Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Feedback Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pre/Post-Screening (frankc)  
User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5280 times:

Hello

I wonder of the image below would be fine in terms of centering, that is, I centered only the aircraft and not the aircraft plus its partial reflection.
The reflection shows only a limited part of the aircraft (looks like 50% or less) so I ignored it during centering.

Any opinions appreciated!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/j1335305529.9482omvrd.jpg

PS please ignore other possible issues with the image, this is only a limited edit.

Best regards,
Frank Clautier

77 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10895 posts, RR: 26
Reply 1, posted (3 years 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5266 times:

I would probably raise it just a bit in the frame, but it might be OK the way it is.


I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
User currently offlinealevik From Canada, joined Mar 2009, 1130 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (3 years 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5265 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Centering looks passable to me. There are other issues but as you noted not a final edit.


Improvise, adapt, overcome.
User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (3 years 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 5233 times:

Thanks guys!

I eliminated some noise and oversharpened edges, along with a color correction.

Before:
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/j1335305529.9482omvrd.jpg

After:
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/e1335370416.741frankc_omvrd2.jpg

Cheers,
Frank


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5200 times:

Hi
I've currently 2 uploads in the queue of the same aircraft:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/e1335370416.741frankc_omvrd2.jpg
and
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...335564504.0476frankc_omvrd_day.jpg

Both pictures are taken on a different date.

Would these to be subject to a "Double" rejection?

Thanks!
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10895 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (2 years 12 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5192 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 4):
Would these to be subject to a "Double" rejection?

Nope. Even if taken on the same date, they'd be fine, as they're showing opposite sides of the aircraft.



I'm watching Jeopardy. The category is worst Madonna songs. "This one from 1987 is terrible".
User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 12 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5169 times:

Many thanks Vik!

A separate issue is this rejection which I've got recently.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...5_u1334594724.9077frankc_hbaff.jpg

Rejected for:
Dark
Level (personal note: needs CW rotation)

I can see the Dark issue, but I've trouble with finding the Level issue.

I used the horizon as a levelling criterium, and the verticals (the lamppost rising behind the aircraft and the little building near the right) appear to be in balance.

Any pointers near the levelling solution are greatly appreciated  

Cheers!
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 12 months 18 hours ago) and read 5137 times:

Hi

Would this one be ok for level?
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...dy/i1335885107.398frankc_dcawu.jpg

I levelled using the verticals on the buildings, but the pole still leans a bit to the left.
However, correcting for this pole, would make the all other background verticals lean to the right.

Cheers
Frank


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 8, posted (2 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 5128 times:

Maybe a touch more ccw, based on the buildings. The pole would be misleading, so you are right to ignore it.

User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 12 months 16 hours ago) and read 5126 times:

Thank you Dana.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 8):
Maybe a touch more ccw, based on the buildings.

Yes I can see it now - it will be like 0.1degrees or the like.

Cheers,
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5087 times:

Hello

A friend found this photo,taken somewhere in the seventies, in his archive.
Would it have sufficient quality to in order to get accepted?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...w1336148914.4958frankc_spantax.jpg

Cheers,
Frank


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 11, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5066 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 10):
Would it have sufficient quality to in order to get accepted?

The color and contrast need to fixed up, but it could be salvageable. If it's your friend's, he will need to be the one who uploads it; you can't upload it from your account if it doesn't belong to you.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 5055 times:

Hi Dana , thank you for your feedback - I will let him know.
Best regards,
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5030 times:

Hi Dana
Referring to our conversation about my friend's photo: at present he doesn't has an account.
Therefore, would it be acceptable - in terms of legality - if I put in the comment field a reference to his name?
Thank you for your help!
Frank


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 5026 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 13):

Airliners.net policy states that you have to be the person that must have taken the picture Frank   An account is free on here, so I wouldn't see a reason for him not to register.  



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5023 times:

Hi Tom
Thank you for your reply - that confirms what I was deducing from the terms of legality.
I will get him to create his own account.
Cheers from Antwerp  


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5020 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 15):

Cheers from Leuven back haha ;D



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 5003 times:

Hello

I got this image rejected for level ("needs cw rotation")

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...10_c1335909162.276frankc_dcawu.jpg

If I would rotate this further cw, the verticals would begin lean to the right (I assume the screener(s) were using the lightpole in the middle as reference).

Any suggestions welcome  

Thanks!
Frank


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 18, posted (2 years 11 months 3 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 4992 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 17):

Looks level to me. Maybe try appealing.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 4972 times:

Hello

I've got a shot of a Global Express, with quite some issues (overexposed,softness,dirty):

Rejected image
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...8_w1335782804.3278frankc_ecleb.jpg

So I worked on another photo, with different camera settings:
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/c1336858600.2948frankc_ecleb.jpg

However, as the photos were taken with the sun quite high in the sky, the exposure and contrast still look somehow problematic to me (especially when compared with existing images of the same aircraft).
I'm not quite sure if it would fit to the A.net standards at all?

Cheers,
Frank


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 20, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 4968 times:

Newer one is better, and should have a chance.

User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 4959 times:

Hello again,

Would the exposure of this Beech 200 be problematic (especially near the nose) ?
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/n1337095762.3585frankc_omtaa.jpg

Thank you for your help,
Frank Clautier


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 4952 times:

Don't think it would be a problem, however I'm giving dana the final call  


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: 30
Reply 23, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 4947 times:

Maybe a bit bright, but not too bad. It is a bit oversharpened and low in the frame though.

User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 11 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4944 times:

Thank you for the feedback, Dana and Tom!
Cheers,
Frank


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 4921 times:

Hi

I find it quite challenging to center this Beaver properly, so any feedback is welcome.
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/f1337531473.4934frankc_lnncc.jpg

Thank you!
Frank


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 26, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4907 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 25):
I find it quite challenging to center this Beaver properly

Centering looks fine to me.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4913 times:

Hello

Would this image be passable in terms of level?
I used the horizon as primary reference, but since the pole behind the airplane is not perpendicular with the apron, it may suggest further ccw rotation.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b.../z1337776536.9049frankc_n572ec.jpg

Thank you,
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4900 times:

Additionally, I'd like some information regarding the field "Operator" for this one:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b.../p1337790975.3651frankc_n525fd.jpg

At present, I selected: Operator - OTHER, using the title "Buddies".
However as this is a brand rather than an operator, I'm not sure whether this is correct. Alternatively, leaving it as "Untitled" doesn't seem to fit either.
Any thoughts?

Thanks a mil !
Frank Clautier


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4898 times:

as far as my intel goes it is privately owned (and I do not know the private owner as he/she is not listed at all)


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: 30
Reply 30, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4898 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 27):
Would this image be passable in terms of level?

Seems ok.

Quoting frankc (Reply 28):
Additionally, I'd like some information regarding the field "Operator" for this one

Title is not the operator. Title is what it says on the aircraft, which is why most private aircraft are titled 'Untitled' rather than 'Private'. 'Buddies' is prominently visible on the aircraft, so that should be fine as the title. If you wish, you can include the operator in brackets 'Buddies (Operator)'.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 31, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 4873 times:

Thanks for the info Dana and Tom!
Cheers
Frank


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (2 years 11 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 4880 times:

Hi,

Would this photo be suitable in terms of vertical centering and noise/grain?
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...dy/r1338064710.865frankc_fhaav.jpg

Thanks !
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 33, posted (2 years 11 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 4870 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 32):
Would this photo be suitable in terms of vertical centering and noise/grain?

It is too high. There is some slight noise noticeable, but I think it should be ok.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 4784 times:

Hello,

I'm not quite sure about this image, in terms of color,exposure and contrast. It was shot in the late evening and I hoped to get a nice lighting, but it looks it turned out rather the opposite.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/s1338912584.2122frankc_vtaat.jpg

Thanks for any feedback!
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 35, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4778 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 33):
I'm not quite sure about this image

Should be ok.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 4733 times:

Hello again,

The elevator of this Falcon 50 seems to vanish into the sky - I guess it's caused by the angle of the camera relative to the aircraft :

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/l1339191346.3009fgxtm.jpg

Would it likely trigger a soft rejection?

PS please ignore other issues, since this edit isn't completed yet.


Thanks!
Frank Clautier

[Edited 2012-06-08 15:27:50]

User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 37, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4726 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 35):
Would it likely trigger a soft rejection?

Seems ok for sharpness.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4663 times:

Hi,

Would it be possible to have a second opinion for this Beech 350 please? Personally I think it's a bit grainy/soft in places.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/e1339594815.4196frankc_fhacj.jpg

Thanks again!
Frank


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 39, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 4658 times:

A little noisy, but shouldn't be a problem. I don't see it as being soft.

User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4552 times:

Hello

Does this image feels ok in terms of Saturation and Color (White) Balance?
The original photo was made using an ExpoDisc and hence I didn't touch any color adjustments in Photoshop.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/w1340398763.2716frankc_dcleo.jpg


Thanks!
Frank


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 41, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 4513 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 39):
Does this image feels ok in terms of Saturation and Color (White) Balance?

Color should be fine.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (2 years 10 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 4477 times:

Thanks Dana, could I also ask the same question on this one?
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b.../b1340573344.1531frankc_n351cc.jpg

Thanks a mil!

Frank


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 43, posted (2 years 10 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4464 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 42):
could I also ask the same question on this one?

Maybe a touch blue, but should be fine.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (2 years 10 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4378 times:

Hi,

This image was rejected for both Soft and Dark.

I've difficulties with identifying the area(s) leading to these rejection categories so I'd be grateful for any pointers.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...9_w1340396910.5766frankc_dbubi.jpg

Thanks!
Cheers,
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 45, posted (2 years 10 months 18 hours ago) and read 4338 times:

Hi,
Please disregard my previous post - I'll appeal, and, in case of rejection confirmation, trying a make-over.
Cheers,
Frank


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 46, posted (2 years 10 months 17 hours ago) and read 4329 times:

Well I'll still give you the feedback though. Dark looks a bit weird to me but maybe adding a touch of exposure might help. As for soft: I'm still looking..


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 47, posted (2 years 10 months 12 hours ago) and read 4311 times:

Cheers Tom, the head screener confirmed that the image indeed lacks some brightness so I'll take it back to the drawing board  
Greetz,
Frank


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 48, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4197 times:

Hi,
Would this one be acceptable in terms of vertical centering?
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...dy/c1341841164.916frankc_spyve.jpg
Thanks!
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 49, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 4188 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 47):
Would this one be acceptable in terms of vertical centering?

Should be.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 50, posted (2 years 8 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3479 times:

Hi,

Would this image be passable in terms of color/saturation and exposure?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/r1345721198.8348frankc_hbimj.jpg

Many thanks!
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 51, posted (2 years 8 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 3462 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 50):
Would this image be passable in terms of color/saturation and exposure?

Should be. I might crop it a bit wider though.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 52, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3295 times:

Hello again!

Looking at this image below,
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/j1346712918.9862vc-2.jpg

Would this be passable in terms of Contrast/Exposure/Dark?

There are other problems, but this is just a quick-and-dirty edit, mainly to pop up the issues above.

Many thanks in advance,
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 53, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3304 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 51):
Would this be passable in terms of Contrast/Exposure/Dark?

I would brighten it a bit, and bring the contrast down.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 54, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3272 times:

Hi,

I'd like to request some info/feedback on the following rejection:

Rejection reasons
1) Soft
2) Color (blue tint)

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r..._m1346066690.5781frankc_dbekp2.jpg

I understand that the image may be a touch blue, but I don't see the softness... or would the latter be a consequence of the former?

Thanks a mil as always!

Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 55, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3270 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 53):
I understand that the image may be a touch blue, but I don't see the softness... or would the latter be a consequence of the former?

Sharpness ok, but color is off.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 56, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3184 times:

Hello again

I've posted 2 images in the queue: same aircraft, same date.
Are these photos likely to be sufficient different in order to avoid a double rejection?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/s1346747117.2554frankc_cgdpf.jpg
and
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b.../r1346761028.5464frankc_cgdpf2.jpg

Thanks again,
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 57, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3175 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 55):
Are these photos likely to be sufficient different in order to avoid a double rejection?

No, they will be considered double, so please upload only one. First one has nicer light, I would go with that one.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 58, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3153 times:

Hi

I've made a quick-and dirty edit of an image:
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...g/ready/h1347553328.3717eirja1.jpg

I'd like to check for 2 issues please:
1) The crop. Not only have the wings been cut, but also a bit of the horizontal stabilo.
2) The exposure (fuselage too bright?)
.
Are these 2 items likely to cause problems? (Please ignore the other issues in this edit)

Many thanks!
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 59, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3146 times:

A little bright, but should be passable; crop on right ok, but better wider on left not to cut stab.

User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 60, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3102 times:

Hi

These images seem to have some issues - would it be possible to point to the areas involved please?

Rejected for softness
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...5_c1346916505.4121frankc_dbekp.jpg

Rejected for oversharpened (I think it's the registration mark)
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...5_t1346970863.0328frankc_cfbcr.jpg

Many thanks again!
Frank clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 61, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3098 times:

First is a little soft on the left side/tail area, second is borderline, the cheatlines are making it look oversharpened. Maybe just the horizontal stab. and winglets are a bit jagged, the rest should be fine.

User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 62, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2997 times:

Hi again,
I was just wondering if this one would suit in terms of vertical centering please?
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/j1348323831.5255frankc_eirja.jpg
Thanks a mil!
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 63, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2986 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 62):
I was just wondering if this one would suit in terms of vertical centering please?

A little high, but should be passable.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 64, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2642 times:

Hi,

The top of the roof of the hangar behind the aircraft in the image below looks a bit like a thick halo, and it's probably even more emphasized by the low sun. Does this necessarily kill the image?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/v1350252536.8146frankc_vc2.jpg

Thank you for your advise,

Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 65, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2637 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 63):
The top of the roof of the hangar behind the aircraft in the image below looks a bit like a thick halo, and it's probably even more emphasized by the low sun. Does this necessarily kill the image?

Not sure what you mean, but I don't see the hangar being an issue.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 66, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2625 times:

Thanks Dana - it's just the top of the hangar that looked smudged to me.
Cheers
Frank


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 67, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2556 times:

Hello,

This is a scanned photo - I've no significant experience with this type of image processing so I'd be grateful for your feedback!

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/k1350772416.8868frankc_ooctw.jpg

Many thanks,
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 68, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2553 times:

That's not too bad for a scan. A touch soft & grainy, but should be acceptable. The only real problem is the poor light, but that has nothing to do with the scan, just looks like the weather that day wasn't too great.

User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2381 times:

Hi

If I would crop this image tighter, I'd be able to get rid of the lightpole on the left, but this would still leave a large bright area though. So I'm just wondering if the cropping is ok?
It's just a draft, so please ignore the other flaws.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/f1351809255.6847frankc_grjxp.jpg

Thank you for your help!
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 70, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2377 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 68):
So I'm just wondering if the cropping is ok?

Crop should be fine.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 71, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 2000 times:

Hi

I received a rejection a while ago for color cast (green/cyan) and dark.

I did a few corrections and I think the color feels better now.
However I think that it's maybe a touch too bright in the new edit, so I was wondering how it looks like on your end?

Rejected:
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r..._f1354793176.9529frankc_n310gj.jpg

Corrected:
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b.../z1355735057.0776frankc_n310gj.jpg

Thank you!
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 72, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 15 hours ago) and read 1993 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 70):
Corrected:

Should be ok.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 73, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1424 times:

Hello

I inserted this image in the queue:
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b.../t1364988725.6364frankc_n317mj.jpg

However the large version of the image (in the queue) has a smaller size compared with the original edit (and consequently it looks softer too).

Am I uploading perhaps an invalid size (which is, in this particular case, 1024x678) ?

Thanks for looking at my issue  

Best regards,
Frank


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 74, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 1402 times:

Quoting frankc (Reply 72):
Am I uploading perhaps an invalid size

That size is at the minimum, but is acceptable.

Quoting frankc (Reply 72):
However the large version of the image (in the queue) has a smaller size compared with the original edit (and consequently it looks softer too).

Can't really comment as I can only see the one you've uploaded, though it doesn't appear to be too soft.


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 75, posted (2 years 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1398 times:

Thanks Dana,

I checked at another PC, the image stretches to the original size hence it must be an issue on my local machine.

Cheers
Frank


User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 292 times:

Hello
It has been quite a while since my last upload. Looking for feedback on this one:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/h1397249718.6639frankc_eclnq.jpg

More specifically, is this image passable in terms of contrast/brightness?

Thanks!
Regards,
Frank Clautier


User currently offlinepowwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 360 posts, RR: 0
Reply 77, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 259 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

looks maybe just a tad dark, but not too much.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Pre/Post-Screening (frankc)
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