Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Feedback Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Post/Pre-Screening: Level, Motive, Quality  
User currently offlineKaphias From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 315 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 829 times:

Trying to get caught up on stuff from the last few months:

1. Rejected two separate times with the message "needs CW rotation". I'm clearly not seeing it, so if you could give an idea of how much more it needs, I'd appreciate it.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N394NS-PAJN-11-09-2011-3.jpg

2. I'm pretty sure the quality isn't there, but for future reference on this spot, is the motive ok with respect to distance and center? I was trying to frame the mountains. I really love this shot and can't wait to have another go at it with a real camera.  http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N791AS-PAJN-01-15-2012-1.jpg

3. Rejected for soft with the comment "Over saturated too. Also, portions of the AC are soft." I now realize that the drastic lighting variations are probably the problem with this one, but I think the shot is unique because the tail has been taken off the aircraft. Any use in trying this one again? What portions of the plane are soft?
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N337AK-PAJN-01-15-2012-2.jpg

4. I've got one sunset shot in before, not sure if these two are too dark.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N5972E-PAJN-04-08-2012.jpg

5.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N88412-PAJN-04-08-2012.jpg

6. Something doesn't feel right on this one. More contrast maybe?
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N337AK-PAJN-04-13-2012.jpg

7. Backlit for sure, but I was hoping the fact that it would be new to the database, shows 3 in one frame, and is a rare occurrence at this airport (yearly at best) might help.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-90-00189-PAJN-04-13-2012.jpg

Thanks very much, as always.  


Flown on: C150, C172, C206, Beaver, Otter, Jetstream 32, Q400, CRJ7/9, E135/40/45, A320, B732/4/7/8/9, B744, B752, B763
19 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2934 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 827 times:

Quoting Kaphias (Thread starter):
I'm clearly not seeing it, so if you could give an idea of how much more it needs, I'd appreciate it.

Use the fence on the left of the frame for reference, it's leaning to the left and therefore needs some CW rotation.

Quoting Kaphias (Thread starter):
I'm pretty sure the quality isn't there, but for future reference on this spot, is the motive ok with respect to distance and center?

I think that's a great composition showing the aircraft departing, the airport and surrounding scenery. It might not work for here though and as you suggest, distance and motive may be given.

Quoting Kaphias (Thread starter):
What portions of the plane are soft?

The rear of the aircraft and the floats apear soft on my screen.

Quoting Kaphias (Thread starter):
I've got one sunset shot in before, not sure if these two are too dark.

They don't look dark on my screen, but could do with a little more contrast.

Quoting Kaphias (Thread starter):
Something doesn't feel right on this one. More contrast maybe?

Looks fine to me, possibly a little sharp though.

Quoting Kaphias (Thread starter):
Backlit for sure

Good attempt, but the lighting was against you that day.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 2, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 805 times:

The second will need a tighter crop. Both it and the third have very noisy skies as well, so that would need to taken care of. The fourth and fifth are flat, and have strong banding in the sky. The sky quality issues might not be fixable, as I seem to recall you were using a point and shoot, which would cause the issues seen here. The sixth is actually not too bad, just a little flat & yellow, and should be fixable.

User currently offlineSoaring1972 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 799 times:

In my eyes the first one does not need any rotation! Sorry, but this fence is not the first fence in the world which is not vertical!!!! Whatch the small wodden house! And look to the rotor-mast, in my eyes this mast is also vertical!
If you take a vertikal line and put this to the left side of the house we can discuss if the picture needs 0,1 deg cw!!!
But I have had the same discussion with no success with one of my pictures!

The second one is a beautyfull picture without any chance in this database. If you crop this one it will loose the panoramic aspect of the mountains and you loose the reflection in the lake!!!


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 793 times:

Given that the helicopter shot is most likely taken with a wide-angle lens at a short focal length , I would expect that fence to lean slightly to the left. Perhaps not as much as it is, but natural lens distortion must be considered with this type of shot. I had a few rejections recently where 'level' was cited as one of the rejection reasons (there were others so I couldn't appeal), so with the reupload I just put a note explaining that it was a wide-angle shot and therefore distortion will have an effect.

Karl


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 5, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 776 times:

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 4):
Given that the helicopter shot is most likely taken with a wide-angle lens at a short focal length , I would expect that fence to lean slightly to the left.

??

Wide angle lenses usually have barrel distortion, which causes the edges to lean toward the center, not away (that would be pincushion distortion). Following your argument, the fence should be leaning right, which goes to show just how much the image is unlevel.

Quoting Soaring1972 (Reply 3):
Whatch the small wodden house!

Yes, it's leaning left = cw rotation needed.


User currently offlineSoaring1972 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 753 times:

"Yes, it's leaning left = cw rotation needed."

http://s1.directupload.net/file/d/2862/c5swcm5h_jpg.htm



???


User currently offlineJakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7
Reply 7, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 744 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 5):
Wide angle lenses usually have barrel distortion, which causes the edges to lean toward the center

Sorry, I meant likely taken with a telephoto at a short focal length. But like I said, perhaps the fence shouldn't lean quite as much as it does. My point was simply that possible lens distortions should be taken into account when screening. If I spot distortions in my images these days I just leave an explanatory note. Not had any trouble since.

Karl


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 8, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 744 times:

Quoting Soaring1972 (Reply 6):

Nice work, but a) we don't magnify to 500% or use a graph to check level, and b) even at 500% the shed is still leaning left, so your nice little diagram reinforces what I said, thanks!


User currently offlineSoaring1972 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 741 times:

@ Dlowwa
Interesting answer! No other comment is needed!  


User currently offlineKaphias From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 721 times:

Getting closer?
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N394NS-PAJN-11-09-2011-4.jpg



Flown on: C150, C172, C206, Beaver, Otter, Jetstream 32, Q400, CRJ7/9, E135/40/45, A320, B732/4/7/8/9, B744, B752, B763
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 11, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 720 times:

Quoting Kaphias (Reply 10):
Getting closer?

A little too much, I'd say.


User currently offlineKaphias From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 715 times:

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N394NS-PAJN-11-09-2011-5.jpg

Corrected the yellow cast, brought the contrast up a bit.
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N337AK-PAJN-04-13-2012-2.jpg



Flown on: C150, C172, C206, Beaver, Otter, Jetstream 32, Q400, CRJ7/9, E135/40/45, A320, B732/4/7/8/9, B744, B752, B763
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 13, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 710 times:

Quoting Kaphias (Reply 12):

A bit better, but still needs to be somewhere between this one and the original.

Quoting Kaphias (Reply 12):
Corrected the yellow cast, brought the contrast up a bit.

Not bad, but still looks a bit yellow.


User currently offlineKaphias From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 707 times:

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N394NS-PAJN-11-09-2011-6.jpg

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w95/Kaphias/Kaphias-N337AK-PAJN-04-13-2012-3.jpg



Flown on: C150, C172, C206, Beaver, Otter, Jetstream 32, Q400, CRJ7/9, E135/40/45, A320, B732/4/7/8/9, B744, B752, B763
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 15, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 706 times:

First should be ok, second still a bit yellow, but might be passable.

User currently offlineKaphias From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 691 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 15):
First should be ok, second still a bit yellow, but might be passable.

Great! Thanks very much Dana, Jan, Darren, and Karl.



Flown on: C150, C172, C206, Beaver, Otter, Jetstream 32, Q400, CRJ7/9, E135/40/45, A320, B732/4/7/8/9, B744, B752, B763
User currently offlinekaphias From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 8 months 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 642 times:

So oddly enough the second got accepted and nearly made it to the front page, while the first got rejected for quality, motive, and contrast with the comment "flat contrast, glare on cabin distracting". Contrast I can fix, but there was no mention from anyone in this topic about the quality (which is always borderline with my shots, I know) or the glare being an issue. I figured that it would be better to ask for advice here before going on, whether that be an appeal, or editing and trying again if it's worth it.


Flown on: C150, C172, C206, Beaver, Otter, Jetstream 32, Q400, CRJ7/9, E135/40/45, A320, B732/4/7/8/9, B744, B752, B763
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 18, posted (2 years 8 months 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 632 times:

If it were just for the glare, I would say appeal. The contrast is passable imho, but the overall quality I have to admit is borderline. Your call if you want to appeal - it is a new reg. so that might help just a bit.

User currently offlinekaphias From United States of America, joined Nov 2010, 315 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 8 months 2 days ago) and read 596 times:

Appeal successful, thanks again Dana!


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kaphias
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kaphias




Flown on: C150, C172, C206, Beaver, Otter, Jetstream 32, Q400, CRJ7/9, E135/40/45, A320, B732/4/7/8/9, B744, B752, B763
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Post/Pre-Screening: Level, Motive, 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