frankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 99 posts, RR: 0 Posted (1 year 7 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 4834 times:
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.
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31 Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4620 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.
frankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 99 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (1 year 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4584 times:
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!
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?
frankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 99 posts, RR: 0 Reply 27, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 4466 times:
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.
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.
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31 Reply 30, posted (1 year 6 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4451 times:
Quoting frankc (Reply 27): Would this image be passable in terms of level?
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)'.
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)
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31 Reply 61, posted (1 year 2 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2650 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.
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31 Reply 65, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2189 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.
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31 Reply 68, posted (1 year 1 month 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 2105 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.
frankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 99 posts, RR: 0 Reply 69, posted (1 year 1 month 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1933 times:
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.