Page 11 of 12 FirstFirst ... 9101112 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 227

Thread: Editing Advice - Arnold Aaron

  1. #201
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    IS this motive acceptable? - i.e. the trucks in front not causing an obstruction rejection?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3627.jpg 
Views:	32 
Size:	878.3 KB 
ID:	27647

  2. #202
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    7,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    IS this motive acceptable? - i.e. the trucks in front not causing an obstruction rejection?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3627.jpg 
Views:	32 
Size:	878.3 KB 
ID:	27647
    Motive is fine.

  3. #203
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Just had this one rejected because I didn't include position of this spotting point in the remarks box - Photo otherwise acceptable from what I can make out.... Question.... Could I have this photo accepted into the database and I'll immediately update remarks box with details of position and description of location - never had a rejection based on the remarks alone before - should I appeal to this effect, and I'll add the remarks in right away? - Many thanks.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Untitled.jpg 
Views:	27 
Size:	470.1 KB 
ID:	27795

  4. #204
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    7,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    Just had this one rejected because I didn't include position of this spotting point in the remarks box - Photo otherwise acceptable from what I can make out.... Question.... Could I have this photo accepted into the database and I'll immediately update remarks box with details of position and description of location - never had a rejection based on the remarks alone before - should I appeal to this effect, and I'll add the remarks in right away? - Many thanks.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Untitled.jpg 
Views:	27 
Size:	470.1 KB 
ID:	27795
    Please read here:

    3.4.2 Spotting location

    https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthr...ES-New-version

    You will need to re-submit the photo with appropriate remarks/description.

  5. #205
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Would this picture work, perhaps as a creative shot? - trying to be a little creative here...


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4131.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	422.5 KB 
ID:	27853

  6. #206
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    7,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    Would this picture work, perhaps as a creative shot? - trying to be a little creative here...


    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4131.jpg 
Views:	30 
Size:	422.5 KB 
ID:	27853
    Not sure why this would be considered creative; I am relatively sure however that it would be rejected for contrast, dirty, and maybe soft.

  7. #207
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Can i just check my understanding of the 'aircraft cut-off' rules.... these photos below would not be rejected for 'cut-off', would they? the full body is included, and although tail fin is cut-off this is acceptable - am I correct? - Many thanks.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1846-4.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	939.2 KB 
ID:	27952

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1867-2.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	725.2 KB 
ID:	27953

  8. #208
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    7,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    Can i just check my understanding of the 'aircraft cut-off' rules.... these photos below would not be rejected for 'cut-off', would they? the full body is included, and although tail fin is cut-off this is acceptable - am I correct? - Many thanks.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1846-4.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	939.2 KB 
ID:	27952

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_1867-2.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	725.2 KB 
ID:	27953
    These are both pretty poorly cropped. Either give them a wider crop to avoid cutting the stab., or crop much tighter to the engines. Both would definitely be rejections for me.

  9. #209
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Just had this one rejected... For unsharpened, over-processed and heat haze.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3320-11.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	566.2 KB 
ID:	28028

    Couple of questions...

    1. photo already sharpened almost to the max. - surely picture looks adeuately sharp?
    2. Heat haze is only near runway surface, and not affecting any part of the aircraft - surely that would be permitted as its not affecting the aircraft itself?
    3. Overprocessed - I can;t see any halos including when looking at the 'check for dust' tool - what are the signs here of overprocessing?

    if picture reduced down to 1280px, is this likely to overcome the above issues?

    Many thanks, I'm almost up to approaching 100 pics in the databse - it is so so addictive!

    Arnold Aaron.

  10. #210
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    7,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post

    Couple of questions...

    1. photo already sharpened almost to the max. - surely picture looks adeuately sharp?
    Surely not, else it would not have been rejected.

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    2. Heat haze is only near runway surface, and not affecting any part of the aircraft - surely that would be permitted as its not affecting the aircraft itself?
    Affecting most of the aircraft actually. Look at how soft the gear, the nose, etc.. are. That's mostly due to the haze.

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    3. Overprocessed - I can;t see any halos including when looking at the 'check for dust' tool - what are the signs here of overprocessing?
    There are some slight halos visible, but really they are insignificant compared to the other issues. If the other issues were not present, I doubt it would have been rejected for processing alone.

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    if picture reduced down to 1280px, is this likely to overcome the above issues?
    Possibly, but not probably.

  11. #211
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Many thanks...

    Had both of these pictures at London City airport rejected for 'wrong category/category missing'. Now, notwithstanding any other issues with these pics, I dont believe either of these pics come under any of the 'aircraft Specific' categories in the upload page, and neither are either of these pics 'Business Jets' or private jets. What should they be uploaded as? Many thanks.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4251.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	891.1 KB 
ID:	28259

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4233.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	835.1 KB 
ID:	28260

  12. #212
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    7,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    Many thanks...

    Had both of these pictures at London City airport rejected for 'wrong category/category missing'. Now, notwithstanding any other issues with these pics, I dont believe either of these pics come under any of the 'aircraft Specific' categories in the upload page, and neither are either of these pics 'Business Jets' or private jets. What should they be uploaded as? Many thanks.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4251.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	891.1 KB 
ID:	28259

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_4233.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	835.1 KB 
ID:	28260
    Night Shot applies to both.

  13. #213
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Is the contrast acceptable on this one - I realise not ideal conditions...

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_2613.jpg 
Views:	19 
Size:	598.9 KB 
ID:	28272

  14. #214
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Would the stairs here cause a rejection for obstruction/clutter?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3600-2.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	795.5 KB 
ID:	28407

  15. #215
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    7,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    Would the stairs here cause a rejection for obstruction/clutter?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3600-2.jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	795.5 KB 
ID:	28407
    Yes.

  16. #216
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Would this A380 make the grade? - Thanks.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3306-5.jpg 
Views:	20 
Size:	420.9 KB 
ID:	28467

  17. #217
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    7,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    Would this A380 make the grade? - Thanks.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3306-5.jpg 
Views:	20 
Size:	420.9 KB 
ID:	28467
    No. Soft/blurry/heat hazed. Not fixable.

  18. #218
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Is the crop in this photo acceptable, or would it be a rejection for cut-off?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3110.jpg 
Views:	15 
Size:	845.4 KB 
ID:	28555

  19. #219
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    7,754

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajaaron View Post
    Is the crop in this photo acceptable, or would it be a rejection for cut-off?

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3110.jpg 
Views:	15 
Size:	845.4 KB 
ID:	28555
    Subjective call. Ok for me, but might not be for others.

  20. #220
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Posts
    136

    Default

    Would 1. below be classed as cutoff or would it make it?

    and 2 and 3, would they be a heat haze rejection? - haze is only on ground, all of aircraft I believe unaffected by it - please confirm. Thank you.

    1.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_2504.jpg 
Views:	15 
Size:	484.2 KB 
ID:	28574

    2.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3080-3.jpg 
Views:	9 
Size:	556.3 KB 
ID:	28575

    3.
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_3102.jpg 
Views:	12 
Size:	493.9 KB 
ID:	28576

Posting Permissions

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