Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Feedback Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pre/post Screening (jpmagero)  
User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1370 times:

Had the following rejection for: "Bad crop motiv soft personal", and I don't understand the "bad crop/motiv", how should I adjust it? The balance seems right to me with roughly equal space above/below the ac. I see the "soft" and another color issue to fix anyways, but need some help on the crop. Thanks.

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...9351__n805mr_rsw_20120928_1200.jpg


John M - Aussie expat in the US
36 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1369 times:

Another for comment:

reject reason: "Oversaturated, magenta cast, dirty top right".

Oversaturated - maybe, with the sun at that direct angle, I think it looks about right?
Magenta cast - it was taken late afternoon near sunset and the clouds are going pink, but is the body of the aircraft really magenta?
Dirty - looked at my larger crop, and that's just the sky, not any dirt, though I can easily "clean" that if needed

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/..._airforcetwo_rsw_20120928_1200.jpg



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2919 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1364 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Thread starter):
Had the following rejection for: "Bad crop motiv soft personal",

The composition looks fine to me too, cropping just aft of the wing. It is a little soft though.

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 1):
Oversaturated - maybe, with the sun at that direct angle, I think it looks about right?

I have to agree with the screening decision, the colours look too strong to me.

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 1):
Magenta cast

I must say I can't see a magenta cast. The fuselage looks white to me so there's nothing you can do about the natural colour in the sky, it's just the time of day.

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 1):
Dirty - looked at my larger crop, and that's just the sky, not any dirt, though I can easily "clean" that if needed

In the far upper corner, it does look like it's a large dust spot rather than a cloud. It's easily removed though.

I'm surprised you didn't get a comment about noise as well. There's a little noticeable noise in the sky although it's probably marginal as to whether it's acceptable or not. I never know what the standard is here with regards to noise these days, it seems inconsistant.

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 offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1348 times:

Thanks Darren - I am ok with putting these through the queue again, but I don't want to fix something that isn't broken, and if I can't see something after it's pointed out to me (magenta cast, crop, motive) then I will just leave as is - not much else I can do.

Will look at the saturation and noise too...txs.



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 1335 times:

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 2):
In the far upper corner, it does look like it's a large dust spot rather than a cloud. It's easily removed though.

I see that, but I just checked my sequence of photos before and after and it's definitely not dust, it's just a darker portion of cloud. I could remove it to satisfy the screeners - not a big deal.



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10095 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 1325 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Just to add another opinion...

On the first one, my guess on the motive/crop is that you cut off the engine. Although, I'm not sure it would look any better with the whole engine there. Might be one of those aircraft that really only look good with either a tight crop on the nose, or to just forward of the wing, or the whole airplane in the frame.

On the second one, I can definitely see magenta in the sky and on the paved areas. I think it could stand to have some of that removed - I doubt you'd notice much difference in the white of the airplane, since it's so bright anyway. As for oversaturation, the green/yellow grass pops quite a bit, but doesn't quite look oversaturated to me. Though again, I'd say no harm in a slight reduction.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently onlineNZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 6436 posts, RR: 38
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1319 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 5):
As for oversaturation, the green/yellow grass pops quite a bit, but doesn't quite look oversaturated to me.

I wonder if overcontrasted would have been a better rejection 'reason' - it seems like part of it may have been caused from the contrast slider too.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 5):

On the first one, my guess on the motive/crop is that you cut off the engine.

My thought too - it's only a little more to include the rest of the exhaust.

And with the magenta - I think it's pretty faint.. I mean I can see it but it by no means detracts from the image significantly enough for me to think of it as a rejection reason..



It's all about the destination AND the journey.
User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1318 times:

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 5):
my guess on the motive/crop is that you cut off the engine

could be...I figured that if I cropped just off the wing would be ok - I guess it's a question of preference in these cases. Will look for another shot there, since that is essentially out of the camera, though I do have others in the sequence to use instead, even though this is my preferred shot.



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 1316 times:

I've worked on the rejects above and have the below in the queue - do you feel they correct what was wrong with the originals?

Air Force Two: http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...4img79656_980002_krsw_20120928.jpg

Customs and Border Control (the original crop was out of the camera so had to use another shot): http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...2img79361_n805mr_krsw_20120928.jpg



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10095 posts, RR: 26
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 week 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1308 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

They both look a bit washed out to me - low on contrast, and maybe a bit bright for my taste, though possibly fine for A.net.


"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 1280 times:

Here's another for some feedback, rejected for soft, dark:

soft - I'm having a hard time getting the balance right...getting some photos as both soft then over-sharpened with only the slightest tweak in between. My eyes tell me that this is not really that soft, but not sure I trust my eyes on this anymore.

dark - it was taken before sunrise, and I put that in the comment, so it's not going to be "bright" - the lighting is naturally soft. Should I just brighten it up, or just drop it as it will never be "bright" due to the natural lighting.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...98img72588_ok-geb_prg_20120902.jpg

Thanks!



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 1277 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 10):
Here's another for some feedback, rejected for soft, dark:

Only a bit soft, but contrast probably should have been included with the rejection, as it's quite low. You should be able to adjust the brightness/contrast, see the left side:

http://imageshack.us/a/img211/3228/20121012n13491804763398.jpg


User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 1273 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 11):
You should be able to adjust the brightness/contrast

Cheers...I'll give that a go - it would make it brighter than the actual scene, but I suppose that's ok - hard to tell based on the image.



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 1248 times:

quick pre-screening question: does this have a chance here? Was a quick shot without a lot of prep for the settings, though I quite like the view of the plane coming in for landing just ahead of the rain. Cheers.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/vandari...087677303/in/photostream/lightbox/



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 14, posted (2 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1218 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 13):
does this have a chance here?

Probably not, a little too distant/dark. Sorry.


User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (1 year 12 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1188 times:

Help...I still don't see it...it's the same shot I had here before, the plane is white, any cast in the ground has to be the real color. Worth an appeal or just give it up?

Reject reason: ground still has a purple cast oversharpened contrast colour personal

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...4img79656_980002_krsw_20120928.jpg



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 16, posted (1 year 12 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1165 times:

Don't think those rejection reasons were quite correct; for me it would have been a color & overexposed rejection. There is a magenta (similar to purple I guess) cast. See the adjusted left side:

http://imageshack.us/a/img823/2323/20121019d13498645787424.jpg


User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 11 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1105 times:

I've brightened up this shot (rejected for dark) - any better?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...mg72588_ok-geb_prg_20120902_v3.jpg



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 18, posted (1 year 11 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 1090 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 17):
any better?

Should be passable.


User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1073 times:

I'm pretty happy with this shot of a sunstrike, but do you think it's something that could work here?

http://flic.kr/p/dokUyk



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 20, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1064 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 19):
do you think it's something that could work here?

Hard to tell, as Flickr isn't the best for judging quality, but it might have a chance.


User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1029 times:

How does this edit look (bit of NR on the sun, and sharpening on the outline of the aircraft)? Are the edges of the sun too soft?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b....1028n949fr_krsw_20121027_1024.jpg



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 22, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1014 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 21):
Are the edges of the sun too soft?

  I don't think we'll be judging solar sharpness. The aircraft does look a little soft/blurry though.


User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1006 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 22):
I don't think we'll be judging solar sharpness

Don't know what I was thinking  
Quoting dlowwa (Reply 22):
a little soft/blurry

Did some selective sharpening...better? http://www.airliners.net/uf/165178/phpHJX4w1.jpeg



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 24, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 982 times:

Still borderline, but not sure how much better you'll be able to do. If you're happy with it, just give it a go as it is.

User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 954 times:

I'm thinking of appealing this, as I don't agree that the contrast is too high, nor that the image is grainy. It first got rejected for dark, and I brightened it up for that, now it's "High Contrast grainy contrast". Thoughts or hints as to where the contrast is too high?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...mg72588_ok-geb_prg_20120902_v3.jpg



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2919 posts, RR: 2
Reply 26, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 950 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 25):
nor that the image is grainy.

I don't agree the contrast is too high, it looks about right to me but there is noticable grain. Given it's a shot taken after sunset and you may have had to increase the ISO, it's not surprising to have some grain. This site doesn't like any noticable grain though so you'll need to reduce with noise reduction.

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 offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 952 times:

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 26):
Given it's a shot taken after sunset

exactly...it's taken before sunrise, using a low ISO and long exposure using a remote. After the first "dark" rejection I brightened it up (a lot brighter than the actual environment was at the time) and that may have introduced the grain/noise, which IMO, is not that noticeable, but I guess it is what it is. Frustrating, but oh well.



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 28, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 949 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 25):
I'm thinking of appealing this

Yes, an appeal might be worthwhile.


User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 941 times:

"Screener rejection correct" oh well, moving on.


John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 929 times:

Have given it one more go...am worried that the NR may have softened up the underbelly too much, do you think it's ok? or too much?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...mg72588_ok-geb_prg_20120902_v4.jpg



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 31, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 923 times:

I would give it a little more sharpening, but otherwise I think it should be ok (as I indicated above).

User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 11 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 917 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 31):
I would give it a little more sharpening

Done...thanks for the feedback.

Here's one I uploaded...I like the shot - considering it's from inside the aircraft, but not sure if this would be backlit and soft? Sun is hitting the wings, but I'm on the wrong side of the body - does it have a chance?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...71542_g-civv_lhr_20120829_1200.jpg



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 916 times:

Rejected for "quality soft".

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...48n949fr_krsw_20121027_1024_v2.jpg

The silhouette of the aircraft is not soft, so I have to assume it is the sun that is being called soft?

As to quality, there is nothing I can do about that, but when looking at the silhouette, it's not perfect, but not too bad either. Seems to me the uniqueness of this kind of shot might be taken into account? Or best to just leave it?



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 34, posted (1 year 11 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 916 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 33):
The silhouette of the aircraft is not soft, so I have to assume it is the sun that is being called soft?

No, as I mentioned above, that would be irrelevant - the problem is with the quality of the aircraft.


User currently offlinejpmagero From United States of America, joined Apr 2012, 174 posts, RR: 0
Reply 35, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 782 times:

HI - been a while. Got a bunch of rejections that I would like some feedback on. Thanks!

1: [backlit; needs more contrast dark contrast personal] The aircraft is not backlit as far as I can tell, the shadow is the horizontal bit of the tail, and light is clearly hitting the side (front, as far as the photo is concerned) of the plane directly. The front of the plane is pure black, so doesn't show up as bright as the back end, which is clearly lit.
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...75273_n891at_rsw_20121020_1200.jpg

2: [flat/low contrast contrast personal ] - tried increasing the contrast but it just doesn't look as good. Seems ok to me on my screen.
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...93img74214_n936at_rsw_20121015.jpg

3: [soft] - Can't really see any soft spots, most areas seem sharp to my eye.
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...73447_n44fg_krsw_20121012_1200.jpg

4: [Soft tail. soft personal] - the reg number has a drop-shadow which may give it a soft appearance, but the tail as a whole seems sharp to me.
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0517_n243ms_kfmy_20121004_1200.jpg

Appreciate the feedback.



John M - Aussie expat in the US
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 36, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 771 times:

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 35):
1: [backlit; needs more contrast dark contrast personal]

Might be salvageable with a better edit, but backlit or not the light is borderline.

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 35):
2: [flat/low contrast contrast personal ]

Yes, looks a little flat.

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 35):
3: [soft]

A bit soft towards the nose, with maybe a bit of heat haze.

Quoting jpmagero (Reply 35):
4: [Soft tail. soft personal]

This one should be fine.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Pre/post Screening (jpmagero)
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