Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Feedback Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Post-screening - Quality  
User currently offlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2550 posts, RR: 17
Posted (2 years 3 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 515 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I've been getting an unusual amount of "quality" rejections which I just don't understand. Not only are my original files good quality, but I haven't even cropped a lot before editing and uploading. I have been holding off about appealing and posting on the forum and whatnot but it's getting really frustrating since I have not changed my workflow or shooting technique. Better yet, some of the photos rejected for "bad quality" were taken in almost ideal conditions. I use a Canon 5D Mark II and 100-400 lens. So can someone explain what exactly you mean by quality?

I have the following two recent examples:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...412_k1333585429.9674img_1904-1.jpg

The F-15 shot, although backlit, had no issues with quality when viewed at original resolution. Indeed, it was also rejected for oversharpened and dark but that is separate from my issue in this thread. I simply don't see how you judge this "quality" criteria.

Another example:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...412_o1333585289.8939img_1626-1.jpg

Quality was ticked again as a reason also citing "heat haze". True, there is haze on the inner flaps, gear and rear part of fuselage but the rest of the wing and front fuselage is exceptional quality in the original file. Whatever haze you see is 100% due to jetwash. I'm too lazy right now, but I can certainly find many examples on the site where half the aircraft is covered by jetwash, especially shots of fighter jets in burner.

Additionally this was marked as "level". Understandable and common rejection. But if the screener thinks it isn't level I'd like to know what vertical or horizontal references he used? Because there are none. The runway is bound to look "crooked" when viewed from such an angle from an elevated position. If I "level" the runway the mountain would look like the leaning tower of Piza.

If a screener would like me to send originals of some of my "quality" rejections I can gladly do it.

Thanks.

5 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31
Reply 1, posted (2 years 3 months 22 hours ago) and read 496 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I checked the screening log, and over the past two months, you've only had two images rejected for quality, the two above. For the E-3, you are right, jetwash usually isn't considered a detriment to quality unless it's covering a significant portion of the frame. I'd say about 1/3 of yours is covered (up to and including USAF titles), so borderline. If you look at the earlier (bigger) version you submitted, the top of the fuselage is soft, perhaps from heat haze, unrelated to the jetwash. This is hidden well-enough in the smaller version, imho. For level, lacking any real reference, we have to go by feel, and when I looked at the image before reading what you had written below it, I also thought the level looked wrong, so I'll have to agree with whoever screened it.

For the F-15, pretty much the same thing - quality looks passable to me, but I don't have an issue with the dark rejection.


User currently offlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2550 posts, RR: 17
Reply 2, posted (2 years 3 months 22 hours ago) and read 491 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Thanks for the reply Dana

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 1):
I checked the screening log, and over the past two months, you've only had two images rejected for quality, the two above.

I certainly can't go back two months. However in the "rejected photos" tab in photographer's corner I found three others. And there definitely was more before that as well, although I don't think I have the rejection emails anymore to find them.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...20329_k1332307425.3803img_7661.jpg - I was thinking of including this one in the original post as well but decided the first two were enough examples.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...329_o1332307054.7979img_6829-1.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...329_i1332307191.8156img_9481-1.jpg

all three of those also had quality...among other things.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 1):
the top of the fuselage is soft, perhaps from heat haze, unrelated to the jetwash. This is hidden well-enough in the smaller version, imho. For level, lacking any real reference, we have to go by feel, and when I looked at the image before reading what you had written below it, I also thought the level looked wrong, so I'll have to agree with whoever screened it.

So should I then just re-level and re-upload?

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 1):
For the F-15, pretty much the same thing - quality looks passable to me, but I don't have an issue with the dark rejection.

Dark and soft have also been very common for me lately. Don't know why but I can work on those myself....could be my monitor or something with my workflow. The "quality" is the one that bugs me, since I can see on the original files that it is good.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 464 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 3 months 21 hours ago) and read 483 times:

Think heat haze might be one of your problems on some pics, but who am I to judge. Just my two cents, I might be totally wrong.


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31
Reply 4, posted (2 years 3 months 10 hours ago) and read 449 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 2):
However in the "rejected photos" tab in photographer's corner I found three others.

Oops, you're right, I missed those, sorry.

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 2):
So should I then just re-level and re-upload?

Yes, I would do that and see how it goes.

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 2):
Dark and soft have also been very common for me lately. Don't know why but I can work on those myself....could be my monitor or something with my workflow.

Don't think it has much to do with your monitor; looking at your rejection log, it seems like most of the dark rejections were in pretty bad light, so it's not your editing, you're just starting with tough images.

Quoting sovietjet (Reply 2):
The "quality" is the one that bugs me, since I can see on the original files that it is good.

You'd probably help yourself by submitting some of them at smaller sizes; the others you're probably just attempting really tough shots, so you shouldn't be too hard on yourself, most people wouldn't be able to pull them off either.

Btw, how did you manage to get the a2a shot of the raptor? Pretty lucky it would seem.


User currently offlinesovietjet From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2003, 2550 posts, RR: 17
Reply 5, posted (2 years 2 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 353 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 4):
Don't think it has much to do with your monitor; looking at your rejection log, it seems like most of the dark rejections were in pretty bad light, so it's not your editing, you're just starting with tough images.

I do like to challenge myself. Sunny side ons are boring to me  
Quoting dlowwa (Reply 4):
Btw, how did you manage to get the a2a shot of the raptor? Pretty lucky it would seem.

From the boomer window of a KC-135 at Red Flag  


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Post-screening - Quality
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format