Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Question About Screening  
User currently offlineMidEx216 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 651 posts, RR: 4
Posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3121 times:

**Not a "Will this make it?" thread**

This is mostly a question for screeners, or someone who knows the screening process well. I was wondering, in a shot like this, is there any chance the screener would look past the graininess due to the fact that there wasn't really a choice due to lighting? I shot at ISO 1600 because there was otherwise no other way the shot had any chance. Or would the shot just be rejected and never have a chance? (BTW, I know this shot in particular has no chance in the db, but bear with me).

http://fc02.deviantart.com/fs17/f/20.../8/Cover_of_Darkness_by_Pilots.jpg

Cheers,
P. Valenstein


"Cue the Circus Music!"
7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 52
Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3113 times:

Quoting MidEx216 (Thread starter):
I was wondering, in a shot like this, is there any chance the screener would look past the graininess due to the fact that there wasn't really a choice due to lighting? I shot at ISO 1600 because there was otherwise no other way the shot had any chance.

I would hope they wouldn't. There are always choices, and there isn't really anything that special to expect special treatment.


User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2069 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3065 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting MidEx216 (Thread starter):
is there any chance the screener would look past the graininess due to the fact that there wasn't really a choice due to lighting?

Nope, the screeners look at the final result only and don't consider the effort it took you to get a certain shot.
However as the quality of the picture ain't too bad, disregarding the grain, you might stand a chance if you remove it; here's a little preview of what it could look like:
Grain removed


I don't know how much freedom of movement you have for the edit of your original shot but with some careful editing it might make it.

Thierry

[Edited 2007-07-03 10:56:35]


"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 49
Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3049 times:

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 2):
Nope, the screeners look at the final result only and don't consider the effort it took you to get a certain shot

You think?  confused 


User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2069 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3046 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting IL76 (Reply 3):
You think?

Well, Eduard, I have to as that's what I've been told here over and over again but I'd be more than happy to learn otherwise.

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 49
Reply 5, posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3037 times:

If a shot is very difficult, of course we take that into account in our judgement. It's all within reason... If the result is not too bad and the photo is an interesting shot in very difficult conditions, we will be more lenient. If it's a very common angle & aircraft, than probably not. There's no black and white, which is also food for all the consistency 'discussions' we get all the time.
We certainly do not screen expecting every shot to be as clear as a 50mm blue sky ramp shot.

E


User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2069 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3032 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting IL76 (Reply 5):
If the result is not too bad and the photo is an interesting shot in very difficult conditions, we will be more lenient.

Ok, that's not the impression I got when I uploaded an A2A shot of an A340 in almost nighttime conditions some time ago but I'm glad to hear that it is how it is if it's really how it is.  Wink

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3029 times:

Quoting IL76 (Reply 5):
the consistency 'discussions' we get all the time.

?? I haven't seen one here for a long time now...

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 2):
Nope, the screeners look at the final result only and don't consider the effort it took you to get a certain shot.

Well I was of that impression also. I've now taken on board what you have said though, Eduard!


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...
Question About Priority Screening posted Sun Nov 19 2006 06:37:48 by XAAPB
Question About NOA_common And Screening Procedure posted Mon Oct 17 2005 22:37:15 by Mwk
Question About Screening posted Tue Jul 3 2007 06:39:45 by MidEx216
Question About Rejection. posted Fri May 4 2007 00:38:20 by XAAPB
Question About Non-payment And Breaking A Contract posted Fri Apr 6 2007 03:38:15 by Clickhappy
Question About Photo Edit Software posted Tue Apr 3 2007 23:20:04 by N612UA
Dumb Question About Uploading Photos posted Mon Feb 19 2007 05:45:08 by N612UA
Perplexed About Screening Time For This posted Fri Feb 9 2007 15:23:32 by JakTrax
Question About Category For D-AIPW posted Sun Jan 14 2007 12:28:56 by Jajo
Question About The Black 350D posted Mon Jan 8 2007 11:35:54 by Dazed767