dazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2601 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (8 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 2299 times:
Quoting Patich (Thread starter): Would like your feedback about it and it´s chances of acceptance.
1. This looks oversharp on my screen towards the rear of the aircraft while the nose looks a little soft.
2. Possibly a little heat hazed and oversharp trying to compensate for it?
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
Newark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1192 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (8 months 1 week 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2093 times:
I would say that the tail and reg area is a little overexposed and possibly a little oversharpened, and I think it could stand to be a tick higher in the frame.
Patich From Portugal, joined Apr 2011, 35 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 2052 times:
Thanks guys.
Pre-screening
Keeping in the greys skies theme and pushing it up a level.
I´ve just realize I have one photo of this "K" baby. I thought I had missed it.
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7317 posts, RR: 31 Reply 24, posted (7 months 2 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1829 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
Cockpit shot is a bit bright, but otherwise they look ok for quality. For level, try to use the verticals in the center of the frame, and keep in mind for the barrel distortion typical with uwa shots the edges should tilt in equally as much.
25 Patich: ok Pulled back a little on the 2nd. Is it better? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...y/k1351810335.7894img_1699-2-3.jpg For the level, ajusted on
27 Patich: Ok thx So, another go at leveling DC3 http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/o1351884574.3401img_1676-2.jpg Dornier http://www.airliners.net/addph
28 dlowwa: First should be ok, but second still feels cw.
29 Patich: Ok Leveling this is revealing more complicated than I thought. Now I leveled by the vertical bars between the blue column and the aircraft. http://www
30 dazbo5: Museum photography and wide angle lenses are inherently difficult when it comes to levelling. As a rule of thumb, always level using a vertical in th
32 gonzalu: What happened to the wheels? How are they hidden by the background grass? Or is the runway not actually the one in front?
33 dlowwa: Not sure what is different about it, but the missing wheels will be an issue, as it was avoidable, and it is oversharpened.
34 Patich: I should have been more specific in my previous post. You are both right. Sorry for that. The difference in the photo was the lower speed, but with th
35 Patich: Hello I would like your opinion on this photo in general and, for future reference, if the aircraft is allowed to be offcenter to the left because of
36 dlowwa: Centering should be ok, but there are exposure (high) and contrast (low) issues.
37 Patich: Ok Dana Made some corrections on exposure and contrast. Did I get it right?? Pre-scennning http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/o1353872665.6504
38 dlowwa: Better, but the light is still pretty poor.
39 Patich: One last try. http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/g1353882933.6681img_2532-3.jpg Maybe I´m aiming too high with this one. Thx Bruno
40 dlowwa: As above. Better than the first, but the light is quite poor.
41 Patich: Hello I would like your comments on this one. I like it because of the condesation in the engine, but the sun was high and in front. Does it stand a c
42 dlowwa: Sharpening seems ok, but look a little flat & noisy.
43 Patich: Hello, Made another edit to the Angola to correct contrast anf NR. Is it ok? Pre-screening http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/x1355432046.9565
45 Patich: Hello Happy hollidays to all. I need your opinion on this one. It´s another try on low shutter speed photo Pre-screening http://www.airliners.net/add
46 dlowwa: Sorry, more than a few severe problems with this one.
47 Patich: Hello Wish you all a happy new year with everything you desire. Lets just forget I showed you that one, ok...? Now I need help with this one: Post-scr
48 dlowwa: Looks like it needs a little cw. Sorry about that. I'll try and remind the screener he should be leaving personal messages with level rejections.
49 Patich: Hello again I would like your opinion on this one. I can´t say i´m happy with this edit but i´m failing to see where to improve. This was yesterday
50 dlowwa: A bit dark/noisy, but probably passable as is.
51 Patich: Hello. Would like your opinion on these: Post-screening: 1)Tui: Grainy http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...115_i1357476852.2805img_3586-2.jpg Made
52 DL747: With the first, I really don't see that much of a difference, to be honest. The second looks a bit less noisy in the sky, so it is better, but really
53 Patich: Hello Would like your opinion on this one: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/f1361035413.96img_5549-1.jpg My concerns contrast and sharp Th
54 dazbo5: It looks oversharp on my screen. Darren
55 Patich: OK Made another edit Still OS? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/k1361038187.6741img_5549-2.jpg Thx Bruno
56 dazbo5: That looks better on my screen now. Darren
57 Patich: Hello, Would like your opinion on this one I took sunday. Does it look OS to you? I'm not sure about those front letters http://www.airliners.net/addp
58 dlowwa: No, actually a touch soft and noisy in the sky. Should be fixable.
59 Patich: OK Dana New edit. Is it better? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...dy/n1363203247.1312img_6488-02.jpg Thanks again Bruno
60 dlowwa: Again, maybe a touch soft toward the front, but otherwise quality looks ok.
61 Patich: Dana, hello again Got rejected Post-screening: Overexposed: "Body of AC is overexposed." http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...ame=w1363212442.2038im
62 dlowwa: It should have a good chance at appeal.
Sponsor Message: 
From Portugal, joined Apr 2011, 35 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2601 posts, 
From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7317 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 8313 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
){kind=link}
){kind=link}