If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
2) motive rejection due to recognisable face
3) contrast issue due to overexposed sky and slightly backlit as well
Okay. Thought that the second one would have a contrast problem but for you information it's not backlit as the sun was at 5 o'clock already in the back
Okay. Thought that the second one would have a contrast problem but for you information it's not backlit as the sun was at 5 o'clock already in the back
Tail in shadow, most of the fuselage in shadow, washed out background -> slightly backlit
Would be seeking for some advice on these pics, thanks in advantage for your help
[ATTACH=CONFIG]15997[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]15998[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]15999[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]16000[/ATTACH]
1: engines are more or less pitch black. If you adjust the curves, you can improve that without impacting the rest of the image. In my opinion, there is also too much dead space below the aircraft for a chopped off tail
2: nice! Even though it would look better if you used the rule of thirds for framing it.
3: nice!
4: nice!! Just don't forget the Vintage category
2: nice! Even though it would look better if you used the rule of thirds for framing it.
Thanks for the feedback What do you mean with that? Do you mean I should more focus on the right and main part of the terminal? Or open the view and also show the bit cut of on the left?
Would like to hear your opinion on that photo. I thought about uploading as Spotting location...but not sure if it does not show enough of the location (there is not that much more around to show by the way).
PS: Here is the uncropped one only to compare with the edited one above
Would like to hear your opinion on that photo. I thought about uploading as Spotting location...but not sure if it does not show enough of the location (there is not that much more around to show by the way).
[ATTACH=CONFIG]16610[/ATTACH]
PS: Here is the uncropped one only to compare with the edited one above
[ATTACH=CONFIG]16611[/ATTACH]
Spotting Location should be acceptable for this one.
I would need help if these pics are okay? Of course a total look but with a special focus on the following please
1: Special focus on leveling, the plane is taxing upwards to a bridge to cross a big motorway and then taxing down to the runway. Thats why leveling is a bit difficult. What do you think?
2: Quality and crop okay? I had to cut the tail, will that be accepted?
hi,
Too much obstruction on front wheel on the 1st one. The 777 crop is really borderline, pic is ok in terms of balance but the crop on the tail is questionable. Sorry I can't help more
The 777 crop is really borderline, pic is ok in terms of balance but the crop on the tail is questionable. Sorry I can't help more
Is that crop better? Because the plane is now not leveled of course as the tail is to high to get it leveled. Otherwise there would be dead space around.
1:
2: Another angle, but also plane is not leveled of course
today I got from 10 photos 7 rejections. Some only with undersharpen. The last time I asked for assistance I got the reply "only a little bit sharpening". What the ****. What is a little bit mean? Maybe the screen is not good enough? Or something else?
Also I had that time JPEG artifacts I never had before in any rejection and I did not change my process.
With a queue getting into 16000 pictures it surely makes sense to push the queue with things like "a little bit". Normally I agree with the most rejections I had with things where I forgot to delete CMOS spots and so on. But today it's simply absurd.
JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!
PS: I already tried in LR to apply "a little sharpness" and I could not see a difference in 100% view. If I apply more I will see oversharpen problems.
today I got from 10 photos 7 rejections. Some only with undersharpen. The last time I asked for assistance I got the reply "only a little bit sharpening". What the ****. What is a little bit mean? Maybe the screen is not good enough? Or something else?
Also I had that time JPEG artifacts I never had before in any rejection and I did not change my process.
With a queue getting into 16000 pictures it surely makes sense to push the queue with things like "a little bit". Normally I agree with the most rejections I had with things where I forgot to delete CMOS spots and so on. But today it's simply absurd.
JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!
PS: I already tried in LR to apply "a little sharpness" and I could not see a difference in 100% view. If I apply more I will see oversharpen problems.
Please post any new editing/screening advice questions in the thread you already have open.
The images you link are all soft, simple as that. Suggesting that images are being rejected for small things to shorten the queue is simply ignorance (and frustration, likely) on your part, since it's easier (fewer steps) to accept an image than reject it. Rejecting more images actually would take more time and thus cause the queue to grow even longer, so your logic is flawed in that case.
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Tweet
Comment