opening a new thread for my uploads, the old one has been locked.

Please comment on these two new uploads, which one to keep? probably can not have both because of the double rule.

These are the first 787 flight arriving at ORD, I like the second one better because the angle probably will be a bit different with others and the 320 adds some interest too. but the light was not as good, so I hope it can make it, what do you think? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/q1352305179.4263dsc_3294-2.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/u1352305303.0841dsc_3303-2.jpg

Quoting powwwiii (Thread starter): probably can not have both because of the double rule.

Indeed, you should submit only one.

Quoting powwwiii (Thread starter): the light was not as good, so I hope it can make it, what do you think?

Light looks fine for both, though the first has a moderately strong yellow tint.

thanks Dana. just got the second one accepted, hope ppl like it.

Please comment on these rejections, both for cyan tint, I thought they are already a bit yellow, what do you think? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...1113_a1352339879.782dsc_3167-2.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...113_p1352305044.3595dsc_3288-2.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...1113_h1352343539.221dsc_3626-3.jpg

[Edited 2012-11-13 16:39:17]

UA 738 - more of a cast here than on the others, that's for sure; if that helps, I'm not too sure.. It only really exists towards the nose.
I see no cyan on the BR MD11.
I hardly see a cyan cast on the A320.. If there was one, it's extremely faint. I'd probably add a wee bit more contrast to this one if you were going to edit it further..

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 2): Please comment on these rejections, both for cyan tint, I thought they are already a bit yellow, what do you think?

Yes, they all have color casts to varying degrees. Cyan/green on the two UA, and I'd say the BR is also a bit oversaturated. Check out the right side of the two below which I've adjusted:

Thanks NZ107, and thank Dana for the edition, now I can see the color tint.

Now, these two new rejections are for grainy and soft, I have taken many pictures with similar light condition, ISO was still 200 I believe, same work flow as many accepted pictures, never had a grainy rejection, soft is different question. so I want to ask for a second opinion to see if you see grainy and soft. thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...114_w1352419223.5354dsc_1468-2.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...114_v1352419729.8835dsc_1480-2.jpg

Hi,

I can see the grain in the first one, but it is minimal.
The rejection is probably a bit hard.

But you can easily remove it with a noise reduction-tool.


And at least with my camera I do sometimes have a slightly grainy sky even with ISO200, too.



Personally I don't see the first one as soft but the second one is indeed a little bit soft. It should be better with some extra-sharpening.


But there are probably better judges on soft rejections than me.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 5): Now, these two new rejections are for grainy and soft,

I see a tiny bit of noise, but not enough to warrant a rejection. Same for the softness.

Thanks Dana, here are some more grainy rejections, which I feel also not guaranteed, please take a look and comment, thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...121120_p1352834490.008dsc_3323.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...21120_b1352834423.1519dsc_3321.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...21120_h1352834125.8222dsc_3316.jpg this one also oversharpened?

and this last one was for soft, really soft?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...21120_w1352834213.5255dsc_3317.jpg

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 8): Thanks Dana, here are some more grainy rejections, which I feel also not guaranteed,

Not sure what you mean about them being 'guaranteed' (did you mean warranted?), but I don't see noise being an issue with any of them.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 8): this one also oversharpened?

I see some jaggies on the leading edges, but otherwise not too bad.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 8): and this last one was for soft, really soft?

Doesn't seem really soft to me.

thanks Dana, yes I meant "warranted". those are all fine now.

Here are a few new uploads, please comment on the quality, I am not sure about the color of them mostly. Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/z1353905161.3802dsc_3532-3.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/u1353906282.5582dsc_3471.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/f1353906430.5145dsc_3507-4.jpg

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 10):

Colour seems ok.. But I'd probably tone down the images - the 2 E170s seem a bit overexposed for my liking.. Another sharpening pass could also be beneficial.

Thanks NZ107.

I just recently got a new monitor, seems the color and brightness are different with the old one, probably my eyes are already used to the old one. Please help me to calibrate my eyes to the new monitor. Here are three new uploads, please comment on the quaility, especially color, brightness, etc. Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b.../ready/b1354574460.773dsc_3787.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/n1354574590.8434dsc_3923.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/v1354581949.1399dsc_3572-4.jpg

AA and B6 seem ok.. I'd be inclined to add a bit more contrast to the UA 753. It just feels a little flat, especially under the wings and around the undercarriage.

Thanks NZ107, that was very helpful.

Some reupload, this one was rejected for color and soft. now it is better? thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/q1355601873.5629dsc_4412-3.jpg

and the next one was for low contrast, now looks ok?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/n1355601179.8156dsc_4456-6.jpg

Thanks!

Both look yellow and a touch bright, but otherwise ok.

Thanks Dana, they have been corrected and re-uploaded.

Here are two new uploads, please comment on them, thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/n1356054345.4724dsc_6300-2.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/f1356055087.7291dsc_6321-3.jpg

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 16): Here are two new uploads, please comment on them

Color is off, cyan cast or worse. Look at the top of the fuselage of the 67, the color is different than the rest. I see my fair share of AC aircraft, and can't say I've ever seen a similar effect.

Thanks Dana, I give up on that 767, but re-work a bit on the 319, hope it is passable now?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/n1356135855.3252dsc_6321-4.jpg

And uploaded a new one, the lighting was quite difficult, please see if it gets a chance, thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/d1356138286.8474dsc_3991.jpg

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 18): re-work a bit on the 319, hope it is passable now?

No, still green/cyan.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 18): And uploaded a new one,

A touch bright.

thanks Dana!

Here are a few new uploads, would like to ask for any comments.

Like this parallet approach, especially all 3 are United 319s, so any problem with this one?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/z1357535714.2432dsc_4495.jpg

the second one would be a new addition to the database, I like to have the tower in the picture, so the crop/center is a problem?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/n1357535954.8529dsc_4285.jpg

those fence and lights are problems for the third one?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/t1357536821.4195dsc_4524.jpg

Thanks in advance!

1. A bit soft, possibly due to the noise reduction and still a little flat.
2. Might be ok but to me, it doesn't really add too much to the picture. Seems a little on the cool side too.
3. It's low in the frame to begin with and the other bits are distracting, especially the overhead light.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 20): Like this parallet approach, especially all 3 are United 319s, so any problem with this one?

Needs cw rotation.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 20): the second one

Borderline, but might be passable.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 21): Seems a little on the cool side too.

Color is fine.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 20): those fence and lights are problems for the third one?

Yes, very distracting, especially whatever's in the foreground. Also a bit dark.

Quoting NZ107 (Reply 21): It's low in the frame to begin with

No, centering is fine.

thanks Dana, I made corrections accordingly.

Just got a rejection for soft, now resized the picture to 1100, so it looks sharp enough? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/m1357698182.0201dsc_3489-3.jpg

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 23):

Still looks soft around the nose,left wing and along the fuselage-All the windows look quite soft.

Cheers Mark

Thanks Mark, so try one more time with more sharpening, how it looks now?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/u1357706823.8745dsc_3489-4.jpg

Still quite soft around the center part of fuselage,made tad blurry the center windows above wing.

Cheers Mark

thanks Mark!

got this one rejected for the crop too tight, I used to like to crop a bit tight, maybe too tight, but seems not a problem for upload, so really a problem?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...30116_g1357538348.2336dsc_4184.jpg

Thanks!

Crop is a bit too tight for my eyes. It makes the plane look to be at a very strange angle. I think a bit looser crop would benefit.

thanks DL747.

got two rejections, first one was for soft, and second one is for color. Please help me to see what I can do to re-edit. Dana, pleae help, thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...118_y1357738875.5395dsc_4270-2.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...30118_f1357710622.7109dsc_5864.jpg

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 29): got two rejections, first one was for soft, and second one is for color. Please help me to see what I can do to re-edit

Both look a little yellow, and the first is a touch soft. Should be easy fixes.

thanks Dana for the quick response, corrected and reuploaded!

Hi there, this is a new upload, please comment on it, color, brightness or anything else? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/v1359120636.1513dsc_4574.jpg

Looks a bit low in the frame for me. Also, might be a bit harsh. Looks good to me other than that.

thanks DL747. Got two rejections for grainy, these were taken at sunset, so lighting was not really good, any chance to fix them? although I could not really see too much noise in the sky.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...125_o1358387232.3038dsc_4535-3.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...30125_r1358388184.0664dsc_4500.jpg

Yeah, I don't see that much grain either. You'll have to wait for further input on that one.

thanks DL747.

got this rejection for cyan cast and overexposure. but I only adjust the white balance very little to get rid of the yellow cast, now cyan? also I feel the exposure is fine, what you think? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...127_z1358563498.1955dsc_4270-4.jpg

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 36): now cyan?

Looks a bit cyan, yes.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 36): I feel the exposure is fine,

It appears the whites are a bit too strong, not sure if it is fixable. The SA symbol especially looks a bit blown out.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 36): what you think?

Overexposed, soft, and more yellow than cyan. It seems you have more problems with color than most. Perhaps there is an issue somewhere, either with your monitor, camera, or other?

Thanks Dana, this one was shot around 4pm here, so sun was low and light was warm. I corrected the exposure. But soft? I thought it was OK.

I did get a new monitor a couple months ago, still trying to get used to it.

Re-uploading some pictures, Dana please help to see if they are fine now, they were rejected for color and soft. Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/o1359847764.4213dsc_5859-3.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...eady/d1359848117.533dsc_4270-7.jpg

319 is a touch dark & cyan; 57 is a bit bright/contrasty.

Thanks Dana, those have been corrected, hopefully they are fine now.

Got a few rejections, and this one was for oversharpened to compensate a blurry/soft or out of focus picture. I looked at the raw picture, it is not blurry or out of focus. This is the second time it was rejected, first time for low contrast, and I added a bit more contrast, but now oversharpened... What you think? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...203_q1359248022.0278dsc_4990-2.jpg

Yeah, hard to judge the sharpening on that one. All that wording/advertising on the aircraft is either going to look too soft, or oversharpened. Not sure what to tell you in this case. That KL 47 you also had rejected for dark, however, shouldn't have been.

Thanks Dana!

I have a few rejections on a few 57s. one I just can not get the color right, I might need maybe Dana to help me with the processing, can I send the RAW to you? Thanks!

Then the following first 57 was for dark, but I think it is not dark at all. the second 57 was for soft, I really don't see it. And finally the 77W, for cyan tint and oversharpen, it may has the color problem, but again I can not see the sharpness problem, what is your opionion? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...214_h1360080609.0956dsc_4714-4.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...213_d1360042299.0848dsc_4754-3.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...211_b1359936541.6109dsc_4906-4.jpg

Color's a bit off again on the first two, but otherwise they should be fine. Third one indeed has a cyan cast.

Thanks Dana! got 12 rejections today, mostly for dark, kind of surprise for me, will you please take a look?

also I am uploading some new ones, please comment on these two, window shots and night shots are new to me, so please comment, thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/z1361652882.4937dsc_5088.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/p1361653339.7dsc_5034.jpg

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 46): please comment on these two

Not much aircraft visible on the first, so motive would be a concern. Second has a very strong yellow cast.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 46): got 12 rejections today, mostly for dark, kind of surprise for me, will you please take a look?

Sorry, I'm not going to go looking through your rejections to find possible issues. If you have questions about specific images, please post them here.

Thanks Dana!

Here is a new upload, please comment on it, dark? soft? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/i1363391186.6783dsc_6526.jpg

Maybe a slight cyan cast, but I don't see it being too dark or soft.

Thanks Dana. Here are a couple of new uploads, please comment on their quailities, thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/f1364089909.5539dsc_7099.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/w1364090531.1998dsc_6951.jpg

They look decent for the size, but as always, your chances of acceptance go down the larger you submit them at. The second has a slight cyan hue.

Thanks Dana!

Resubmitting a couple, this 748F is sharp enought now? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/m1364741443.3997dsc_5981-7.jpg

and this UA is bright enought? it was also rejected for level, but I think that was fine, so I did not rotate. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/m1364742116.5457dsc_6699-4.jpg lighting was not good, so I guess contrast might be flat.

The followings were rejected for grainy (noise in sky), I found that is difficult to believe, they were shot with low iso at 200. What do you think?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0331_r1364048743.234dsc_5306-2.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...331_g1364049062.0653dsc_5308-2.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...331_k1364048249.8613dsc_6858-2.jpg

Thank you very much for comments!

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 52): this 748F is sharp enought now?

Should be ok for sharpness.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 52): it was also rejected for level, but I think that was fine, so I did not rotate.

Not a good idea unless you are looking to receive a warning/ban for re-uploading.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 52): The followings were rejected for grainy (noise in sky)

I don't see them as being too noisy, but there are some banding artifacts visible in the sky, perhaps that was what the rejection was for.

Thanks again, Dana. That UA 772 was for Dark and Level, I brighten it up a bit. But based on the tower, I feel the level is fine. Definitely not looking for a warning, do you see problem with its level? Please let me know.

Banding artifacts is something new to me, any suggestion how to fix it? Or what caused banding? Thanks!

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 54): Definitely not looking for a warning, do you see problem with its level?

If you don't agree with a rejection, the proper recourse is to appeal. Simply uploading it again unchanged because you don't agree will get you a warning first, and then a ban if it happens again. Both will remain on your membership permanently, so best not to upload it unchanged if you wish to avoid that. The image looks very bright and needing ccw rotation to me.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 54): Banding artifacts is something new to me, any suggestion how to fix it? Or what caused banding?

Almost impossible to remove, better not to introduce them in the first place. From my experience they are most commonly introduced with noise reduction, either on the jpeg, or the RAW file itself.

OK, I re-worked on that UA 772, less brightening and some CCW. Also trying to avoid bandings, I actually decrease the sharpening a little bit, and then only apply minimium amount of noise reduction, maybe less sharpening only need very minor noise reduction plus they were taken in bright sunlight, so they don't really need too much noise reduction. Here is what I got, hopefully they are ok now?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/v1364772184.5224dsc_5306-3.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/b1364772359.8678dsc_5308-3.jpg

Thanks Dana again for all the help!

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 56): hopefully they are ok now?

Banding is less evident, so whatever you did has affected it - most likely the noise reduction.

Thanks Dana, I think I learned something new about sharpening and NR.

Anyway, got this one rejected for overexposed again after a re-edit. I really don't think it is too bright now, what do you think? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...408_d1364676322.6589dsc_6861-2.jpg

you do have a couple of reflections that are clipped (or close to clipped) but I have a feeling you could appeal that successfully.

OR - kick up the shadows a bit and simultaneously drop exposure to reduce white clipping.

Cheers

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 58): I really don't think it is too bright now, what do you think?

Would be better with a slight reduction in brightness.

Thanks Dana, very slightly reduced the brightness on that one and resubmitted.

Also resubmitting this one, it was rejected for cyan tint, heat haze and soft. I adjusted the white balance and resized it to a smaller size, to address the softness. But looking at the original RAW, I can see only minimum heat haze on the aircraft, there is significiant heathaze on the buildings behind, but that is a mile or more away. I reupload this version, it is acceptable? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/v1365820709.6239dsc_7659-6.jpg

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 61): I can see only minimum heat haze on the aircraft, there

I can still see it on the nose gear, though you might get away with it at this smaller size.

Thank you Dana!

Here are a few new uploads, please comment on their quality.

This AA is dark? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/k1366244317.2942dsc_6352-3.jpg

This AC is yellow? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/l1366244702.9016dsc_6349-2.jpg

And maybe this UA is cyan? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/w1366210183.9976dsc_6630-3.jpg

Thanks!

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 63): This AA is dark?

No.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 63): This AC is yellow?

A touch, yes.

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 63): And maybe this UA is cyan?

Definitely not. Actually a little yellow. Not meaning to offend, but do you perhaps have issues with color blindness? It could be the reason you often have problems with color in your images. If not, then I would strongly recommend getting your monitor properly calibrated.

Centering should also be checked on those images, as the first two are a little high.

Thanks Dana, I don't really think I am color blind. I can tell there is a color difference when I adjust the color temperature, my problem is I have not got the sense of a neutral white balance. Anyway, looking through my pictures in database, I think I am making progress in term of the color.

I have a different question, what is the policy about reflections? I have a few pictures, the aircraft itself is good and sharp, but because they were shot through windows, there are some reflection on the picture too, not too bad but definitely there, so it is a automatic rejection if there is a reflection? Thanks!

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 65): so it is a automatic rejection if there is a reflection?

In most cases, yes.

Thanks for clear that up, Dana.

This China Southern was rejected for oversharpening, as it was like this: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0421_e1365832448.848dsc_7676-5.jpg

Here is the new upload, hope it is ok now? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/l1366574520.0771dsc_7676-6.jpg

Again this one UA was rejected again for yellow tint and grainy, here is the new upload, http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/c1366563807.8105dsc_5306-5.jpg
this one was shot with good lighting, early morning with nice sunshine, but turns out it is difficult to get this one accepted, hope now it is fine. Thanks!

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 67): Here is the new upload, hope it is ok now?

No, still looks pretty bad. I assume a fair amount of heat haze you tried to fix by oversharpening?

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 67): Again this one UA was rejected again for yellow tint and grainy,

Again, whatever you are (or aren't) doing in regards to color simply isn't very effective. Most of your images have a yellow-ish cyan hue as on this one.

Thank you Dana, I try to adjust the tint to remove the yellow, but doing that I also can see the image become purple or magenta, I am wondering how you adjust because I don't see purple on the half image you processed, how did you do that?

That CZ cargo does not have too much heat haze, and I only applied low sharpening when exporting, I am not sure why it appeared oversharpened.

Thanks again!

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 69): Thank you Dana, I try to adjust the tint to remove the yellow, but doing that I also can see the image become purple or magenta, I am wondering how you adjust because I don't see purple on the half image you processed, how did you do that?

Simple adjustment to the hue. I would guess it's something you're doing with the white balance or maybe saturation. Are you setting the white balance manually?

Quoting powwwiii (Reply 69): That CZ cargo does not have too much heat haze, and I only applied low sharpening when exporting, I am not sure why it appeared oversharpened.

Yes, after seeing the original, I can see that. This is just a case then of the cheat lines being jagged to start with, and sharpening and re-sizing making it look worse.

so you just add more blue hue to the image to remove the yellow? or just decrease yellow? I tried to play with hue in LR but seem the effects were not very obvious, PS is more powerful to do the hue adjustment? Yes, I pretty much set the color temp and tint manually now, trying to address this color issue.

For that CZ cargo, it was rotating so the cheat line was not a level line, maybe I will try 1400 size with low sharpening when exporting, to see if that looks a bit better.

Thanks Dana, very helpful!

Got these two rejected for soft, or quality, I think both are ok in term of the sharpness, what do you think? Thanks!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...512_q1367456914.1248dsc_6352-5.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0512_v1367458451.269dsc_8406-4.jpg