Also don't forget that United has slack in their 77W fleet right now as they have more than enough frames in service to cover the set operating routes and some others that are flying familiarization and training for ground crews on 772 sub outs. Next a.net attack against United will be if 2143 gets ...Jump to post
Both hit for blurry: Maybe cockpit windows on the AA 738 are soft, but didn't look blurry on my display.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 498a1b8729
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... a747d2ca33
First off... great to see your Global Africa Aviation has made it to the cover. Also looks like the Polar went through on appeal. Nice.
As for these four.... They look okay. The SZ 738 and the 3U A321 look to have some slight grain in the sky, but it could just be I'm still on my work computer.
Len, I screened the CO B737. The area of the cockpit windows as well as the main titles look blurry which is why I rejected it. Sometimes us screeners miss things. However, I looked at this one again and I'd stay with my call. You could try sharpening those areas and uploading at a smaller size (10...Jump to post
That glare is going to give you an exposure issue. Do you have any other shots from the sequence where that glare is not so bad? The glare is also leading to soft appearance of the windows on the second deck as well as a bit in the titles. It is definitely low in frame. I'm usually a slight bit high...Jump to post
Retro: not that blurry, but the cheatlines are jaggy. B772: looks ok for me. So what can I do with that CO retro? No sharpening was used on the cheat lines. I work with masking and only sharpened on the windows without touching those cheat lines. I'll put the UA 772 in appeals if you feel it is oka...Jump to post
Lastly there is this cast. "Magenta" was the personal. http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/0/6/4454605.jpg?v=v4e3066a9568 :confused: I don't see a magenta cast. haha should have just copied and pasted that into the appeal reason :D I politely appealed. How blurry is this Conti...Jump to post
Agree with the Polar. It was OS when I initially saw it.
SF 752: Looks a little OS. Cheat lines near the reg are jaggy
Ethiopian Cargo: Slight OS but probably passable
Mahan: Looks fine
Dragon: looks fine
China Southern: Looks okay
China Eastern: Little too much contrast
So I take it Kas was not the HS who saw the VS A346 and B6 321 in the appeals. Both were rejected on appeal. The VS 346 was given personal message for revised reasons. The new reasons were soft and underexposed. B6 321 which was originally just underexposed got Soft and Vignette added to it. http://...Jump to post
VS346 and B6321 (UE) to be appealed. I'll rework the others for centering. The B6 321 with HIF do you really see that one as high? It looks to be maybe at most a couple of pixels which is not something that would normally be considered an issue. High Contrast: http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air...Jump to post
CI A332: OS... pretty jagged at the nose. Excess sharpening to overcome a bit of blur?
Aero 77F: okay
Polar 748: Slight OS on titles
Africa MD11: okay
Korean: a little OS.. registration under the wing looks jagged to me. Bottom right of the sky is that smoke or cloud formation?
Seems like today was big day of screening catch up for the site. With that came these: Underexposed: http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/6/6/4447661.jpg?v=v4402be3b751 http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/4/6/4447643.jpg?v=v4ed8b642c1c http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airli...Jump to post
Three quick ones: Halos: Not really seeing a halo at all http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/6/2/4441267.jpg?v=v4eef41683a9 http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/7/2/4441271.jpg?v=v4d2b02f6612 Vignette: (maybe lower right corner is a tadlighter?) http://imgproc.airliners.net/ph...Jump to post
BENAir01 wrote:Afaik, the 19 UA 77As will be replaced by 38 739s. It's the sad truth.
Will brighten Delta up... not worth appealing a 50/50 there.
The 738 I'll add another pass of sharpening to. It was shot on my 7D2 at 300+ and I'm used to working with images off my 70-200. However, those banking departures can make some of the pain worth it.
Two more: American 737-800 first of the registration hit for soft: Can't really see it on my school/work display. Maybe a little soft around the middle of the fuselage windows? http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/1/9/0/4453091.jpg?v=v4575f165e63 Delta 752 Skyteam: underexposed. http://imgp...Jump to post
What's the deal with 77W fleet right now and slack? For example 2136 did EWR-SJU-EWR. This afternoon it did a reposition flight to IAH and is now doing a IAH-HNL round trip that is 10+ hours late. Looks as if it is being used an emergency sub for a 772??? From what I have seen it seems like there ar...Jump to post
Hello and no worries. I started off way worse than you. Sadly, all three examples you provided suffer from Heat Haze which really is not salvageable for acceptance here. Heat haze is a significant issue with photography, especially in the summer months with the higher sun angles and warmer temperatu...Jump to post
Damn, that's one tough shot. You must like torturing yourself ;) I tried something in Photoshop and there is room for improvement. But it will probably require quite some tweaking, mainly in the RAW converter. In my half edit, the sky is overexposed and the aircraft is a little washed out. But it m...Jump to post
This one hit for "underexposed" http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/4/7/4430749.jpg?v=v4ace991a111 My concern is bumping up the exposure more will blow the sky and this is a relatively dark plane to photograph as is. I know lighting wasn't the best when I got it but really hopi...Jump to post
I appealed the Delta and whichever HS said vignette in one of the corners with removal of the soft. I'm fine with that outcome/explanation. http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/4/4/4421449.jpg?v=v4dcf57fa37c Banding/Vignette are the reasons. Here's the equalized: https://www.flickr.com/ph...Jump to post
B747: overexposed, blurry (titles, windows, aft fuselage), low contrast B777: A bit bright, but otherwise not that bad Thanks kas! I touched the 777 per your comments and submitted for upload. My first one, hopefully. Do you now how long it typically takes these days for a review? http://www.airlin...Jump to post
I'm back at my station. [Can you please provide a screener comment regarding the motive of the other two images? It really seems like it is a 50/50 depending on who screens. Would like to have some clarity on this. I saw one of your images rejected in the appeals I think, the other one I didn't cat...Jump to post
First one: Motive is the only thing I'm not sure about with that composition Horizon: Oversharp and might be a bit blurry at the rear half of the fuselage FedEx feeder: Low contrast Alaska 737: Looks to be some motion blur, visible on the windows above the registration, and the rear door. Might be d...Jump to post
As of right now, with the current set-up B6 could try using PHX but there is WN and AA with big operations out there. LAS would be tough given direct competition to WN and AS. I still think the growth for B6 is in middle america. IND is a place I really think they have missed out on. Could try and d...Jump to post
/on-topic: Len, I saw that your photo got accepted upon appeal. I agree that it was acceptable motive-wise. I wasn't/I'm not in a position to comment as I'm away for a few days. Just a friendly suggestion, is it perhaps possible to position yourself a bit differently next time to not get the lamp p...Jump to post
Underexposed, motive, personal message "distracting metallic part bottom left" http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/9/6/4406693.jpg?v=v42fbfccfbf9 Seems like this is very screener dependent as these were accepted: http://www.airliners.net/photo/JetBlue-Airways/Airbus-A321-231/44...Jump to post
Vignette and OS: http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/8/6/4406687.jpg?v=v4fcfb734a54 The only equalized version I have access to right now is from the other site and there is no vignette there. Don't see any areas of OS on this one; unless you want to go extremely specific at that cockpit...Jump to post
I have this one that got hit with motive. How is the streetlight a motive rejection? http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/4/8/4404843.jpg?v=v43c1eb3d935 This seems to be extremely subjective in nature. The streetlights are featured in many shots from JFK 13L arrivals and I've seen lots o...Jump to post
I have this one that got hit with motive. How is the streetlight a motive rejection? http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/4/8/4404843.jpg?v=v43c1eb3d935 This seems to be extremely subjective in nature. The streetlights are featured in many shots from JFK 13L arrivals and I've seen lots of...Jump to post