MAG - editing advice

[MAG]

Got this photo rejected for wrong category and heat distortion

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6217261

As I remember I checked military and cargo categories because all 16 photos of this aircraft in the db have these categories. Which category I missed?

About heat distortion I found only heat distortion at the background but all aircraft is clear. For better view here 2000+ pix photo

Is heat distortion at the background the reason for rejection or I missed distorted areas somewhere on the aircraft?

Thanks in advance!

[Julian S.]

Got this photo rejected for wrong category and heat distortion

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6217261

As I remember I checked military and cargo categories because all 16 photos of this aircraft in the db have these categories. Which category I missed?

About heat distortion I found only heat distortion at the background but all aircraft is clear. For better view here 2000+ pix photo
[ATTACH=CONFIG]11885[/ATTACH]
Is heat distortion at the background the reason for rejection or I missed distorted areas somewhere on the aircraft?

Thanks in advance!

Hey,

you have to tick Military, Cargo and Special Scheme for this Aircraft.
Because of the Heat Distortion, best wait for a screener who can give a professional opinion.

Have a nice day!

[dlowwa]

Got this photo rejected for wrong category and heat distortion

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6217261

As I remember I checked military and cargo categories because all 16 photos of this aircraft in the db have these categories. Which category I missed?

About heat distortion I found only heat distortion at the background but all aircraft is clear. For better view here 2000+ pix photo
[ATTACH=CONFIG]11885[/ATTACH]
Is heat distortion at the background the reason for rejection or I missed distorted areas somewhere on the aircraft?

Thanks in advance!

The heat distortion is quite evident on the aircraft in the rejected image, and even more so in the higher resolution version. That being so, I don't think there is much you can do to fix the image to make it acceptable for inclusion in the DB.

[MAG]

Julian, dlowwa thanks for answering me... I'm not sure that I understand why "the heat distortion is quite evident" because I thought that ragged lines primary show distorted area. I mean ragged like this:

And picture damaged like this I see only at the background. At the same time lines on the aircraft seems clear...

[dlowwa]

Julian, dlowwa thanks for answering me... I'm not sure that I understand why "the heat distortion is quite evident" because I thought that ragged lines primary show distorted area. I mean ragged like this:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]12150[/ATTACH]
And picture damaged like this I see only at the background. At the same time lines on the aircraft seems clear...

If it's not heat haze, then the aircraft is simply extremely soft/blurry. The most likely cause of such extreme softness is heat haze, which is probably why it was mentioned.

[MAG]

MAG - Editing Advice

Hi,
I need some help on how to level the horizon in this picture https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6235779
I used verticals of tug as reference. But as I understand the screener use other object.

And which category I missed? Thanks!

[brianw999]

I would run an average horizon ruler along the the far horizon. It comes out at 1.3 degrees clockwise rotation. I don't know which category you missed but it needs Night Shot and Special Scheme categories.

[MAG]

Thanks Brian!

[MAG]

MAG - editing advise

Hi! Got this photo rejected for "dark underexposed"

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6271541

I was truly surprised that this photo can be considered as dark.
But I was much more surprised by screener comment:
"Gap on right side of histogram."
The histogram from jp:

So where's the gap? And if it is "a gap on right side" what the name for histogram like this?

I'm still confused how this symmetrical, evenly distributed from left to right, well shaped histogram can be rejected as underexposed?

[dlowwa]

Hi! Got this photo rejected for "dark underexposed"

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6271541

I was truly surprised that this photo can be considered as dark.
But I was much more surprised by screener comment:
"Gap on right side of histogram."
The histogram from jp:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]12612[/ATTACH]
So where's the gap? And if it is "a gap on right side" what the name for histogram like this?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]12615[/ATTACH]
I'm still confused how this symmetrical, evenly distributed from left to right, well shaped histogram can be rejected as underexposed?

Gap is on the right edge.



Without even looking at the histogram, you can see it's too dark/low contrast - the fuselage should be white, but it's a dull grey here. Aim for something like the left side here:



Brighter, but still not close to blowing any highlights.

[MAG]

Thank you for this detailed answer!
The gap is an absence of any information. There is no gap in this histogram. This information will be lost if I increase exposure.


When I look at your example I definitly choose the right side as the left side is unnaturally burned out, a bit soft near windows and has wrong colour at the background (it come closer to black and white). This softness appears because you blow some highlights. Your example is unnatural.


You say "the fuselage should be white". Why do you think so? Some liveries are white (for example Emirates or Austrian). But not every white livery is absolutelly white in fact. Often it's light grey or light beige. Direct and very strong sun light may turn light grey colour into white in the photo or screeners like you may force photographers to turn light gray into white. But if you came to many "white" aircrafts closer you will see that it's not RGB 255,255,255 white in fact. For examle you can see the same aircraft at the same location and the photo was taken at the same time of the day but 10 day before my shot. All these mean that light condition and livery condition are very close.

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8776133

This livery seems light grey to me but not pure white.

Finally could you please say do you have something against these shots:

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8792484

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8798331

Are they underexposed in your opinion?

[MAG]

MAG - editing advise (horizon)

Hi! Could you please check the horizon in the photo. I'm interesting the horizon only.

[LX-A343]

Hi! Could you please check the horizon in the photo. I'm interesting the horizon only.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]12664[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]12665[/ATTACH]

Horizon looks OK, but there are other issues with the photo.

[LX-A343]

Thank you for this detailed answer!
The gap is an absence of any information. There is no gap in this histogram. This information will be lost if I increase exposure.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]12656[/ATTACH]

When I look at your example I definitly choose the right side as the left side is unnaturally burned out, a bit soft near windows and has wrong colour at the background (it come closer to black and white). This softness appears because you blow some highlights. Your example is unnatural.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]12657[/ATTACH]

You say "the fuselage should be white". Why do you think so? Some liveries are white (for example Emirates or Austrian). But not every white livery is absolutelly white in fact. Often it's light grey or light beige. Direct and very strong sun light may turn light grey colour into white in the photo or screeners like you may force photographers to turn light gray into white. But if you came to many "white" aircrafts closer you will see that it's not RGB 255,255,255 white in fact. For examle you can see the same aircraft at the same location and the photo was taken at the same time of the day but 10 day before my shot. All these mean that light condition and livery condition are very close.

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8776133

This livery seems light grey to me but not pure white.

Finally could you please say do you have something against these shots:

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8792484

https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8798331

Are they underexposed in your opinion?

You asked for advice, you got it. The Eurowings has high chances to be rejected for underexposure.
As for the photos already accepted: this is a prescreening topc, not a topic about already accepted photos.

[MAG]

You asked for advice, you got it. The Eurowings has high chances to be rejected for underexposure.
As for the photos already accepted: this is a prescreening topc, not a topic about already accepted photos.

It was rather a question "why correct histogram and correct exposed photo goes to reject?" then asking for advise.
I used my accepted photos to show why I'm still sure that Eurowings was correctly exposed. But I understand your position. "White fuselage is more important than anything else and it doesn't matter if picture became unnatural. Screener opinion is the only one correct. There's no place for discussion".
If it's prescreening topic where is the forum for discussion of rejected photos like it was before?