1. Weather hurts this shot... possibly un-level, contrast? How is the sharpness?
2. It is dark again, soft and maybe not level but can it be fixed?
3. Dark again (Weather was shite!). Doubt its chances on quality/dark/soft/colour but thought I'd ask.
4. A possibility of acceptance but common might play a part
5. Same as above...
Eadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 1839 times:
1 - Gulfstream looks fine here.
2 - Airbus - does look a bit dark. Check levels and adjust accordingly. Watch when doing so in case of grain etc.
3 - OzJet - Looks ok apart from the grain there - I reckon that one can be fixed to standards.
4 & 5 are back lit but they look ok. I don't think that the back lighting is a problem here.
Acontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 29
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1817 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Just my personal view on your pictures:
1. Gulfstream: Very grainy (blue under-fuselage), slightly blurry/soft/oversharpened. Cannot really comment on level.
2. Airbus: Dark, and I suspect it will get too grainy if you brighten it up. Slightly soft and oversharpened. Contrast.
3. 732: Contrast is good, but the black paint+low light shows too much grain. Slightly oversharpened.
4. BAe 146 -NZM: Oversharpened, slightly our of focus/soft/blurry. You have some areas almost overexposed (bad time of the day).
5. BAe 146 -NZK: Oversharpened and soft. This one looks better than the previous BAE 146 on the exposure/focus.
Overall I would say all pictures are marginal quality in A.net terms, but if I would have to choose, I would try new edits with the Oz 732 and the second BAe 146.
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!