Something I have noticed is that if I have a photo rejected with a comment about, say, colour balance, if I then correct that one issue and leave everything else alone I then have the improved photo rejected again, but for a host of different reasons not previousy mentioned, when I have only changed...
Jump to postHello -
One of the commonest reasons for photo rejection I get is 'vignetting'. Does anyone have any tips on correcting this, for example, seen when a pale aircraft is shot against a blue sky and the sky outlining the plane is a shade darker than the rest of the sky?
Thanks.
Of course, I should have realised Almaty might be a re-fuelling stop, although I thought I saw at least one which returned to Shannon from there rather than continuing to China. In any case, using the 225 for such small items seems odd, when plenty of more conventional planes would seem to be suitab...
Jump to postI find that odd given that the 225 is usually used for single item loads (transformers, etc.) that cannot be split down and that no other plane can carry. I would have thought car parts, etc., could go by sea as they are not intensely time-critical. I also wonder why Shannon is the destination rathe...
Jump to postI hope this is an appropriate area in which to post this thread. The AN-225 has visited Shannon several times recently and I am wondering if anyone knows the purpose of its trips there, i.e. its cargo? It flew there from Almaty yesterday and I was lucky enough to be able to get some (distant) shots ...
Jump to postThere already is an outsize freighter in existence, based on an in-production design, that features front loading, that no-one has yet mentioned - the A330 Beluga. If the demand was there I'm sure Airbus would be happy to modify this design (slightly less extreme fuselage barrel for example?) to cr...
Jump to postI must admit that I hadn't realised FX still had any DC-10s (or, indeed, that there were any civil DC-10s still flying at all!).
Jump to postMany thanks. The first one today was heading north from a take-off from LGW, while the second did several go-arounds there before heading to Southampton then Bournemouth to do the same, then landed at Bournemouth. Perhaps runway equipment calibration testing?
Jump to postAt least two A400Ms have been at Gatwick this morning, with ZM419 on finals now, from Brize Norton. Is there an exercise underway?
Jump to postI flew to Singapore on one en route to New Zealand in 2010 and was disappointed with the seats. Still impressive, with a leg-stretch involving flights of stairs! I still haven't managed to catch sight of the China Southern visitors to Heathrow.
Jump to postI would be surprised if it hasn't been said before, but I haven't seen it so...if the de-commissioned A380s are de-liveried, it may be a case of two somewhat unsuccessful types - 'white elephants' (i.e. jumbos/747-8s) and 'white whales'. Sorry.
Jump to postThank you for that. I imagine more than a few will be photographing the ensemble before long! Also, Maleth's 9H-BRE (737) is returning from Dublin to Bournemouth.
Jump to postLooks like there are about to be two 346s at Bournemouth with 9H-EAL en route from Cardiff. I hadn't thought of the 'HEAL' slant to it. Is there an HS-ICK (etc.) somewhere I wonder?!
Jump to postThanks again. EAL almost passed over us here in east Surrey on its way east the other day, but was just too far away for an attempt at a photo.
Jump to postThanks. Was the reg. a coincidence then, as the sticker looks fresh from the photo on FR24 accompanying the flight details?
Jump to postI see the 346 is back at Bournemouth. The reg. is 9H-NHS - was this chosen for the NHS livery from options globally, or does Maleth have particular connections here (or was it re-registered specially from 9H-EAL)? Edit - a photo shows it having a sticker over the old reg. and the current one applied...
Jump to postI hope this belongs here - today was a rather unusual day here in Surrey in that we had a Bangladeshi Air Force Hercules C130J en route from Cambridge to ?, and a Kuwait Air Force C17 en route from Newcastle to ? overflying. Perhaps these are not so rare but stood out owing to the dearth of other fl...
Jump to postThanks for the responses. Crew training for 346, and for Newquay or Cardiff (or both)? If not for 346s, it seems an odd (and increasingly rare) choice for training. I think it's on about its 6th circuit of the day now. Those under the flight path must be wondering!
Jump to post9H-EAL is shuttling between Newquay and Cardiff today - does anyone know the reason?
Jump to postThanks to both. Roughly how many flights' details are generically estimated by FR24 rather than using specific data for each flight? Edit - FR24 for GEC8175 (approaching Ireland )has a crossed arrows symbol between its origin and destination (Atlanta and Toronto) which shows "flight diverted to...
Jump to postI can't see this covered elsewhere, but apologies if I've missed it. Over the last couple of months I've noticed a very large increase in the number of flights shown on FR24 with erroneous route details. A particularly frequent one appears to be for flights crossing the Atlantic being described as i...
Jump to postMany thanks for the replies. Can't recall seeing a C17 at Gatwick before. Odd that the message didn't mention Bournemouth.
Jump to postC17 ZZ173 has done a tour of England today, from Brize Norton to Bournemouth at around 3,000 feet, then what appears from Flightradar24 to have been a very low pass (150 feet) over Hurn, then to Gatwick at around 2,500 - 3,000 feet where it was on the ground for about 30 minutes before heading back ...
Jump to postG-TCXC of Sunclass Airlines is approaching Newquay, according to FR24. Forgive my ignorance, but is this one of/the largest civil aircraft to land here? Passed over me in Surrey at 40,000ft a short while ago. Edit - I've also just noticed BA 747 G-CIVJ from LHR to Kemble, which has just landed! Same...
Jump to postWhy would they convert the beacon light to LED? LEDs are essentially maintenance free, and may last the whole useful life of the aircraft? best regards Thomas I thought LEDs were pretty much maintenance-free too, but the large number of cars I have seen with failed LED light clusters has made me re...
Jump to postApologies if this is in the wrong area of the site. I'm interested in views on the level of security for flights recently. On my last two flights I have experienced what I think are major lapses on security, but others may view these as minor. The first was when travelling with my wife to Madeira fr...
Jump to postThank you very much for your time and help. My photographic 'career' has been much more about railways, landscapes and wildlife, and aviation presents a special set of issues!
Jump to postOK - here is the next (final?) version with highlights at 0. Do you think this is now suitable for submission?
https://imgur.com/a/i7w5IMc
Absolutely - clarity and texture to 0, remainder as was:
https://imgur.com/a/gPMm4zK
Here:
https://imgur.com/a/MA0R0To
I think halos are my biggest blind spot so your help is much appreciated.
A little highlight reduction and no shadow changes. What would be your recommendations for halo removal?
Jump to postThanks to all once again. HIF is obviously easy and I've had another look at the halos with fresh eyes this morning!. The basic, un-edited image simply had the exposure increased by about 20%, with no definition increase and a 40ish% sharpness increase. Noise was reduced and contrast increased very ...
Jump to postI have tried a quick dabble in 'Lightroom' and came up with this:
https://imgur.com/a/bVl6DqY
Thank you Tim. I suspect 'Lightroom' will be way beyond my non-professional photographer capabilities!
Jump to postEdited with 'photos' on MacBookPro and 'Pixlr'. Initially sharpened to around +95% then reduced to around +70% after your first thoughts. I initially took a dropper colour sample of the blue sky on 'Pixlr' and replaced the whole sky to guarantee elimination of the halos, but your view was that it lo...
Jump to postI'll follow all this advice and try the 1200-1300px width range at 72dpi. All appreciated - thanks. I must have been fortunate with the two (yes, only two!) shots so far accepted, as they were at 1700-1750px width.
Jump to postGreat - thanks again. Final version before I submit:
https://imgur.com/a/ThIbC4n
Based on the thoughts from 'spompert' (for which many thanks), amended version here:
https://imgur.com/a/I2KtQnl
McG1967 - Interesting; thanks. Kaphias - I will do my best to cast aside my erroneous pre-conceptions! Thanks to both.
Jump to posthttps://imgur.com/a/neOUUSL
Kaphias - many thanks for the advice - hope it works.
I was hoping for pre-screening on a photo not yet in the A.net system, and therefore I simply tried to copy and paste my image into my message. Is this not possible on A.net? Do images that are seeking pre-screening somehow need to be in the A.net system before the viewing can take place? Sorry to b...
Jump to postI would much appreciate some pre-screening thoughts on the attached photo, please.
I will try going that small but it will destroy a lot of quality and therefore inevitably introduce different rejection criteria. I still maintain that, if I look at two photos that fill 80% of my screen, the quality should be obviously comparable.
Thanks again for the thoughts.
Agreed, but, assuming the average upload size is around 1700px, then my similar-sized ones should appear very similar when viewed at a similar frame size on my screen. My point was that they don't seem to and that claims of blurriness and/or softness in my shots don't seem right from my viewings. I ...
Jump to postOK - the reverse also holds true - the aim for comparison purposes is to get similar-sized photo frames on my screen. If I am not to zoom in on an A.net shot, then I can zoom out of my shots to make them as small as the A.net shots appear, which increases my shots' apparent sharpness and clarity to ...
Jump to postOK - I'll try the 'command, click' route in future. I'll also re-upload at around the 1600p mark. I appreciate the responses - thank you.
Jump to postMany thanks, but not all A.net shots look bad - some are in stunning quality even when zoomed. Wouldn't all photos, no matter what their source, be treated the same by my screen? As a further test, I compared the two photos I have had accepted by looking at them on A.net, and they appear considerabl...
Jump to postJKPhotos - yes, agreed - A.net shots need to be enlarged/zoomed to fill my screen, but I did the same enlargement with those and my submitted shots for direct comparison. The enlarged A.net shots looked far worse (in general) than my enlarged 1920p or 1850p shots, for example, when both are equally ...
Jump to post