First one looks blurry at the nose for sure. Could be lens edge softness. Second generally looks okay to me but there are parts that look a touch soft/blurry. It's not underexposed but the angle (showing the underside) does mean that you're seeing a lot of darker areas.
VH-HWV is poorly lit, blurry, oversharp, noisy and has an obstruction across the tail. VH-KGE is too small a file to properly judge but the light is bad. I'm going to pull no punches by saying that you need to considerably improve your technique because those images are awful. There really is no nic...Jump to post
Have Chrono Aviation's two 732s actually flown for them yet? I know their first had been languishing in New Zealand (I think) for a good number of years. Based at Montreal St. Hubert I believe, which I didn't think was big enough to cope with a 732 (but obviously is!).Jump to post
The point I was making concerns the wider community, rather than exclusively here. I don't do too many creatives but I like seeing them in the database. What I like far less are these over-processed night shots we're seeing a lot of lately - I'm of the opinion that, if it couldn't be achieved in a d...Jump to post
I'm in agreement with much of what Thierry says above. But I'd like to elaborate a little and ask exactly what is creative? Trends are (or used to be?) set here - we all remember when the LAX overhead shots first appeared, courtesy of Sam Chui, but they've become ubiquitous and what we're seeing now...Jump to post
Looks good to me, although I personally think the contrast is a little weak.
ajaaron, hope you don't mind me saying but I'd pull that Norwegian image from the queue and re-edit as it's over-exposed and has a very slight pink hue. The red appears almost orange and toning down the brightness will help improve the contrast. Back to the OP, don't go overboard with the latest edi...Jump to post
Jehan, I don't claim to be an expert on the composition of the current screening team - nor do I want to get into this debate in this thread - however I have spoken with many ex-screeners (including heads) who have all told me that, at least in the past, favouritism and bias have been rife. The rece...Jump to post
The f/8, ISO100 rule is generally a good place to start but I think too many photographers fall in to the trap of only ever using those settings, without variation. A Canon rep once told me that there is almost no discernible difference between ISO100 and 200 - and as a terrible pixel-peeper I tend ...Jump to post
I'm lead to believe that G-CIVB is due to leave the fleet in November - hardly around for 'a long time'....... I know the rumour-mill generally tries to be helpful but when so many people jump on it, in an attempt to be the oracle of information, things get distorted. Perhaps best to wait and see ex...Jump to post
I think some are missing my point here. Yes, everyone gets some satisfaction out of other people looking at and (presumably) enjoying their photos, however my point is that the obsession for hits and praise is, in some cases, turning otherwise decent people into narcissistic, overly competitive dron...Jump to post
Like I said, Kas...... partially...... The gist is that some people only seem interested in taking photos of aircraft (and other things, for that matter) because of the exposure/views it gets them. There are many, many exceptions, of course, but I know folks my age (40) who only decided to pick up a...Jump to post
I personally think the 'other site' doesn't feature the same quality we see here, but as Royal pointed out the bar for screened photo sites seems to have been lowered of late. I guess it's the old 'if you can't beat them....' adage. It's a sad indictment of the direction in which the hobby's heading...Jump to post
Kas, I wasn't attacking the screening team as a whole (there are those who apply common sense, yourself included) but the evidence suggests that some do indeed look to reject rather than accept. You only need look in this forum to see some of the ridiculous rejections, many of which are overturned b...Jump to post
Perhaps going a little off-topic, but there's a lot of negative effects created by social media. There's a current mentality that any criticism, even if it's constructive/helpful, is bad and mustn't be tolerated, lest we offend anyone. Part of a wider culture, I know, but it's not particularly helpf...Jump to post
An interesting topic; allow me to give you my take on this, as a once regular uploader...... Aviation photography has become a competition, and I find myself increasingly wanting to be alone at the airport, away from those who are only interested in hits. here's nothing wrong per se with hit-seeking...Jump to post
Hi All, The Jet got the boot for oversharp and low contrast. Oversharp seems awfully picky but at least legitimate, however I'm struggling to see low contrast. Looks passable to me, given what gets into the database daily - the shot below I found in today's acceptances (two seconds to find, first pa...Jump to post
Yes, I have noticed that the latest crop of (certainly Canon L) lenses better resolve DSLR sensors, both FOVCF and FF - something I really failed to take into account as I was so set in just the one workflow. I'll pay more attention to detail if I upload here again.
Okay, cheers guys, pretty much how I view it - passable except for a few oversharp areas. I must say, however, that I can't see any problematic jaggies on the titles or tyres (perhaps nothing more than I'd expect for an image of this size), but now you mention it I can see some on one of the prop bl...Jump to post
Hi All, Decided to upload a priority the other day, which got the boot for oversharp, distance and quality. https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/31308384357/in/dateposted-public/lightbox/ Now I'm happy to admit that I'm unfamiliar with the latest criteria, having not uploaded much in the last...Jump to post
Thanks, guys. It's a priority upload so I'd be surprised if someone decided to be ultra-picky! Paul, you are right about the traditionalist in me - the fence is of little consequence to me, however I do possess a new set of (even taller!) steps that eliminate the fence completely... even on an A380!...Jump to post
Hello All, Having not uploaded much recently I'm not familiar with the latest site preferences - the first image has already been rejected twice (firstly for soft, then for oversharp). https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/5/4/5313455.jpg?v=v410f4437912 https://imgproc.airliners.net/photo...Jump to post
Hi Paul, I'm well, thanks. You? Kas very kindly did me an edit (it's been so long since I uploaded here I've lost touch with site preferences, preferring to apply my own instead), however I'm going to try again from the RAW as, looking at it now, it does appear soft and underexposed (amazing how the...Jump to post
Hi Kas, No, the original is tack-sharp all over. 1/640th at f/9, ISO400 on a FF body, with IS on (subject stationary). It was taken literally 10 minutes after sunrise - I really had to play with the colour to get it looking anything like I wanted; I was actually pleased with the final result, given ...Jump to post
Hello All, Having not uploaded for a while I thought I'd try this priority, but it got the boot for underexposed, soft and compression. Now I'm not going to appeal as I kinda thought it might be considered soft (although in my experience the site lately seems not to prefer the same level of sharpnes...Jump to post
Don't get too caught up in the measure of a lens' quality being determined by how many images there are in the database here - at the sizes A.net prefers, a multitude of flaws can be easily masked. Ultimately, the only person you have to satisfy is yourself. As long as you're aware that a 28-300 typ...Jump to post
I see some blur in the first image which, given the obviously low shutter speed, isn't too surprising. What I'm about to say may not be the case with you but very often, when people claim to have outgrown their gear, what's in fact happening is that they are scrutinising their images more closely an...Jump to post
It depends how well you want to cover that combined focal range. I'm a Canon guy, with little Nikon experience, but I can tell you for sure that any lens boasting over 10x zoom is going to be a master of all trades, jack of none. A 28-300 is going from pretty wide-angle, all the way to super-telepho...Jump to post
Somewhat related, whatever happened to the two proposed specials that were supposed to be unveiled in January this year? Much more than rumours as they were announced by KM officially on Facebook (and very likely other media platforms - Facebook is just the one I happened the announcements on). I kn...Jump to post
Contrast still looks weak to me.
Centring looks acceptable to me, although my personal preference would be to have it a touch lower (and I'm guessing the screener thought likewise). As for the pole, as far as I know, that will always be an instant rejection here, especially since it was clearly avoidable. The more disturbing issue ...Jump to post
It's entirely up to you whether or not you try again, but I would go through the image database and familiarise yourself with the kind of standards you'll need to adhere to here. Getting all worked up after having clearly sub-par images rejected is a waste of everyone's time (yours included).Jump to post
I was hoping to win at least £50,000 in this week's lottery but it didn't happen. Life's tough sometimes......
The image Kas linked above is pretty unspectacular, and if the link is reflective of the quality then I'm not surprised it was rejected.
My D800e takes far better images than the older D3S, a 12mp camera. Those 36.3mp D800e images still leave me amazed. And so it should, all things considered - but does it take images 3x as detailed as those from your old 12mp camera? I can't speak for Nikon but I've yet to find an up-to-date Canon ...Jump to post
It certainly looks softer at the nose than the rest of the aircraft, but I'd probably not go as far as to say blurry. I've said many times that it's really not possible to succinctly conclude that an image is blurry from the small sizes we see here. The main problem with this image is that it featur...Jump to post