Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 250

Thread: YanS - Editing Advice

  1. #201
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    A feedback on these four would be great .

    1.Attachment 20758
    2.Attachment 20759
    3.Attachment 20760
    4.Attachment 20761

    I'm not sure about colour and horizon on them. They look a bit unlevelled but the verticals seem ok (to me)

    As always, thanks for your answers,
    All the best,
    Yannick
    Color shouldn't be an issue, and horizon can't really see anything wrong, but the last three are relatively poorly lit, especially #2 & 4.

  2. #202
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Hi everyone,

    Thanks dlowwa, for your answer. I gave #1 and a (hopefully) improved version of #2 a chance.

    I also have some new photos for pre-screening:

    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_8038v2.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	994.3 KB 
ID:	20777
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_8279v2.jpg 
Views:	23 
Size:	915.2 KB 
ID:	20778
    3.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_8542v2.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	1.02 MB 
ID:	20779
    4.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9355v2.jpg 
Views:	24 
Size:	1.04 MB 
ID:	20780 ( 'special scheme'-categroy, right?)

    Thanks for your replies,
    have a good start in the year 2019 and thank you to everyone who answered my questions and (pre-)screened my pictures this year!

    Yannick

  3. #203
    JetPhotos.Net Crew pdeboer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    near EHAM/AMS
    Posts
    3,768

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    Thanks dlowwa, for your answer. I gave #1 and a (hopefully) improved version of #2 a chance.

    I also have some new photos for pre-screening:

    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_8038v2.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	994.3 KB 
ID:	20777
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_8279v2.jpg 
Views:	23 
Size:	915.2 KB 
ID:	20778
    3.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_8542v2.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	1.02 MB 
ID:	20779
    4.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9355v2.jpg 
Views:	24 
Size:	1.04 MB 
ID:	20780 ( 'special scheme'-categroy, right?)

    Thanks for your replies,
    have a good start in the year 2019 and thank you to everyone who answered my questions and (pre-)screened my pictures this year!

    Yannick
    2 looks a tad soft and overexposed, rest looks acceptable, 4 needs special scheme indeed

  4. #204
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Hi everyone,

    Yesterday this picture ( https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7036051 ) was rejected for the aircraft being obstructed by the push-back-truck. As far as know they are generally allowed but of course this one was not technically in service when the photo was taken. As it went through pre-screening (which is no guarantee ,of course ) I thought it might be OK in this case.

    My question would be if this one is worth an appeal.

    Thank you for your replies,
    Best regards,
    Yannick

  5. #205
    JetPhotos.Net Crew LX-A343's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Zurich Kloten - LSZH
    Posts
    13,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    Yesterday this picture ( https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7036051 ) was rejected for the aircraft being obstructed by the push-back-truck. As far as know they are generally allowed but of course this one was not technically in service when the photo was taken. As it went through pre-screening (which is no guarantee ,of course ) I thought it might be OK in this case.

    My question would be if this one is worth an appeal.

    Thank you for your replies,
    Best regards,
    Yannick
    I wouldn't appeal it. The push back truck is not doing anything with the aircraft itself. Some moments later, it would be gone.

  6. #206
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Thanks Gerardo

    Have a nice evening,
    Yannick

  7. #207
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Hi everyone,

    A feedback on these would be great.
    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0046v2.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	1.01 MB 
ID:	21301
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0197v2.jpg 
Views:	19 
Size:	939.0 KB 
ID:	21302
    3.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0330v2.jpg 
Views:	25 
Size:	1,016.1 KB 
ID:	21303

    Thanks for your help,
    best regards,
    Yannick

  8. #208
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    A feedback on these would be great.
    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0046v2.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	1.01 MB 
ID:	21301
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0197v2.jpg 
Views:	19 
Size:	939.0 KB 
ID:	21302
    3.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0330v2.jpg 
Views:	25 
Size:	1,016.1 KB 
ID:	21303

    Thanks for your help,
    best regards,
    Yannick
    1 borderline soft
    2 vignetting, borderline soft
    3 clutter

  9. #209
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Hi everyone,

    Thanks dlowwa. I gave #1 a chance (with some improvements).

    What about these two A319s ?
    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0225v2.jpg 
Views:	19 
Size:	1,008.7 KB 
ID:	21310
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0381v2.jpg 
Views:	23 
Size:	946.0 KB 
ID:	21311

    Thanks for your feedback,
    All tha best,
    Yannick

  10. #210
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    Thanks dlowwa. I gave #1 a chance (with some improvements).

    What about these two A319s ?
    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0225v2.jpg 
Views:	19 
Size:	1,008.7 KB 
ID:	21310
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0381v2.jpg 
Views:	23 
Size:	946.0 KB 
ID:	21311

    Thanks for your feedback,
    All tha best,
    Yannick
    Maybe a touch soft and needing slight CW, but otherwise ok.

  11. #211
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Hi everyone,

    Thanks dlowwa for your feedback again.

    I have got a few new ones for pre-screening:
    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9845 1v2.jpg 
Views:	25 
Size:	1.04 MB 
ID:	21333
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9894v2.jpg 
Views:	25 
Size:	1.07 MB 
ID:	21334
    3.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0144v2.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	1.01 MB 
ID:	21335
    4.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0276v2.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	954.9 KB 
ID:	21336

    Thanks for your answers,
    Best regards,
    Yannick
    Last edited by YanS; 01-23-2019 at 07:26 PM. Reason: addad the EK ;)

  12. #212
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    Thanks dlowwa for your feedback again.

    I have got a few new ones for pre-screening:
    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9845 1v2.jpg 
Views:	25 
Size:	1.04 MB 
ID:	21333
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9894v2.jpg 
Views:	25 
Size:	1.07 MB 
ID:	21334
    3.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0144v2.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	1.01 MB 
ID:	21335
    4.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0276v2.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	954.9 KB 
ID:	21336

    Thanks for your answers,
    Best regards,
    Yannick
    Horizon looks a touch off on the first and last, but otherwise would be ok for me.

  13. #213
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Hello everyone,

    A feedback on these would be great .

    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0092v2.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	1,017.0 KB 
ID:	21521 (horizon looks a bit unlevelled to me but the verticals seem ok)
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0142v2.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	1,014.0 KB 
ID:	21522 (not sure if it's too similar to this one: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9188422 )
    3.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9973v2.jpg 
Views:	20 
Size:	1.04 MB 
ID:	21523
    4.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0343v2.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	900.7 KB 
ID:	21524
    5.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9934v2.jpg 
Views:	20 
Size:	1.01 MB 
ID:	21525 (too dark/too harsh contrast?)

    Thanks for your answers,
    All the best,
    Yannick

  14. #214
    JetPhotos.Net Crew LX-A343's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Zurich Kloten - LSZH
    Posts
    13,518

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YanS View Post
    Hello everyone,

    A feedback on these would be great .

    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0092v2.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	1,017.0 KB 
ID:	21521 (horizon looks a bit unlevelled to me but the verticals seem ok)
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0142v2.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	1,014.0 KB 
ID:	21522 (not sure if it's too similar to this one: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9188422 )
    3.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9973v2.jpg 
Views:	20 
Size:	1.04 MB 
ID:	21523
    4.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0343v2.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	900.7 KB 
ID:	21524
    5.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_9934v2.jpg 
Views:	20 
Size:	1.01 MB 
ID:	21525 (too dark/too harsh contrast?)

    Thanks for your answers,
    All the best,
    Yannick
    1,2) borderline soft (not similar)
    3, 4, 5) OK

  15. #215
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Hello everyone,

    Yesterday I had the chance to take a photo of this Bae Jetstream 32. The serial is 842. As far as I know the aircraft is stored at EDDW since 2010. Now it has a new livery and a new reg. (HB-ARFF).Previously it was SP-KWE. My questions would be if I should
    enter 'private' for Airline as it doesn't have the 'JetAir'-titles anymore and if the picture would have a chance to be accepted as a new reg. .

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0549v2.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	1.05 MB 
ID:	21565

    Thanks for your help,
    Best regards,
    Yannick

  16. #216
    Administrator Alex - Spot-This !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    4,406

    Default

    HB-ARFF isn't a valid reg so as it's fake I would recommend using the real one (last one) or upload without reg at all, just the cn

    Regards
    Alex

    To check any HB- reg - this is the place to go : https://app02.bazl.admin.ch/web/bazl/fr/#/lfr/search

  17. #217
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Hi everyone,

    Thanks, Alex for your help. I think I'll give it a try with the last reg. .

    I'm not sure about the quality of these:
    1.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0010v2.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	1,001.4 KB 
ID:	21595 (too far?)
    2.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0358v2.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	1.01 MB 
ID:	21596 (very borderline backlit for me)
    3.Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_0169v2.jpg 
Views:	20 
Size:	1,011.3 KB 
ID:	21597 (is the LH behind enough to 'de-center' the BA?)


    Thanks for your replies,
    Best regards,
    Yannick

  18. #218
    Administrator Alex - Spot-This !'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    4,406

    Default

    Hi Yannick,
    1. Pic looks a bit too dark, lacks some saturation and is a bit soft
    2. Nice one, could go with a tad more contrast via levels
    3. Interesting one, composition works well

    Cheers
    Alex

  19. #219
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    149

    Default

    Hi everyone,

    Thanks Alex, for your answer!

    Today this picture ( https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7106062 ) was rejected for being to soft and horizon unlevel.
    Personally I do not agree with these two aspects:
    For me the aircraft is not soft enough for a rejection and the verticals in the beckground seem to be ok to me.

    But of course this is only a personal opinion so I ask here if this one would be worth an appeal.

    Thanks for your help,
    Best regards,
    Yannick

  20. #220
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,706

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    Thanks Alex, for your answer!

    Today this picture ( https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7106062 ) was rejected for being to soft and horizon unlevel.
    Personally I do not agree with these two aspects:
    For me the aircraft is not soft enough for a rejection and the verticals in the beckground seem to be ok to me.

    But of course this is only a personal opinion so I ask here if this one would be worth an appeal.

    Thanks for your help,
    Best regards,
    Yannick
    Not worth an appeal, imho.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •