 N37404 020220.jpg
Views:	27
Size:	522.4 KB
ID:	1079959Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04329 N179FE 020220.jpg
Views:	28
Size:	434.4 KB
ID:	1079960

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
                        Could you provide some feedback on these photos? These are potential hot photos for paint scheme and first registration and would like your feedback. Thank you in advance.

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03970 N43SF 020220.jpg
Views:	36
Size:	534.2 KB
ID:	1079958Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03898 N37404 020220.jpg
Views:	27
Size:	522.4 KB
ID:	1079959Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04329 N179FE 020220.jpg
Views:	28
Size:	434.4 KB
ID:	1079960
                        1. borderline vignetting/overprocessed
                        2. soft, overprocessed
                        3. soft(tail), borderline contrast

                        Comment


                        • Are these re-edits any better than their previous versions? Thank you again for your help

                          Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03898-2 N37404 020220.jpg
Views:	31
Size:	469.9 KB
ID:	1079988Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03970-2 N43SF 020220.jpg
Views:	25
Size:	432.0 KB
ID:	1079989Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04329-2 N179FE 020220.jpg
Views:	24
Size:	447.6 KB
ID:	1079990

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
                            Are these re-edits any better than their previous versions? Thank you again for your help

                            Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03898-2 N37404 020220.jpg
Views:	31
Size:	469.9 KB
ID:	1079988Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03970-2 N43SF 020220.jpg
Views:	25
Size:	432.0 KB
ID:	1079989Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04329-2 N179FE 020220.jpg
Views:	24
Size:	447.6 KB
ID:	1079990
                            1. soft, contrast, compression, overprocessed
                            2. overprocessed, compression
                            3. borderline contrast/oversharpened noise

                            I think only the second one has the quality to make further attempts worth the effort.

                            Comment


                            • Appreciate the assistance on the previous photos. Here is a redo of #2 and #3. Made #2 4x3 to see if that would help with the compression issue and toned down the sliders on the photo to see if that could account for the over processed bits.

                              Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03970-3 N43SF 020220.jpg
Views:	29
Size:	655.7 KB
ID:	1080008

                              I wanted to see if I could salvage #3 as this would be a potential first reg and would appreciate your input to see if I could fix the contrast issues as well as the oversharpened issue. Thank you

                              Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04329-3 N179FE 020220.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	450.6 KB
ID:	1080009

                              Again,

                              Thank you for your assistance!

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
                                Appreciate the assistance on the previous photos. Here is a redo of #2 and #3. Made #2 4x3 to see if that would help with the compression issue and toned down the sliders on the photo to see if that could account for the over processed bits.

                                Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC03970-3 N43SF 020220.jpg
Views:	29
Size:	655.7 KB
ID:	1080008
                                Halos still there, though much less than before. Soft, and borderline overexposed however.

                                Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
                                I wanted to see if I could salvage #3 as this would be a potential first reg and would appreciate your input to see if I could fix the contrast issues as well as the oversharpened issue. Thank you

                                Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04329-3 N179FE 020220.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	450.6 KB
ID:	1080009
                                Still almost certainly a contrast rejection, and possibly compression, though that could just be some sharpening artifacts I'm seeing.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X