It’s like this website is still debating VHS vs Betamax while the rest of us are debating Netflix, Disney+ or Apple TV+. The photog in question upthread could just be really good at promoting his work, which is what the entire internet is now based on. The game has changed. Wake up. You’ve set your...Jump to post
This time I would like some prescreening on this picture. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/6/1/5676161.jpg?v=v4f4a77ceed3 Feel free to judge everything, shaprness, contrast, colours (it was taken from a 787 window which gives serious casts) etc. I would also like to ask if this pictu...Jump to post
Karl, The photo you are describing is currently 2k views short of No.1 for the last 365 days (which I just noticed is from the same guy) surpassing the rollout of the 777-9 and the first A220 for Delta. If one clicks on that pic will see 0 likes and added in the usual album...This indicates rather l...Jump to post
I had this photo rejected as double of the following one, even after an appeal. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/3/5/5612539.jpg?v=v44f4557194c 2821023 I understand that they are from the same sequence but the motive and the frame is really different. What are your thoughts on this?Jump to post
One more series of rejections. This time is thw Swifair 737 N314XA, under priority screening My first attempt was rejected for "blurry" and "oversharpened". https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/1/5/5507511.jpg?v=v435ed259c85 Then I tweaked sharpening and it was reject...Jump to post
It shows but it is on page 3 of recently added with only 3 views between pics with 50-100 views. It is already buried...
I know there is a lot of debate about getting views but in my case I lost my fair chance of competing
I d like this pic to be removed.
Can someone check Photo #5485257 please? Just got an email saying it was accepted but it is not showing up in the database and is no longer available. Experiencing the same issue with #5481267 which was accepted after appeal. One hour and the photo is still missing. I can't even access the full siz...Jump to post
Royal, I like your photos, because you shoot in a very similar manner to me. The old fashioned 'sunny side-on' is often sneered at these days (not here so much) but, given an old 35mm camera, I have to wonder how many of these digital whizz-kids could achieve the required standard without having Ph...Jump to post
Oh, it is possible to check where views come from, and with the right reporting tools even exclude views from particular sources. I use these tools in my day job. But I guess this site also wouldn’t have the budget available that I do to get these enterprise level solutions. This was implemented on...Jump to post
I just appealed the 2nd one. Hope this works out. Today I realized that there is an HS with his own view on centering. I appealed this pic for blurry yesterday and I got the exact same message "Blurry but too high in frame. Please consider tail as a part of aircraft " And the photo is obvi...Jump to post
I had a totally 4 rejections for one single image. My first try was this. It was rejected for noise and low contrast. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/4/1/5467147.jpg?v=v4f37d9e20f6 Then I boosted the contrast and reduced noise, so it was rejected for high contrast and underexposed h...Jump to post
Thank for your answer Harry. I appealed the last one... Passable for me. It ended up far from passable Kas. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/4/5/5454543.jpg?v=v4a93fc32a86 It was rejected for Overexposed Size Soft Low Contrast Heat Haze I can agree with the overxposed and contrast, b...Jump to post
Hello... I have one more weird rejection. My first try was this. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/0/2/5453209.jpg?v=v422b80b8628 It was rejected for dark and oversharpened. Then I increased the brightness, and increased the size. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/9/7/5...Jump to post
I closely examined the original and I couldnt see any "motion". I think it's just softnes. I applied a bit of selective sharpening at the front. I think it's Ok now.
I want some pre-screening on this Travel Service 738. Do you think its OK for that size. Is the glare killing this pic?
I ve reuploaded it, and now hoping for the best. Double Southwest Rejection I uploaded first this at 1920 px and was rejected for soft and blurry. Soft, maybe on the back, but I cant see any blurryness. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/3/7/5449731.jpg?v=v4e460b41e29 After this I resi...Jump to post
Third time was the charm indeed! Now this was rejected after appealing for high in frame. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/0/4/5414403.jpg?v=v4bc8c51947e I also have two more pics accepted with the same composition. 5376799,5395841 Should I upload the same one again with this remark,...Jump to post
Another pair of rejections... This was rejected for soft. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/8/3/5414385.jpg?v=v475279ae435 Then I added some sharpening and it was rejected for oversparpened and CCW. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/6/2/5422261.jpg?v=v4d73d249db9 Should...Jump to post
This Delta 738 was rejected as "Soft" and the screener added "This shot does not support such a large size. Try 1200 pix or below" https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/2/5/5408529.jpg?v=v4b69c652878 I understand that the conditions are not ideal but should I upload at...Jump to post
Another puzzling rejection
This pic was rejected for "Low in frame"
I understand that the empty space above the plane is bigger, But the center is right on the window line. Should I appeal?
Thanks Jehan! I ll defenitely re-edit the 717 and upload it again. As for the two SW I appealed them both... Now one more rejection https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/3/8/5394839.jpg?v=v4f66c741562 This is some kind of overview. I understand that the United and the buildings behind are...Jump to post
Hello... I had a ton of rejection lately...Some more puzzling than others Southwest winglet. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/3/8/5385833.jpg?v=v4317e78455b Rejected for "banding" I understand that such large color gradient cant be perfectly smooth. The only way to reduce i...Jump to post
I came up to this weird situation today... I clicked on this thumbnail 5307479 and despite the colours look really good on the thumbnai, the full-sized pic is has a strong purple hue. This is a screenshot from the full size. https://imgur.com/a/pYaM0ij By all means I don't want to degrade the work o...Jump to post
Thanks for the replies! I dumped #1 and #4 and I re uploaded the other two. This was rejected again for underexposed and low contrast. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/3/7/5214735.jpg?v=v401732d2f63 Should I appeal? Can you also give a bit of pre screening at this LH 330. https://img...Jump to post
Thanks Miguel, the full view will soon be screened! Now I want to bring up some rejections. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/6/6/5066663.jpg?v=v45bf7db4b61 Went down for blurry and compression. I know it's a tough pic, but I want an opinion if it can be saved. https://imgproc.airline...Jump to post
Hello again Is the motive OK for this pic? https://www.dropbox.com/s/o4ns8599y3d6oat/DSC_3491.jpg?dl=0 (dont judge contrast etc itsnt not processed) And also can the previous and this one both be uploaded, or they will be considered as double? https://www.dropbox.com/s/3gbty8qa4w2gbv0/DSC_3490-2.jpg...Jump to post
What's going on? The uploaded pics on the site were almost 800k and now they are only 1600...Looks like another "successfull" update.Jump to post
It appears that 1000 views were subtracted for this pic...
I dumped the Frontier and I uploaded the AM at the same size. Is it OK now? http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/6/9/5066961.jpg?v=v4a476349d04 I also had this rejected as Overexposed and oversharpened. I think that both are really marginal. Does it worth an appeal? http://imgproc.airline...Jump to post
Hello again I had one puzzling rejection. This went down for oversharpened and blurry on the same time. I see some jaggies here and there but no motion blur. Does it worth an appeal? http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/6/1/5044161.jpg?v=v487975ff655 I also want pre-screening on this nigh...Jump to post
I guess the photo traffic went where the forum traffic went (to competing sites). I don't think that much. My personal records reveal that the average traffic for non-featured (in social media or flight tracking sites) pics that have been uploaded long ago (not counting the initial views) are only ...Jump to post
Thank all for your answers!
@seahawk. I totally agree with you, I already own a D7200 with 18-105 70-300. Probably one of the best DX set-ups.
But since I moved and left the camera behind to my family, I am not like getting the same thing again.
Deal was finalized with a D750 and a Nikon 28-300.