KAWA
Topic Author
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:29 pm

Soft, Dirty ...?

Thu Jul 12, 2007 7:04 pm

Soft? Ok maybe it is soft but dirty ? Where ?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ctions/big/20070712_przelot747.jpg

Piotr
 
speedbirdegjj
Posts: 402
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 7:01 pm

RE: Soft, Dirty ...?

Thu Jul 12, 2007 10:22 pm

Theres a huge dustspot thats bigger than the aircraft about an inch underneath it......
 
alphafloor
Posts: 1265
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2004 12:36 am

RE: Soft, Dirty ...?

Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:07 am

Quoting SpeedbirdEGJJ (Reply 1):
Theres a huge dustspot thats bigger than the aircraft about an inch underneath it......

This is no a dust spot.

I can't see any spot in this shot. Fantastic shot !!!
Whatever
 
bmibaby737
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2005 1:07 am

RE: Soft, Dirty ...?

Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:21 am

Dustpot circled in red below.

http://www.airliners.net/uf/536892286/1184253653fLjzwU.jpg



Bmibaby737
 
oly720man
Posts: 5743
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 7:13 am

RE: Soft, Dirty ...?

Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:30 am

Not a hole in the cloud then?
wheat and dairy can screw up your brain
 
ilikeflight
Posts: 359
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:19 am

RE: Soft, Dirty ...?

Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:44 am

I see dirt in the top right corner and yes its a little soft
Think Different
 
Psych
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: Soft, Dirty ...?

Fri Jul 13, 2007 12:57 am

Hi Piotr.

I think this shot has fallen into the same trap that one of mine did a few months ago - I posted about that one here.

I would agree that I cannot see any dirt in your photo, but that patch in the cloud highlighted by colleagues above does look rather like dust spots/blemishes look in digital images. You can see why someone might be fooled into thinking it was dirt.

I raised the issue in my thread about what we are supposed to do in such circumstances. There was no definitive answer, so we are left to draw conclusions but, on that basis, it seems that the least we should do is mention the issue to the screeners, but in the end it appears that such 'apparent' dirt should be cloned out. This may appear to contravene the sites rules about cloning, but it looks as though having a clean looking image takes priority. I drew this conclusion because I appealed my image - after being able to demonstrate beyond doubt that my 'blemish' was in fact a wisp of cloud - and it was still rejected for 'dirty'. I received no further message but on that basis I can only conclude that the screeners wanted me to tidy up the apparent blemish by cloning.

It may be helpful to get confirmation of this from the team - or a different view if required.

All the best.

Paul
 
Granite
Posts: 5026
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 5:55 pm

RE: Soft, Dirty ...?

Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:23 am

Piotr

No maybe about it, it is soft.

Regards

Gary
 
KAWA
Topic Author
Posts: 32
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 11:29 pm

RE: Soft, Dirty ...?

Fri Jul 13, 2007 4:16 pm

 
Psych
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: Soft, Dirty ...?

Sat Jul 14, 2007 2:04 am

Hi Piotr.

It is a shame that, once again, we have not been able to debate this issue of cloning for 'dirt that isn't dirt'. But I think you should assume that, as no-one has said that you shouldn't do this, then the only sensible conclusions to draw is that you should - as you have done. As it is now I don't think you would get a 'dirty' rejection but, unfortunately, it sill still not going to satisfy the screeners from the point of view of quality/soft/blurry. A shame, as the effects on the contrail are very nice.

All the best.

Paul

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests