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 3 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 5329 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 exactly 12 years ago today! , 11225 posts, RR: 25
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 5315 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, 1161 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 5314 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 3 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5282 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 (3 years 3 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5249 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 exactly 12 years ago today! , 11225 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 5241 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 (3 years 3 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 5218 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 (3 years 3 months 1 day ago) and read 5186 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: 29
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 23 hours ago) and read 5177 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 (3 years 3 months 23 hours ago) and read 5175 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 (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 5136 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: 29
Reply 11, posted (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 5115 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 (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 5104 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 (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5079 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 (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5075 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 (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5072 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 (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5069 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 (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 5052 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: 29
Reply 18, posted (3 years 2 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 5041 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 (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 5021 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: 29
Reply 20, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 5017 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 (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 5008 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 (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 5001 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: 29
Reply 23, posted (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4996 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 (3 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 4993 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 (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 4970 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: 29
Reply 26, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 4956 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 (3 years 2 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 4962 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 (3 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 4949 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 (3 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4947 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: 29
Reply 30, posted (3 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4947 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 (3 years 2 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4922 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 (3 years 2 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4929 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: 29
Reply 33, posted (3 years 2 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4919 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 (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 4833 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: 29
Reply 35, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 4827 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 (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 4782 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: 29
Reply 37, posted (3 years 1 month 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4775 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 (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4712 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: 29
Reply 39, posted (3 years 1 month 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4707 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 (3 years 1 month 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4601 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: 29
Reply 41, posted (3 years 1 month 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 4562 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 (3 years 1 month 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4526 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: 29
Reply 43, posted (3 years 1 month 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 4513 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 (3 years 1 month 2 days ago) and read 4427 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 (3 years 1 month 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 4387 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 (3 years 1 month 1 day ago) and read 4378 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 (3 years 1 month 19 hours ago) and read 4360 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 (3 years 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4246 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: 29
Reply 49, posted (3 years 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 4237 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 11 months 1 week 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3528 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: 29
Reply 51, posted (2 years 11 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 3511 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 11 months 17 hours ago) and read 3344 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: 29
Reply 53, posted (2 years 11 months 16 hours ago) and read 3353 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 10 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3321 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: 29
Reply 55, posted (2 years 10 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 3319 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 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3233 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: 29
Reply 57, posted (2 years 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3224 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 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3202 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: 29
Reply 59, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 3195 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 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3151 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: 29
Reply 61, posted (2 years 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3147 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 10 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3046 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: 29
Reply 63, posted (2 years 10 months 1 week 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 3035 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 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2691 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: 29
Reply 65, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2686 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 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2674 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 9 months 1 week 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 2605 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: 29
Reply 68, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2602 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 9 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2430 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: 29
Reply 70, posted (2 years 9 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2426 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 7 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 2049 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: 29
Reply 72, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 2042 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 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1473 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: 29
Reply 74, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 1451 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 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 1447 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 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 341 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, 362 posts, RR: 0
Reply 77, posted (1 year 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 308 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