Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (Chukcha)  
User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1991 posts, RR: 7
Posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2271 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Had this one rejected for level:


MyAviation.net photo:
Click here for bigger photo!
Photo © Andrei Bezmylov



The Screener left no personal message, and neither did the Head Screener on appeal. I have no clue what they thad in mind - CW, CCW?

The photo was taken from the ground level, with the camera pointing slightly upwards, focal length 13mm.

Any input would be much appreciated.

Cheers,
Andrei

7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineKLM772ER From Germany, joined May 2006, 615 posts, RR: 18
Reply 1, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2256 times:

Hello Andrei,

it looks like it is leaning a little bit to the left and needs some CW rotation..

I would always judge a wide angle picture not online with the references in the background, but also the overall impression of the picture..

Hope this helps!  Smile

Cheers,
Bjoern


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 4005 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2240 times:

Personally I still prefer to find some piece of evidence to base my leveling on.

Here, there are no central verticals, but

The mast on the left slants about 4.1 deg
The green container on the right slants about 5.5 deg at the same distance from the edge
Difference 1.4 deg, suggesting that 0.7 deg CW is needed

And I do think that looks better.

You can measure more accurately in the original, or double check with the white container on the left vs the red one on the right, they're also about the same distance from the sides.

Peter 

[Edited 2009-03-25 07:27:17]


The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineKLM772ER From Germany, joined May 2006, 615 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2237 times:



Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 2):
The mast on the left slants about 4.1 deg
The green container on the right slants about 5.5 deg at the same distance from the edge
Difference 1.4 deg, suggesting that 0.7 deg CCW is needed

Wouldn't CCW correction than not even emphasize the problem??? Big grin

And I don't think the mast is a good reference anyway, looking at the white container, is has a complete different angle in my opinion and is more reliable  Smile

Bjoern


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 4005 posts, RR: 18
Reply 4, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 2228 times:



Quoting KLM772ER (Reply 3):

Wouldn't CCW correction than not even emphasize the problem???

Yes, it would! I meant CW, sorry, I edited my post. Thanks Bjoern.

The mast may not be enitrely reliable, but it's only normal that it slants more than the white container.

Peter Smile



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineStulli From Germany, joined Mar 2009, 48 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 2215 times:

I guess, sometimes it's just a matter of personal taste of the screener... In this case, no levelling or other further corrections may help in any way. Just remember that there are human beings an not machines sitting behind the screens, so decisions are personal decisions.

regards


User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1991 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (5 years 9 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2188 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Thanks guys, for all the replies.

Over the three years of uploading here, I found out that leveling pictures is not always as straightforward as pure math, and there have been many arguments here on the forum. It all boiled down to one thing: when the references are not dead obvious, the overall impression may be more important.

Maybe it is leaning to the left, and I just don't see it... Anyway, I'll try the mathematical approach this time. I've just measured using Peter's method, and it comes to slightly over 0.7 CW. I'll do that, and I'll keep my fingers crossed  Smile .

By the way, how does it work now with the acceptance threads - is it one thread per rejection or per photographer now? I have an inquiry concerning another picture now; should I continue in this thread, or should I start a new one?

Cheers,
Andrei


User currently offlinePhilthy From Australia, joined May 2005, 123 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2070 times:

Wow! What a great aeroplane!  

Glad you sorted it out, Andrei.

[Edited 2009-03-31 04:40:07]

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...
Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (stevemchey) posted Tue Mar 24 2009 10:01:50 by Stevemchey
Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (A340Spotter) posted Mon Mar 23 2009 15:43:14 by A340Spotter
Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (JakTrax) posted Mon Mar 23 2009 13:54:34 by JakTrax
Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (Neophyte) posted Mon Mar 23 2009 08:50:45 by Neophyte
Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (G-CIVP) posted Sat Mar 21 2009 08:44:11 by G-CIVP
Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (codeshare) posted Sat Mar 21 2009 07:59:01 by Codeshare
Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (ivaradi) posted Thu Mar 19 2009 06:53:33 by Ivaradi
Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (Atomother) posted Wed Mar 18 2009 22:44:36 by Atomother
Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (spencer) posted Sun Mar 15 2009 08:07:35 by Spencer
Photo Acceptance - Post-Screening (Marchez) posted Sun Mar 15 2009 04:31:51 by Marchez