Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Delta95Heavy - Prescreening/Rejection Help

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

  • trenchjp
    replied
    Originally posted by B7772ADL View Post

    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!

    Leave a comment:


  • B7772ADL
    replied
    Originally posted by trenchjp View Post


    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • B7772ADL
    replied
    Originally posted by Delta95Heavy View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • trenchjp
    replied
    Originally posted by Delta95Heavy View Post
    Already resized to what I hope is acceptable. Anything else you all think I can to do improve the odds of approval?

    Many thanks!


    Click image for larger version  Name:	IMG_5059.jpg Views:	20 Size:	555.2 KB ID:	1110473

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delta95Heavy
    replied
    Already resized to what I hope is acceptable. Anything else you all think I can to do improve the odds of approval?

    Many thanks!


    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_5059.jpg
Views:	402
Size:	555.2 KB
ID:	1110473

    Leave a comment:


  • eastex.aviation
    replied
    ISO 400 is unnecessary in the full light of the day. The high ISO is making the photo soft. Try ISO 100-160 (camera dependent) (sometimes it's "ISO-Lo" or something like that) and compensate with bringing the shutter speed down a bit. Shutter 1250 or 1600 is normally all you need. The high ISO might have made the photo impossible to sharpen to the point that is acceptable for JP, simply because the subject doesn't fill the whole frame.

    Practice makes perfect, my friend!

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Delta95Heavy View Post
    Now that I have a decent DSLR camera, going to have a go at editing. Other than cropping (obviously), what steps should I take to edit this for later upload? Another question I have is why did this and other photos I shot this afternoon come off the camera looking a little on the dull side? I noticed this on all of the RAW and JPG images. This particular photo was shot f/8 1/2500 sec. ISO400 210mm focal length. Thanks for any and all tips, advice, etc....

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0235-preedit.jpg
Views:	389
Size:	418.1 KB
ID:	1077673
    Contrast and color indeed need adjusting. Beyond that, you'd need to actually crop it properly before I could comment on other quality issues.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delta95Heavy
    replied
    Now that I have a decent DSLR camera, going to have a go at editing. Other than cropping (obviously), what steps should I take to edit this for later upload? Another question I have is why did this and other photos I shot this afternoon come off the camera looking a little on the dull side? I noticed this on all of the RAW and JPG images. This particular photo was shot f/8 1/2500 sec. ISO400 210mm focal length. Thanks for any and all tips, advice, etc....

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0235-preedit.jpg
Views:	389
Size:	418.1 KB
ID:	1077673

    Leave a comment:


  • NZDN_spotting
    replied
    Originally posted by Delta95Heavy View Post
    So DSLR's have a larger sensor than the one in my camera then. Guess that is going to steer me ever closer to finding a decent DSLR. Thanks for the input.
    Yep, much larger. This allows for a lot more detail. Lenses are just as important in a DSLR, if not more important. Good glass is good on any DSLR body, bad glass can't be made good by a top notch DSLR body.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delta95Heavy
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    The horizon is not level. Neither the vertical (more important) nor the horizontal references are straight. The aircraft is too low, and too much to the right in the frame. The gear and part of the engines are obstructed. The compression is unfortunately due to the sensor on your camera; super-zoom bridge cameras have to make sacrifices to fit such capability in such a small form factor, and one of those sacrifices is using a much smaller sensor than say a dSLR. The horizon/centering issues are easily fixable, but the obstruction, and potentially the compression issues are not.
    So DSLR's have a larger sensor than the one in my camera then. Guess that is going to steer me ever closer to finding a decent DSLR. Thanks for the input.

    Leave a comment:


  • NZDN_spotting
    replied
    Originally posted by Delta95Heavy View Post
    Again, thanks! Will check out those Canon's.
    If you have the budget, used 750Ds are fantastic. I use one alongside my main body, an 800D.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Delta95Heavy View Post
    Yes, I did read on that forum. I guess I need to understand more about the Korean Air rejection. It's a brand new livery not in the database yet. Anyways:

    Horizon Unlevel - The horizon is level. This particular taxiway at KATL slopes down on the approach end to 26L where is departed, hence the slight angle of the aircraft.
    Bad Composition (framing/centering) - Looking at the photo, I suppose it's slight not centered, considering the gap between the nose of the 748i and the edge of the photo could be cropped a little.
    Obtruding Objects/Foreground Clutter - Mainly this is spotting location. Most all ground shots here are going to that wall view unless it's a smaller aircraft CRJ, 737, Embraer.... You can zoom in tighter on those and lose the wall. Can't do anything about the bushes. I don't think they ever mowed that stretch of the taxiway in all my years spotting at ATL.
    JPEG Compression Artefacts - Point me to a good program to shrink to valid upload size without lose of data???

    Thanks!
    The horizon is not level. Neither the vertical (more important) nor the horizontal references are straight. The aircraft is too low, and too much to the right in the frame. The gear and part of the engines are obstructed. The compression is unfortunately due to the sensor on your camera; super-zoom bridge cameras have to make sacrifices to fit such capability in such a small form factor, and one of those sacrifices is using a much smaller sensor than say a dSLR. The horizon/centering issues are easily fixable, but the obstruction, and potentially the compression issues are not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delta95Heavy
    replied
    Originally posted by NZDN_spotting View Post
    Ah okay. Have a look at getting a used Canon 550D/600D/650D/1200D/60D from Ebay or similar, they sell dirt cheap. Paired with a Canon 18-55 and a Canon 55-250, it's a damn good setup for cheap. Feel free to message me with any questions.

    Spot wise, that one will be unsuitable for Jetphotos.
    Again, thanks! Will check out those Canon's.

    Leave a comment:


  • NZDN_spotting
    replied
    Ah okay. Have a look at getting a used Canon 550D/600D/650D/1200D/60D from Ebay or similar, they sell dirt cheap. Paired with a Canon 18-55 and a Canon 55-250, it's a damn good setup for cheap. Feel free to message me with any questions.

    Spot wise, that one will be unsuitable for Jetphotos.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delta95Heavy
    replied
    Originally posted by NZDN_spotting View Post
    I'll give you a hand here. The way that screeners often judge whether horizon is level is to look at buildings or towers in the background. You can see that the buildings below the tail lean to the right.
    Composition, yes it's the gap at the nose.
    Foreground clutter - the ground and bushes obstruct the landing gear and engines.
    I don't see compression artefacts there. However, you will lose sharpness if you shrink it in anything other than Lightroom or Photoshop.

    However, if I was screening it I would have also rejected it for Undersharpened/soft and heat haze. You can see there's a lack of sharpness, particularly around the tail. I'm willing to bet this was shot with a lot of zoom on a hot day. This will cause the heat haze to wobble the image, and make it considerably less sharp. Anything less than perfectly sharp is unlikely to get on Jetphotos. However, if a photo is less sharp, shrinking it to a smaller resolution can (not always) lead to a sharper looking image. Sometimes, a higher resolution image can be sharper. See https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9493746 for a high resolution example (1920px, only available to upload at that size after 50 uploads) and https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9371180 for a minimum resolution image (1024px).
    Awesome! Thanks for the clarify. Photo was shot with no zoom and it was 75 degrees F here in Atlanta. Gotcha on nose gap. As far as the obstructions, it's this particular spotting locale. They haven't mowed those bushes down in forever. Not sure I can convince the grounds crew to do anything, LOL. If our parking deck was higher, that would solve the problem.

    I guess I am also a slave to the camera I am using. I have a Sony DSC HX300 since a DSLR is going to be financially out of my reach. So I don't have RAW images I can edit. Have to make do with what I can edit in a jpg right off the camera.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X