JumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2462 posts, RR: 50 Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2327 times:
Graham
The helicopter pic is too small and very hard to give any feedback on it.
The FA18 looks good but not sure if it would get a motiv rejection due to the crop and the missile blocking most of the aircraft.
Nice shot would love to get some screeners input on it.
Cheers
But when the learning is over and some say it never is over you will start to enjoy the fruits of the hobby and what it can bring.
I just got my first ever Mag cover and its made it all worth while.
The helicopter is now visible and to me looks good but i cant comment on quality as I'm at work on a very bad monitor.
But looks centered and level.
Keep it up your doing well .
Cheers
Eadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2214 posts, RR: 16 Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2302 times:
The helecopter, I feel will still get a quality rejection. Looking at it here I'd say its right on the borderline and with the standards of today, being right on the borderline is not going to be enough. I also thing that parts of the white are slighlty too bright.
How big is the original? If you want me to have a look at it for you, let me know I'd be glad too. The hornet, might not be worth the worry as suggested, but depending on the state of the original chopper it might be ok.
Anyway, I personally think that you are close with the chopper.
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4536 posts, RR: 26 Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2253 times:
The helicopter shot has a white line along the border on the left side.
[Edited 2006-08-17 09:53:43]
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
IFlyADesk From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 309 posts, RR: 1 Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 2221 times:
What do you mean by "I Need Both Of These Images"?
AussieAviator From Australia, joined Jul 2006, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2168 times:
Quoting Azza40 (Reply 9): What is that brown poo spot above the propeller?
Well spotted ! I didn't see that.
It is actually an RAAF Beech Kingair 350 (Nav Trainer) which departed about 5 min's before I snapped this shot. It's present in most of the other shots I took of the chopper as well. I didn't notice it previously.
I guess they don't allow you to clone out those back ground blemishes here either ?
ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2154 times:
That's not always enforced strictly. My two newest shots in the DB are 1024x697, and 1024x695. And I've got another that's 1024x780.
Depending on the crop the aspect ratio is not crucial, as long as it's at least 1000 pixels wide and 667 high (those are the minimum dimensions, as given on the upload page).
So, as for your pictures, I like the helicopter one, but the F-18 will most likely get a motive rejection as the missile is blocking the majority of the aircraft and looks like it's out of place. With a wider crop showing the entire wing, thereby making more obvious that the missile is attached to it (though more people will realize that anyway) the motive issue might be resolved. But the missile really does take quite a bit away from the actual picture of the plane.
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
Sulman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2028 posts, RR: 35 Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2150 times:
Quoting AussieAviator (Reply 15): I guess they don't allow you to clone out those back ground blemishes here either ?
Hmm. If they look like blemishes (as small dark birds can), I think they're fair game under the cloning policy. A screener would give a definitive answer though.
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 53 Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2138 times:
I would quit using that photo in your posts as part of your signature, it is a violation of the site's rules. Do you see anyone else using them? Other then Bubbles and his silly waving smiley?
AussieAviator From Australia, joined Jul 2006, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2056 times:
Quoting JeffM (Reply 19): I would quit using that photo in your posts as part of your signature, it is a violation of the site's rules. Do you see anyone else using them? Other then Bubbles and his silly waving smiley?
Right.
Actually, you might have missed the fact that I was seeking comments more in line with image critique.
On the same token, I have refamiliarised myself with the site rules and reg's.
Thankyou for your vigilance with this matter.
Perhaps you might like to offer some constructive criticism regarding the images - this would help me a hell of a lot more.
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 53 Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 2052 times:
Quoting AussieAviator (Reply 20): you might have missed the fact that I was seeking comments more in line with image critique
What makes you think I missed that?
Quoting AussieAviator (Reply 20): Perhaps you might like to offer some constructive criticism regarding the images - this would help me a hell of a lot more.
No thanks, there are too many 'rejection experts' here as you will soon see. Do you really want me to tell you what you did wrong? You may not like it.
Sulman From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2004, 2028 posts, RR: 35 Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 2003 times:
Quoting AussieAviator (Reply 22): I know the images aren't brilliant, but as a total beginner - this is my starting point ... so the harsher the comments, the better!
You're actually off to a decent starting point. I like the FA/18 image, and the perspective from the hardpoint. It needs a touch more sharpening around the fuselage, but very carefully. It might have been an idea to raise the viewpoint a little (I understand this may not have been physically possible!) so that more of the canopy is visible, whilst still keeping the badges visible. Either way, I like what you've done with this one.
The helicopter is marginal quality wise - it just lacks definition. Have you got the original anywhere?
AussieAviator From Australia, joined Jul 2006, 78 posts, RR: 0 Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1788 times:
Quoting BrianW999 (Reply 31): How about going back to the original theme of the post and help the guy with some constructive advice ?
Thankyou ! I concur totally. Sadly, this thread rapidly decayed into nothing. Perhaps it has exhaused its usefullness?
As a new member, I must ask - is this the typical reaction/response one receives when requesting assistance? If it is, I'll give the whole thing a big miss.
Thankyou very much to all those who DID take a mature approach and offer constructive assistance. Especially to those of you who contacted me off-line, extending assistance. Thankyou gentlemen.
Sponsor Message: 
From Australia, joined Jul 2006, 78 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4536 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2006, 1052 posts, 
From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3070 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
