Airkas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 3913 posts, RR: 56 Posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3126 times:
I had uploaded 13 shots of which I thought looked very nice. I was anxious to find out how they did, so I looked forward to the e-mail this morning.
But when I opened it, I was baffled to see all 13 were rejected, most of them with a reason a had never gotten before: baddirty.
I also came across 2x badpersonal. They screener mentioned dust spots in the e-mail, so I guess dustspots warrant a badpersonal rejection?
I understand why those 2 shots were rejected.
But there were 9 baddirty and 1 was badquality (with 1 badqualitybadcommon and 2x badpersonalbaddirty). I tried to find the page on which all the rejection reasons are explained, but I couldn't find it.
INNflight From Austria, joined Apr 2004, 3765 posts, RR: 61 Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3107 times:
so I guess dustspots warrant a badpersonal rejection?
(Bad)personal just tells you that you got a personal message from a screener at the bottom of the email - This has nothing to do with the quality / motive etc.. of the photos itself. It only tells you the screener wrote you a personal message.
Dendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1630 posts, RR: 63 Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3092 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
You have dirt on your sensor.
Look above the unfortunate light on the nose of Max and there is a dark mark. If you reduce the brightness a bit it will hit you. That was the only one I could see
Very fixable using the clone tool
LHSebi From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 1049 posts, RR: 9 Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3091 times:
About the baddirty rejections...I didn't look at all of them, but most of them seem to have one main dustspot towards the top-left of the picture. If you open the Peter Max picture, extend upwards from the light post on the right, and you will see the spot. It sometimes helps to make the window in which you opened the picture non-maximised, and then move the whole window in circles, or from side-to-side. This will make any dark (dust) spots stand out as they will also move around with the picture!
The badquality BA shot is very nice, but I notice 2 things. 1) The plane is extremely oversharpened. This is visible especially around the area where the blue meets the white part of the livery. There are jaggies everywhere. 2) Is it possible that you used neatimage? The sky has a pastel-like look.
Re the dust spots, you can try to remove them using the band-aid tool in PS. It does a very good job in fixing up pictures. However, be wary of badmanipulation rejections, which you may get if you don't do it subtle enough .
As for the clickable links: the reason is that there are those abbreviations that give a tool-tip thing for the airport/airline. The solution is to make those letters lowercase, as the filenames are not case sensitive, but the tool-tips are!
By123A From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 23 posts, RR: 3 Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3034 times:
I've been photographing aircraft for the past 40 years and thought I knew a thing or two about how to do it. Alas, since I've been submitting shots to A.net I realise I'm still wet behind the ears with nearly all my shots being rejected. "Baddirty", "badsoft", "badjagged", "badgrainy", you name it my shots have it. To my untutored eyes your shots look great and short of opening the shots up in Photoshop and tweaking with the levels it would be hard to spot the "dirt".
Assuming that you are using a digital SLR and want to check the sensor for cleanliness, stop the lens down to f22 or more and photograph a blank light wall out of focus. Spots on the sensor will then become more visible and I would suggest you use a blast of canned air about two inches from the sensor in an attempt to displace them, and not a soft brush as some user manuals suggest.
Keep snapping, I will and I'm sure we'll get there in the end.
LHSebi From Germany, joined Jan 2004, 1049 posts, RR: 9 Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2981 times:
Regarding the can of air, I heard this was not such a good idea. One of those cans will have some sort of propellant as well, which could produce moisture on the sensor which is NOT what you want! I don't know what they're called, but try to use something that just blows "regular" air out...anything with a manual pump for that matter.
What I have actually used, which worked quite well, is this little tool used in soldering. It is used to suck in any of the excess soldering metal when using it. It works wonderfully as you can just use it to blow air onto the sensor!
Don't try to blow on it yourself (through your mouth), as you can never be sure you are not also spitting on the sensor .
I guess that's what happens in the end, you start thinking about the beginning.
Dendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1630 posts, RR: 63 Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2970 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
I cleaned my sensor with great trepidation last week for the first time after noticing a couple of dust spots, one of which almost touched the An12 I had waited in the cold for so long for. I was able to totally remove it with the clone tool.
I used a foot pump as used to inflate dinghies and such after a recommendation from a friend.
This leaves one hand for the camera, one for the air nozzle and a foot to pump.
Pleased to say it worked well.
Chris78cpr From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2004, 2819 posts, RR: 51 Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2919 times:
I have heard of people saying they used them, but i have always been worried as bits of dirt and grit can easily get clogged in the pumps outlet! I would hate to launch a small piece of grit onto my sensor at 100mph!
5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII