I would really like to avoid having the screening team decide about PCs or even what is PC eligible and what is not. As JK said above, that is opening the well known favoritism can of worms. If the system is apparently not working perfectly fine with a large number of photographers being able to vo...Jump to post
I like the idea of upping the pictures required to vote for PC as well. So do I. Although I'm just assuming here, I think a large part of the (possible) manipulation can be eliminated if you make voting for PC elegible only for photographers with a minimum of 50/100/whatever number of photos in the...Jump to post
I am sorry that you didn't get any further information. I have looked it up on the screening log, Headscreeners rejected it for "motive" as they think the motive with the aircraft moving being half sharp / half motion blurred does not work. I tend to agree. You've had a similar rejection f...Jump to post
It is also possible that photographers campaign for votes, or as you mentioned, groups of photographers vote for each other--very easy to do with exposure on social media. If there is a deliberate attempt to swing votes to certain photographers, or groups, I agree that it goes against the spirit of...Jump to post
The LH is not really blurry. The quality is not the best, but I don't see why it shouldn't make it if you go a bit smaller (1.400max) with some better sharpening on the back part.
The AA is a bit soft indeed and could do with a pass of sharpening allover.
the Xiamen is still quite soft, especially towards the back (reg & titles). It needs quite a boost in sharpening.
The KC-46 looks okay to me & definitely better with the lifted shadows, though the overexposed background is a bit problematic, so be prepared for that.
Is this the same photo that’s been in the Top 5 for the last few hours or am I missing something? To keep it on the facts: The photographer appealed and it was added on appeal. I personally think that is right, as on my editing monitor I could see them (only after a really close look after equalisi...Jump to post
Hi Craig, to share an image you need to open it in your photographers corner, right click - > copy image adress and then share the link Here is your shot: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/6/8/5833863.jpg?v=v479a794c960 It was rejected for Halos. I have to say I don't really see them,...Jump to post
My argument is always "there is something in-between", so I could only encourage you to maybe try something at 1.400px first. Looking at your newest shots I don't see why they should not have made it at 1.400px for example. I just don't see the need for these ultra-small sizes. If people w...Jump to post
Sorry but it’s almost 2020 cameras have 25-30mp as standard and I don’t like when people are still talked into very small sizes. I agree that 1.920px is not ideal for beginners, but as your feedback thread shows you can very well go for 1.400. - 1.600 px. No need for these ultra small ones unless yo...Jump to post
Well, anet Images that fill the screen and a MacBook Pro tells me there must be something wrong. A MacBook Pro has a 2880*1800 resolution as far as I know, anet shots can be maximimum 1.920 px wide, and (unfortunately) only small minority gets uploaded at that size. So at best any image could fill 2...Jump to post
I would go with the 5D MKIV and the 100-400L II. It is a very sharp and fast combo. I do sports, too and it is very suited for that. I shot at an nordic ski event earlier this year and was really satisfied with the results, somehow on my sports shots I feel the fullframe upgrade more than on aviatio...Jump to post
You would neet to fix the way you are linking your images first and foremost, as they are not visible.
Either choose and external image hoster or put the shots in your upload queue, open them there, right click on the image and chose -> copy image adress -> insert that link here.
Hi Karl, first very nice shot! Excellent conditions. I always struggle with flickr links with the real sizes as it shows me several. The right one (by just accessing your flickr page without the kink, then it works fine) looks fine sharpening-wise.Would be an instant add for me. Would be nice if you...Jump to post
Stefan is right. A "dark" aircraft against a bright background is not a good point to start with. The aircraft would need some more exposure but then the sky will be blown out. In terms of a.net as Stefan said not really fixable, sorry to say. I can see the noise as well (for the record). ...Jump to post
Well what a fitting comment. In this case actually 3 screeners say the same (poor sun angle/ underexposed) and yet you claim it came down to a personal liking? That makes sense. Otherwise screening criteria also changed / evolved over the years. And yes crops are subjective. You can cite me as much ...Jump to post
Hi, easy to say, because the tail is part of the aircraft, too and you should take that into account for the framing. Your shots are just centered by fuselage. That can work on very long planes with small tails, but otherwise it will look unbalanced. Especially on the first plane there is quite some...Jump to post
Hi Mark, I am sorry to say and I didn't have anything to do with your rejection (obviously as I am not a headscreener), but I fully agree that the sun angle is poor and due to the very high sun the underside will always look underexposed so that goes in-line for me. Overall the shot has a dark feeli...Jump to post
The rejection mail says: "The Screener left a comment regarding this photo:..." -> That is the Personal message. I can see that this "Here's why your photo was rejected: Personal Message Soft" might be confusing. But even with that one can see the screener message I mentioned fir...Jump to post
I am sorry to say, but it is very hard for us to understand what you don't get about the personal messsage and which personal message you mean. First you got the following personal message: "Tip of horizontal stabilizer is cropped out of the frame on the right side." Obviously you understo...Jump to post
Well as Jehan and Stefan have noted the quality is not there. Heat haze is all over. Again, I would recommend to not shoot at times when the sun is at the highest, this will lead to not really nice light and also heat-haze, especially at a larger distance. So in the warmer month I would recommend to...Jump to post
well softness means the shot requires more sharpening on post processing. How you do that is depending on the programm you are using.
I was suspect the shot was also rejected for overexposed as highlights are blown out. So I would reduce exposure / tonw down highlights as well.
Hi, please consider that blurry is generally not fixable, especially if its allover like in this case. If you only have a small part that is blurry like the tail or so one might be able to mask it by applying quite some sharpening or chosing a very small sizes. Again this is rather masking than fixi...Jump to post
Hey, The Volaris isn't far off, might be even acceptable as it is. To make sure I would recommend to sharpen the "window-line" more. I think with some more sharpening and Contrast the PSA would be acceptable as well. Same for the Asiana if you add some exposure and sharpening. They are rea...Jump to post
Hi Garrett, let me say that I first screend your F-15 and gave it a Second Opinion as it was still soft for me and it does look overexposed IMO. I did ask for another opinion as overexposed wasn't mentioned before, so to stay fair I tend to ask further. Obviously the next screener shared my opinion....Jump to post
Stefan, for what's it worth I think you can get acceptances / acceptable shots with every DSLR lense outthere. I don't think it's the point for Karl, that does not even upload at the moment. The question is more: will these shots have sufficient quality for someone that is used to an L-Lense quality...Jump to post
I can only echo Kas, if there is a language barrier, please ask us for help either here or per mail. Uploading the same shot over and over isn't a good idea, neither for you, nor for us. It is lose-lose. Next time: ask us. As said before, we have chinese team members who are surely willing to help ...Jump to post
I can only echo Kas, if there is a language barrier, please ask us for help either here or per mail. Uploading the same shot over and over isn't a good idea, neither for you, nor for us. It is lose-lose. Next time: ask us. As said before, we have chinese team members who are surely willing to help a...Jump to post
I have used the non STM version as well, while it is solid and you can get good results until 200mm, it is nowhere near any L lense I have used. Honestly mate, I get your problem, but I would struggle having to use it again. Knowing that you are quite picky with your shots as well, not sure if it's ...Jump to post
We cannot even delete shots as screeners. You can see them all under your Photographer's Corner -> rejected shots. Please stay to the facts, before claiming stuff like this. Let me post the shots for you, as apparently you are keen on making this public: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliner...Jump to post
Apparently you uploaded / reuploaded shots withou the necessary changes. If you feel like this is unjustified you can post your shots here and wel'll have a look. Otherwise how should we tell if you made the changes or not? Otherwise I can see that you have already received a warning recently for re...Jump to post
I like the crop...very imposing! OK for me as well. Jehan Let me clarify, nothing wrong with the crop generally . I like it as well. My point was not about the crop itself just about the fact it is very tightly cut. I just prefer it a bit wider. I started in the non-digital era, and still prefer a ...Jump to post