Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is This Centering Ok?  
User currently offlineJajo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2872 times:

Hi!

I've received a couple of centering rejections which has made me a bit unsure. What do you think about the centering in these shots?

http://boplats.net/070105-jajo-D-AIAH.jpg
http://boplats.net/070105-jajo-TC-JDA.jpg

I have tried to have the same distance everywhere.

Thanks for your time

/ Jacob

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 48
Reply 1, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2862 times:

If they were my shots, I'd keep more space on the right and crop closer to the engine on the left, to keep the fuselage more centered.

E


User currently offlineJajo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2857 times:

Thanks for your quick response, I'll do that!

/ jajo


User currently offlinePrat From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 229 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2848 times:

Personally I think they could go either way. The quality is there that the non-lit engine still looks sharp. I really like the color and contrast between the lit parts and the non-lit!


Dan


User currently offlineJajo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2843 times:

Centeringwise, any better?

http://boplats.net/070105-jajo-D-AIAH2.jpg
http://boplats.net/070105-jajo-TC-JDA2.jpg

/ jajo


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3959 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 2838 times:

I'd be tempted to try to include the whole tailplane if possible.

Peter Smile



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 48
Reply 6, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2815 times:

Quoting Jajo (Reply 4):
Centeringwise, any better?

Yup, I think so. (my personal preference, I'm sure others might feel differently)


User currently offline9V From China, joined Aug 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2803 times:

Why the need to have them so big? Why not reduce them to 1024 pixels wide. It's not worth it. I only have a 15" monitor and I'm sure many others do too.

User currently offlineJajo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 2786 times:

Quoting IL76 (Reply 6):
Yup, I think so. (my personal preference, I'm sure others might feel differently)

I prefer it too. Thanks for the help!

Quoting 9V (Reply 7):
Why the need to have them so big? Why not reduce them to 1024 pixels wide. It's not worth it. I only have a 15" monitor and I'm sure many others do too.

Personally I think it is worth it and as long as the rules don't require a certain resolution I guess it is up to the photographer. I run 1680x1050 on my monitor, I edit the pictures mainly for my own collection and I will not make a different version just for a.net. If the picture is detailed, why waste details by resizing it to 1024px? It is always possible to reduce the size of a big image but not the other way around without major quality loss. And if someone would like to make a print of a picture they would enjoy the increased resolution. As long as a.net allows it I will continue to upload in 1280px, 1400px or 1600px depending on picture quality since 1024px shots looks really tiny on my screen and trying to view them in fullscreen looks like crap.

Would be interesting to know which is the most common screen resolution among a.net visitors. I guess either 1024x768 or 1280x1024.

Edit: I've been thinking about this for a while now, and I guess the best thing would be if the system could automatically resize a copy of all big images (over 1024px) that are accepted in the database to 1024px and show it when "Large" is being clicked. An additional size called "Full size" next to large would open the picture in the original full size. I guess it would be impossible to implement on existing images and it would take up more space on the servers, but it would make everybody happy.

/ jajo

[Edited 2007-01-05 20:40:57]

User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3959 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2772 times:

Quoting Jajo (Reply 8):
Would be interesting to know which is the most common screen resolution among a.net visitors. I guess either 1024x768 or 1280x1024.

This was published in 2006, need not be very reliable but the outcome is clear enough.

Quote:

The most popular screen resolutions on the web in the world are:
1. 1024 x 768 54.02%
2. 800 x 600 24.66%
3. 1280 x 1024 14.1%
4. 1152 x 864 4%
5. 640 x 480 0.6%
6. 1600 x 1200 0.8%
7. 1152 x 870 0.1%



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineJajo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2767 times:

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 9):
This was published in 2006, need not be very reliable but the outcome is clear enough.

And the source for these stats is? Interesting stats would be what the most popular resolution among a.net visitors is. I don't really know for sure but I would suspect that a.net visitors have bigger screens and higher resolutions than the world wide average because of what we do (image editing).

/ jajo


User currently offlineJajo From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2765 times:

Quoting Prat (Reply 3):
Personally I think they could go either way. The quality is there that the non-lit engine still looks sharp. I really like the color and contrast between the lit parts and the non-lit!

Thanks Prat, I appreciate your comment. I too like the "dark-side, bright-side"-effect.

/ jajo


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3959 posts, RR: 18
Reply 12, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 2761 times:

Quoting Jajo (Reply 10):
Interesting stats would be what the most popular resolution among a.net visitors is. I don't really know for sure but I would suspect that a.net visitors have bigger screens and higher resolutions than the world wide average because of what we do (image editing).

Probably only a fraction of the viewers submit photographs themselves.

Pete



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offline9V From China, joined Aug 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2757 times:

Quoting Jajo (Reply 10):
I would suspect that a.net visitors have bigger screens

Nope, many are poor like me, and it's a real pain in the ass on a 15" monitor to have to scroll up and down / left and right just to view one photo. If it's an exceptional one I don't mind but most pics are not.  Wink


User currently offlineOly720man From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 6814 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2750 times:

Quoting 9V (Reply 13):
Nope, many are poor like me, and it's a real pain in the ass on a 15" monitor to have to scroll up and down / left and right just to view one photo.

With Opera you can zoom pages in and out.

Using the LH from above




wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
User currently offlineChrisH From Sweden, joined Jul 2004, 1136 posts, RR: 16
Reply 15, posted (7 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2741 times:

Quoting 9V (Reply 13):
Nope, many are poor like me, and it's a real pain in the ass on a 15" monitor to have to scroll up and down / left and right just to view one photo. If it's an exceptional one I don't mind but most pics are not.

you can get a 17" more or less for free these days (i gave my CRT away to a mate)... i cant think of one person i know who still runs 15".. unless on laptop but then resolution is still gonna be pretty high.

so id say the problem is on your end. I like highres shots. 1024 look like stamps on a 21" TFT



what seems to be the officer, problem?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Is This Crop OK? posted Tue Feb 21 2006 22:45:41 by Bubbles
Is This An OK Size? posted Sun Feb 27 2005 21:44:54 by AirKas1
Is This OK For A Beginner? posted Thu Nov 2 2006 23:15:15 by EMA747
Is This Asiana 777 Shot Centered And OK Overall? posted Thu Jul 27 2006 04:26:41 by Airplanenut
Is This Ok? posted Fri Jan 13 2006 00:58:00 by AirKas1
Advice On Filters Is This Ok!? posted Fri Sep 16 2005 18:25:30 by LHRsunriser
Ok, What Is This? posted Wed Feb 28 2001 05:24:46 by Brownphoto
Is This Soft? And Is The Airline Name Correct? posted Thu Dec 14 2006 22:12:54 by Edoca
Is This A Picture For The Database? posted Thu Nov 30 2006 18:18:20 by JetCrazy
Is This Sharp Enough? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 22:27:16 by Linco22