KLAX From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4435 times:
Well, I'm just gonna concentrate on uploading to one website now, its easier, and I've already chosen what website I'd like that to be. This website is turning into a buisness, and I'm in thise for the hobby and the fun.
I have a few pics here, but I wont be uploading anymore. It was fun though.
Thanks for all the help and support.
UTA_flyinghigh From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 6495 posts, RR: 51 Reply 6, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4260 times:
Too bad, one less frog on the site
I've been with a.net since 1998, and at the time it was a lot more good-natured and open to anyone with a 24*36 camera.
Nowadays, you need DLSR's in order to have any hope of having 98' style approval rates. This is supposed to be a site for aviation enthusiasts regardless of their views or budget, not a plaything for people with cameras that cost more than my car. I sincerely Johan will remember what it was like in the good old days.
Anyway Clovis, I'll be at LBG in June, maybe with a DSLR (if you can't beat 'em...)
Anyways, CMF spotters will still kick ass for a long time - 200+ pics of CMF and 462 pics for CMF spotters
Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
JayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 17 Reply 9, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3848 times:
I wonder how many photographers such as Clovis, Josh Rawlin and Mark Abbott have left A.net? Would be interesting to know. I still participate in the forums over here, but there is no way I would ever upload another photo in this database.
Too much of a hassle with the screeners. Not enough consistency in the screening process, in my opinion.
JayDavis From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 2000 posts, RR: 17 Reply 14, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3692 times:
Look at some of my photos on this site. They are quality stuff. I don't see why all of a sudden my shots are "crap" and not worthy of A.net. I am not doing anything differently in terms of scanning, photoshopping, etc. in uploading to Jetphotos.net
As I have said earlier, I think this site is becoming way too concerned with digital images and I don't have those.
Also, who made you judge and jury of the photo quality of my shots?
EGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 37 Reply 15, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3683 times:
Jay - you say your photos are quality stuff, but you also moan about how you need $1000's worth of equipment to get good photos.
Anyone can get photos into the database, I know people who are 12 or 13, have very cheap cameras and can still get photos in the database, I just think you are not willing to try new techniques or improve your photos especially when you get rejections.
Joe pries From United States of America, joined May 2000, 1957 posts, RR: 54 Reply 18, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3660 times:
Jay, you have the best setup money can buy as far as Canon, theres no reason to get not sharp photos. for action shots just set to TV and about 500th of a second on sunny days (theres no need to shoot kodachrome on cloudy days unless you're into sadomasochism) and you should be ok. I can shoot with the 70-200 and 2x converter at full strength and still achieve great results.
Timdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 66 Reply 20, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3671 times:
Jay, equipment is not a problem. Maybe a new scanner will do, or work on your photoshop skills. Masking the sky, and other techniques can greatly improve your scans. I always try new things and try to get the best out of my slides.
As an example:On this photo I masked the sky and then used a little smartblur to eliminate most of the grain. Was shot with a Canon eos33, 28-105, and K64, and coolscan 4.
Timdegroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 66 Reply 22, posted (10 years 6 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 3633 times:
Use the "magic wand" tool to select the sky (works best with a blue sky without clouds, but can be done on a cloudy sky with some practice). You can then apply some smartblur to the selected area (I usually apply between 2.5 and 5.0). You can then also use "invert", so you select everything except the sky. You can apply unsharp mask to that area. This way the sky will be nice and smooth and the plane will be sharp. On all of my recent scans I have used this technique.