rotor1
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:57 am

Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Sun Mar 23, 2003 10:02 am

Hello everyone,

After getting such good info from my last query into a rejection I didn't quite understand, I'm back with another. Have a peek:

http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=STUA_ReversersF.jpg

Out of 50+ shots of the "water-spray phenomenon", only this one was (in my mind) up to spec, and I really felt confident when I clicked the upload button. However after around 2 weeks in the HQ que, it got the kick for everyone's favorite "BadScan".

Seeing as that the rain has passed this area for another year or so, and how I loved drying my camera (and self!), I don't think I can go re-take this shot very easily, so I'd like to ask for some advice on how this photo can be salvaged to ALN standards.

I look foreward to any and all assistance and comments!
Mike
The best aviation photo I've ever taken was rejected by Airliners.net
 
Continental
Posts: 5222
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2000 3:46 am

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Sun Mar 23, 2003 10:26 am

Holy CRAP! That got rejected??? I think it's wonderful! I don't care what the screeners think, that should have been accepted HANDS DOWN! Ok, I have no idea on how to fix it, maybe a LITTLE less noise on the fuselage near the titles maybe??

co
 
serge
Posts: 1903
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2001 2:01 pm

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Sun Mar 23, 2003 10:44 am

Hi Mike,

Cool shot.. I think it was probably rejected for the digital effects like purple fringing and jaggies in some areas- It probably isn't "rare" enough for the screeners to allow it to pass.

If I would you I would definately try to improve the shot or appeal it to Johan though.

Keep up the good work! I really enjoyed these Brasilia photos. How did you talk the owners of the taller parking garage into letting you up? I see your latest SW light trail shot was taken from the shorter garage...


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike "Rotor" Nowak
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Mike "Rotor" Nowak



...Serge
 
AndrewAir
Posts: 337
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2002 2:08 pm

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Sun Mar 23, 2003 10:47 am

 
EGGD
Posts: 11880
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2001 12:01 am

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Sun Mar 23, 2003 10:59 am

I don't understand,

The top of the aircraft IS a little soft, there is very little if any chromatic abberations, the only thing I could see it being rejected for is the fact its not 100% level (check the fence posts), or the angle of the shot.

I can't believe its badscan, I've seen about 50% of the shots that got in the d/b in the past 2 days have been worse quality..
 
rotor1
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:57 am

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Sun Mar 23, 2003 11:12 am

Whoops, forgot the brackets, thanks Andrew!

CO, you flatter me! Honestly, I don't think the quality of my shot is anywhere NEAR most of the shots uploaded these days. But sometimes I wonder what exactly is going on in the screening process, such as this photo that got rejected a few weeks ago:

http://members.cox.net/rotor/EORHALSideFrontF2.jpg

Seeing as that is not only the only photo (save another one of mine) of that aircraft in operation with the Raiders logo on it, but also the last picture of that aircraft in operation, I thought it would get accepted on the rarity basis despite the fact that my camera was malfunctioning and producing poor shots (since fixed by Olympus). After a rejection and unsuccessful appeal, I gave up. What does it take to have a shot accepted based on how rare it is? While the A320 shot definately isn't all *that* rare, I think it's at least a bit better in quality then the above HAL shot, and many of the other pics on the database based on rarity.

Serge, believe it or not, both of my night shots were from the shorter garage. I just zoomed in a bit more for the Embraer shot. I've found there are two ways to get on the taller parking garage -- pay for a day's parking and don't take the shuttle, or maybe renting a Corvette from RentAVette (below the parking garage) and asking for a trip up top after cutting the check... I'll be waiting until I know I can grab some good shots before dumping $16 for the parking or several hundred for the vette rental  Smile

As for the fringing, I can see some faint fringing in the backround (on some of the trees), but honestly don't think it's bad enough to spend the time and risk of correcting it. Care to point out some more obvious spots that I'm missing, or do you think the backround stuff is important enough to correct, or more importantly, significant enough to have caused the rejection?

The jaggies, oh yes the jaggies. Other than in-camera sharpening set to normal (which does a good job of sharpening the image w/o sharpening then oise) and a single 500%/0.2rad/0.0thresh USM pass in Photoshop, I didn't do anything more... could jaggies be brought out with such easy sharpening? Should I start from scratch and forget the USM, or maybe swap in a High-Pass instead? I remember when I was working on this photo, I was trying to find the line between too soft and too many jaggies, and this one (in my mind) hit a good middle ground, showing good sharpness with no terribly obvious jaggies. In fact, I have to zoom in to 200% on the computer for my young eyes to see the "stairways to rejection". Do I have to settle for soft to keep smooth, until I can afford L glass for a DSLR?

Keep it coming, guys/gals! Thanks already!

Mike
The best aviation photo I've ever taken was rejected by Airliners.net
 
User avatar
lindy field
Posts: 2940
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2001 1:52 pm

Speeding A320

Sun Mar 23, 2003 1:58 pm

The shot looks good to me--there aren't all that many photos in the database that show the effects of rapidly travelling aircraft on a wet runway surface at such close range. I suspect the problem is with the houses and trees in the background.

Mike, spend a little time playing with the image, experiment with photoshop, and then appeal the sucker. It's too good to let go without giving it another chance.

I can understand why the Hawaiian shot didn't go through--the only thing rare about it is the sticker--and I suspect that some of the European screeners might not appreciate the Raiders... Maybe it was just punishment for the Raiders' sad performance in the Superbowl.  Smile

Edward
 
User avatar
United_fan
Posts: 6374
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2000 11:11 am

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Mon Mar 24, 2003 2:28 am

I liked that HA DC10 pic,you can still see where it said 'American Airlines Luxury Liner' (replacing DC10 Luxury Liner after the ORD crash in '79). It's too bad we don't get to see more 'off beat' pictures in here because of the stuck-up screeners.......
Champagne For My Real Friends,and Real Pain For My Sham Friends
 
serge
Posts: 1903
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2001 2:01 pm

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Mon Mar 24, 2003 3:38 am

It's too bad we don't get to see more 'off beat' pictures in here because of the stuck-up screeners.......

Hows this for off beat? As well as the thousands that don't make Editor's Choice that are extremely interesting?

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?specialsearch=COOL&static=yes

 Insane
 
boeingholiday
Posts: 445
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2002 10:59 pm

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Mon Mar 24, 2003 3:41 am

wow, absolutely great shot!  Smile
 
ah414211
Posts: 163
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2001 1:12 pm

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Mon Mar 24, 2003 9:20 am

Amazing shots! I can't believe that they were rejected! Both the UA and HA shots look great!! Your quality ranks right up there with the tops on this site! I'd appeal--that shot should definitely be in the database!!!
 
N754PR
Posts: 2909
Joined: Mon Oct 04, 1999 10:03 pm

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Mon Mar 24, 2003 2:34 pm

Mike,

Send it to www.jetphotos.net and I'm sure they will be happy to accept your picture.
Bush, your a sad, sad man.
 
An-225
Posts: 3859
Joined: Mon Sep 04, 2000 2:55 am

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Mon Mar 24, 2003 3:51 pm

This could also be screeners' mistake. Either appeal/resubmit, and I am sure it will grace the database in the near future. And to those who are bashing screeners cough *Continental* cough - you should try being one before you bash them. I haven't seen a single photo of yours in the database, maybe there's a good reason for it?

Grow up, for crying out loud!

Alex.
Money does not bring you happiness. But it's better to cry in your own private limo than on a cold bus stop.
 
rotor1
Posts: 222
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2003 8:57 am

RE: Fixing This "Rare" Shot?

Mon Mar 24, 2003 6:19 pm

Wow, thanks for all the comments guys! I'm still only getting started in this whole photography thing, so while I do get lucky, it's just because I take a LOT of pictures (I'm averaging about a Gigabyte a month, at around 1mb per pic raw!). I'm glad that you all like the photos none the less.

I just appealed the UA shot, and am going to spend some more time on the HA shot before giving it another go. I think I see some green fringing around the Alaskin 737 in the backround -- something I didn't know how to fix when I first tried it  Smile

Thanks everyone for all the advice, and I'll let you all know if the photo gets accepted. It's a shame I didn't get more like it, but most of them turned out like this one:

http://members.cox.net/rotor/STNWA320_Reversers1E.jpg

Good phenomenon, low photographer skill  Smile

Mike
The best aviation photo I've ever taken was rejected by Airliners.net

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests