Delta95Heavy - Prescreening/Rejection Help

[trenchjp]

Already resized to what I hope is acceptable. Anything else you all think I can to do improve the odds of approval?

Many thanks!

I'm not a screener but it is a bit dark for my taste, but that's just a subjective opinion. Now objectively speaking, the aircraft is poorly centered and the horizon is unlevel, check for dust also shows a lot of compression in the sky.

[B7772ADL]

Already resized to what I hope is acceptable. Anything else you all think I can to do improve the odds of approval?

Many thanks!

Needs clockwise rotation to bring the horizon level. Aircraft is too low in the frame and I would crop a bit closer to the nose. A little dark over-all (whilst the aircraft itself seems to be exposed ok, the background is darker). Remember to select special scheme on the upload page.

[B7772ADL]

check for dust also shows a lot of compression in the sky.

If you are talking about the JP check for dust, it compresses the image on display so it's not a true indication of the actual compression, so be careful when looking at it.

[trenchjp]

If you are talking about the JP check for dust, it compresses the image on display so it's not a true indication of the actual compression, so be careful when looking at it.

Got it. Thanks for the information!

[Delta95Heavy]

Hey everyone, thoughts on these two shots before I attempt to upload them to the queue? Many thanks as always!

[dlowwa]

Hey everyone, thoughts on these two shots before I attempt to upload them to the queue? Many thanks as always!

1. borderline soft/heat hazed
2. borderline soft

[Delta95Heavy]

Prescreen request on this please. Not in the JP database as of yet.

[dlowwa]

Prescreen request on this please. Not in the JP database as of yet.

Soft spots, especially the tail.

[Delta95Heavy]

Soft spots, especially the tail.

Gotcha. This re-edit has been sharpened as much as LRc will let me. Do you think reducing the size down to 1028 on the long edge would do it some justice as well? Cheers!

[dlowwa]

Gotcha. This re-edit has been sharpened as much as LRc will let me. Do you think reducing the size down to 1028 on the long edge would do it some justice as well?

Still borderline, but ok for me. Lower resolution always hides flaws better.

[Delta95Heavy]

Lower resolution always hides flaws better.

Kinda of learning that's the case sometimes. I hate to have to reduce the resolution/size just to get a really nice photo accepted. Have to wait to get some queue spots back though to try again. Not a fan of only having 5 but I'll live with it I guess.

[Delta95Heavy]

Ok, I am a little mystified and need to vent a bit. So this got rejected for a third time for being "soft". I reduced this down to 1028 on the long side and the sharpening has been as maxed as I can get it, yet it got rejected again. I appreciate all the advice I have gotten, especially dlowwa who has been most patient with me.

I also understand from talking to a lot of other people who submitted photos to JP that most of the screeners are "subjective" in their screening processes. Isn't that the wrong way to go about screening? I thought when presented with something to review, you're supposed to be "objective" and not let your personal taste, feelings and opinions come into play. I have browsed through lots of photos here and really question how some made it through screening and published. Had I been a screener and been objective, I would have rejected them.

I am not saying that this is unfair, but as a relatively new uploader (8 photos accepted) it is a little disheartening to go through all this effort to get one photo rejected 3 times (and lost 3 queue slots in the process) after being told on the forums what was wrong and I try to correct. I think for first registrations, there needs to be a little more leniency for something minor. I get it if something is way out of focus, backlit, etc..., even I know a lousy photo when I see one but quite personally, I don't even see on the tail where it is soft on my photo.

Anyways, that's all I have to say. Not really trying to stir things up and I apologize in advance if that seems to be the case! Cheers!

[dlowwa]

Ok, I am a little mystified and need to vent a bit. So this got rejected for a third time for being "soft". I reduced this down to 1028 on the long side and the sharpening has been as maxed as I can get it, yet it got rejected again. I appreciate all the advice I have gotten, especially dlowwa who has been most patient with me.

I also understand from talking to a lot of other people who submitted photos to JP that most of the screeners are "subjective" in their screening processes. Isn't that the wrong way to go about screening? I thought when presented with something to review, you're supposed to be "objective" and not let your personal taste, feelings and opinions come into play. I have browsed through lots of photos here and really question how some made it through screening and published. Had I been a screener and been objective, I would have rejected them.

I am not saying that this is unfair, but as a relatively new uploader (8 photos accepted) it is a little disheartening to go through all this effort to get one photo rejected 3 times (and lost 3 queue slots in the process) after being told on the forums what was wrong and I try to correct. I think for first registrations, there needs to be a little more leniency for something minor. I get it if something is way out of focus, backlit, etc..., even I know a lousy photo when I see one but quite personally, I don't even see on the tail where it is soft on my photo.

As I mentioned, the tail is soft, and as I also mentioned its chances were borderline for being accepted due to that softness, so not sure why you are 'mystified' exactly.

[Delta95Heavy]

Thoughts on these two before I try to queue them up?

[dlowwa]

Thoughts on these two before I try to queue them up?

1. borderline heat haze
2. dark/contrast