Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/aviation_photography/read.main/102747/

Topic: Rejections Galore ...
Username: EGFF
Posted 2003-09-18 20:10:56 and read 2029 times.

Im feeling a little hard done by this evening .... Im sure your all fed up just as i am with these posts about how 'unfair' it was to reject there pic, well ... i feel i have a fair case here.
The following rejected for "Bad Quality"
http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=Dsc05885.jpg
http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=Dsc05902.jpg
http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=Dsc05972.jpg
http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=Dsc05970.jpg
http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=Dsc05961.jpg
These are just a handful of about 80% of what i uploaded and that was rejected for many other things ... all comments welcome please,
Regards,
Shaun  Sad

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: Jon01
Posted 2003-09-18 20:23:59 and read 2004 times.

First 4 are over-exposed with loss of clarity. Look at the reg's and white areas.
Using some negative exposure compensation when bright and sunny should help.

The cockpit photo appears too dark! Fill in flash used?

Rgds,

Jon

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: EGBB
Posted 2003-09-18 21:31:58 and read 1954 times.

Make you feel better Shaun I have just had a rejection

http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=251-5143_CRW_RJ.jpg

The photos were of low esthetic qualities - bad angle, included
window reflections


I know the picture has window reflections its a bit hard not to get that on this sort of shot and yes if it was a 'common' picture I could agree with the rejection but I looked at all the Jaguar pictures on Anet and not one cockpit shot is on here so I would have thought this would be accepted because it is rare?

It was screened by a trainee so do you think I should appeal? is it rare enough and good enough to go on the database in your opinions?

Cheers

Derek

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: EGGD
Posted 2003-09-18 21:41:46 and read 1934 times.

Yes, the first four are overexposed, and they aren't contrasty enough (but jacking up the contrast will just increase the level of over-exposure) and they are a little soft.

The cockpit shot is a little soft, it looks good quality though so i'm sure you can brighten it up in PS.

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: EGFF
Posted 2003-09-18 21:50:39 and read 1928 times.

The cockpit shot is a surprise to me, i sharpened it TWICE, anymore and it'll look stupid ... Im gonna start all over again and re-do all the pics, hopefully to some avail ...
Regards,
Shaun

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: EGGD
Posted 2003-09-18 22:19:57 and read 1909 times.

The cockpit doesn't need to be sharpened, it needs to be brightened  Smile

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: Wietse
Posted 2003-09-18 22:22:13 and read 1911 times.

2 things:

They are NOT overexposed. I see loads of detail in the white areas.

secondly, I know what weather it was that day. It wasnt very clear. It may look sunny, but it was a little hazy.

Wietse

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: EGFF
Posted 2003-09-18 22:26:14 and read 1907 times.

Oh, finally somebody here to help me, lol ...
Someone mentioned flash, i didnt use the flash in order for the computers and other lights to stand out ...
Dan, dark? Look again, it's not that dark ...
Regards,
Shaun  Laugh out loud

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: Timdegroot
Posted 2003-09-18 22:32:15 and read 1898 times.

They are NOT overexposed. I see loads of detail in the white areas.
===================================================

They are, the fuselage is clearly "washed out". Having recently had some problems with it myself I know Big grin -0.3 0.5 should do it.

Tim

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: Jon01
Posted 2003-09-18 23:02:19 and read 1873 times.

If they are not over exposed , then they have been brightened up too much. There is clearly no detail on the upper (sun lit) areas, you should be able to see the panel joins. The darker (shady) areas are very grainy.

The 'haze' shouldn't affect quality much with shots taken this close.

I fear it could be the use of a magnifier/lens converter on this type of camera (Sony F?) that affects quality/exposure on a fast moving subject.

Jon

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: Jon01
Posted 2003-09-18 23:12:25 and read 1863 times.

The cockpit shot is under-exposed as the camera is fooled by the bright window light. Using 'fill in' flash or just concentrating on the instrument panels should give better results like this:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Manuel Javorik



Jon

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: Ejazz
Posted 2003-09-19 02:25:36 and read 1805 times.

I like them which explains why I have so many rejections.

Dust blob on the lower left of the No 3 pic though.

Cheers

Bailey

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: AndrewUber
Posted 2003-09-19 06:04:38 and read 1768 times.

Great pics Shuan!!! I think the screeners are just cranky lately... they've rejected a few GREAT shots of mine as well.

If it were me, I would enhance the color saturation and contrast a bit. These don't look "soft" to me, but then I've uploaded some photos that you could see a mouse hopping in the grass between the runways, and they still get shot down for being soft.

My two cents would be to enhance, re-upload, and hope for a different screener!!!

Keep up the great work!

On this shot, I used no flash, and turned the lights on the panels all the way up. I did do a bit of editing, but they finally accepted it.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Freight-Dawg

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: BO__einG
Posted 2003-09-19 08:12:34 and read 1747 times.

Looks nice but yes I agree that overexposure is the key word here.
I think the first photo has the worst overexposure but the 3 after that have a little bit lesser amount of it.
The fourth one, yeah its good but just too dark.
Try and adjust the curves by bringing it down a little in photoshop. It might help but guarantee isnt 100%

Topic: RE: Rejections Galore ...
Username: Qantas744
Posted 2003-09-20 16:18:24 and read 1665 times.

You already know how much I like these pictures Shaun, but the cockpit shot is a bit underexposed. The others are perfectly acceptable to me.


Matt


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/