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
    Looking for feedback on a long-shot with this photo. I want to know if it is lacking contrast and exposure as well as any other issues you might see. Thank you.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04649 VT-ALP 090520.jpg
Views:	18
Size:	398.2 KB
ID:	1099020
    Would be rejected for dark/contrast. Not fixable.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    Looking for feedback on a long-shot with this photo. I want to know if it is lacking contrast and exposure as well as any other issues you might see. Thank you.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC04649 VT-ALP 090520.jpg
Views:	18
Size:	398.2 KB
ID:	1099020

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Looking for feedback on these two photos. I want to make sure everything is in order with them before I upload them. Thanks in advance.

    1) Are there any issues with color, exposure or contrast? Reddish color is from sky due to wildfire smoke overhead

    Click image for larger version Name:	DSC09109 ZZ172 091520.jpg Views:	0 Size:	296.3 KB ID:	1098792

    2) With this photo at a low shutter rate, are there any issues with softness. Also would this be considered backlit?

    Click image for larger version Name:	DSC01251 N318NB 080520.jpg Views:	0 Size:	497.9 KB ID:	1098793

    If there are any other issues that I may have missed, I would appreciate it if you brought it to my attention. Thanks
    Contrast borderline (at best) for both.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    Looking for feedback on these two photos. I want to make sure everything is in order with them before I upload them. Thanks in advance.

    1) Are there any issues with color, exposure or contrast? Reddish color is from sky due to wildfire smoke overhead

    Click image for larger version  Name:	DSC09109 ZZ172 091520.jpg Views:	0 Size:	296.3 KB ID:	1098792

    2) With this photo at a low shutter rate, are there any issues with softness. Also would this be considered backlit?

    Click image for larger version  Name:	DSC01251 N318NB 080520.jpg Views:	0 Size:	497.9 KB ID:	1098793

    If there are any other issues that I may have missed, I would appreciate it if you brought it to my attention. Thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Would there be any objections in regards to contrast or exposure with this photo? Also are there any issues with any visible jpeg compression artifacts? Thank you

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC08638 N6829K 091320.jpg
Views:	48
Size:	358.4 KB
ID:	1098618
    Lacks shadows and midtones. Edges look a bit fuzzy, as if you used too much noise reduction.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Would there be any objections in regards to contrast or exposure with this photo? Also are there any issues with any visible jpeg compression artifacts? Thank you

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC08638 N6829K 091320.jpg
Views:	48
Size:	358.4 KB
ID:	1098618
    Contrast is a bit weak, but exposure should be ok. Compression shouldn't be an issue.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    Would there be any objections in regards to contrast or exposure with this photo? Also are there any issues with any visible jpeg compression artifacts? Thank you

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC08638 N6829K 091320.jpg
Views:	48
Size:	358.4 KB
ID:	1098618

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    I can understand the vignette and the exposure rejection, but what categories did I miss? I know for sure I checked military, but what other category did I miss? https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8406567
    This is a cargo aircraft.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    I can understand the vignette and the exposure rejection, but what categories did I miss? I know for sure I checked military, but what other category did I miss? https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8406567

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Seeking feedback on these three photos.

    1) contrast, exposure and if there are any sun glare issues on the tail?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07287 F-GZCD 090520.jpg
Views:	50
Size:	365.0 KB
ID:	1098374

    2) exposure and same as above if there are any issues with the sun glare on the tail

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC06689 XA-MIA 090520.jpg
Views:	47
Size:	369.6 KB
ID:	1098375

    3) any issues with contrast or exposure?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07727 N674NK 090520.jpg
Views:	47
Size:	390.2 KB
ID:	1098376

    Thank you in advance, please let me know if there are any issues I may have missed. Thanks
    First two would be ok for me, but last one is a bit dark, and has editing halos & vignetting.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    Seeking feedback on these three photos.

    1) contrast, exposure and if there are any sun glare issues on the tail?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07287 F-GZCD 090520.jpg
Views:	50
Size:	365.0 KB
ID:	1098374

    2) exposure and same as above if there are any issues with the sun glare on the tail

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC06689 XA-MIA 090520.jpg
Views:	47
Size:	369.6 KB
ID:	1098375

    3) any issues with contrast or exposure?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC07727 N674NK 090520.jpg
Views:	47
Size:	390.2 KB
ID:	1098376

    Thank you in advance, please let me know if there are any issues I may have missed. Thanks

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    Looking for feedback. I want to make sure this photo is sufficient with no visible compression artifacts, exposure is just right and to make sure the contrast is good too. If there are any other aspects of the photo that I may have missed, I would appreciate it being brought to my attention. Thank you

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC06091 N401SX 090520.jpg
Views:	57
Size:	404.2 KB
ID:	1098259
    Would be acceptable for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    Looking for feedback. I want to make sure this photo is sufficient with no visible compression artifacts, exposure is just right and to make sure the contrast is good too. If there are any other aspects of the photo that I may have missed, I would appreciate it being brought to my attention. Thank you

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC06091 N401SX 090520.jpg
Views:	57
Size:	404.2 KB
ID:	1098259

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bgkicks49 View Post
    For this edit, I based it off the angle of the base (squares and plaque) and those lines are slightly angled left so in retrospect, this would need CW rotation. The monument is on an incline as well as the road and the gas line rods that are sticking out of the ground. This one definitely tough to judge, but would you agree that based off the base that the plane sits on, it would now need CW rotation?
    Honestly, I think you've probably done the best you can, but I do see the potential of someone still thinking it's leaning right.

    Leave a comment:


  • bgkicks49
    replied
    For this edit, I based it off the angle of the base (squares and plaque) and those lines are slightly angled left so in retrospect, this would need CW rotation. The monument is on an incline as well as the road and the gas line rods that are sticking out of the ground. This one definitely tough to judge, but would you agree that based off the base that the plane sits on, it would now need CW rotation?

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X