Pre-Screen Thread #2

Longhornmaniac · Thu Jul 24, 2008 3:56 am

Quoting Longhornmaniac (Reply 94):

Anybody have any feedback on my shot? I feel so left out. cry

Cheers,
Cameron

bubbles · Thu Jul 24, 2008 4:18 am

Quoting Longhornmaniac (Reply 100):
Anybody have any feedback on my shot?

Hi Cameron

Sorry, I simply missed your message. I think if there is something outside interesting in that cabin window view, the shot will look better. To me, just clouds and a wing do not appear to be very appealing.

_Hongyin_

deaphen · Thu Jul 24, 2008 7:38 am

Hi screeners:

Could you please tell me if this is level now? I had some trouble levelling it earlier. thanks other criticism also welcome!

regards
Nitin

Samuel32 · Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:20 pm

Still got a headache after seeing how soft my 100-400L after coming back from Canon (thank you Canon Switzerland...). Best I could get out of that visit.

What ya'll think?

[Edited 2008-07-25 12:29:09]

bubbles · Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:47 pm

Quoting Deaphen (Reply 102):
Could you please tell me if this is level now?

Clockwise rotation needed, for sure.

Quoting Samuel32 (Reply 103):
What ya'll think?

Quality looks good. Maybe a tiny CW rotation needed.

_Hongyin_

[Edited 2008-07-25 12:48:06]

HAL · Sat Jul 26, 2008 4:40 am

This one was rejected for overexposed, grainy, and category (?!?!)

And this one was rejected for centered, level, and category (?!?!)

I know the Delta plane was a difficult shot to get exposed right, and my adjustments made it grainy. I know the CJ1 was a little low in the frame (although I'm completely befuddled on the level). My question to Bubbles or any other screener is why in the world were they rejected for Category? I listed the Delta plane as Airliner - a pretty hard one to get wrong. The CJ1 is flown by the owner as a personal plane. The day I saw it he was flying his wife and kid out to see some relatives across the state. It's his private plane. He owns it. He flies it. It is not part of his business. So I'm asking the screeners, do you know something about the ownership of these planes that I don't? How could they be in the wrong category?

David

acontador · Sat Jul 26, 2008 3:23 pm

Hi David,

On the Delta one, did you check "Air to Air"? On the quality issues, I think you just went a bit too far with the adjustments, just keep it a bit darker and and try to avoid the grain. I would also suggest you to upload at 1024.
Reg the CJ1, I think you didn't read the corresponding help section:

Quote:
Check this box if the photo is picturing a business jet. That includes just about any business jet that is privately or corporately owned (including those used by fractional ownership companies).

And as you said, it's too low in the frame.

Hope it helps Smile

.

aadc10137 · Sun Jul 27, 2008 7:35 pm

Hey Guys,
I have a few old scanned images that I would like some imput on. The DC10 image was taken in 1996 and the TWA was taken in 2000. Any imput would be appreciated!! Thanks in advance.

Andy

Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 683 File size: 523kb

Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 683 File size: 454kb

misterdsdan · Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:13 pm

I know this doesn't really have a chance, I'm just looking for some constructive criticism. I've only just started taking aviation photos, I'm using a Canon S5 IS.

Thanks in advance for your help.

Dan

ptrjong · Sun Jul 27, 2008 9:41 pm

Quoting HAL (Reply 105):
The CJ1 is flown by the owner as a personal plane.

It's classed as a business jet. It's irrelevant who owns it.

Peter Smile

HAL · Mon Jul 28, 2008 2:17 am

Quoting Acontador (Reply 106):
Reg the CJ1, I think you didn't read the corresponding help section:

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 109):
It's classed as a business jet. It's irrelevant who owns it.

Got it. I'd just assumed A.net used the same terms as the rest of the aviation world.

Quoting Acontador (Reply 106):
On the Delta one, did you check "Air to Air"?

I think I did, but it is possible that was the problem.

HAL

UnitedJumboJet · Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:57 pm

What do you guys think about this one?

Still trying to crack the database...

bubbles · Mon Jul 28, 2008 4:05 pm

Quoting UnitedJumboJet (Reply 111):
What do you guys think about this one?

Hi James

The image looks grainy, blurry, and the plane is low in frame.

_Hongyin_

johnsiebert · Tue Jul 29, 2008 10:55 am

Hi all how about these?

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/Futura1.jpg
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/flyglobespan1.jpg

many thanks in advance

John Wink

TupolevTu154 · Tue Jul 29, 2008 11:20 am

Hi John

In that first Futura shot, you've got a couple of dust spots. One on the top, in the left third of the photograph on the edge of a cloud, and another couple in front of the tail.

I think a little more sharpening might also be beneficial, especially around the cockpit windows.

As for the Globespan, it is quite unlevel. (Look at the lamp-posts). Another couple of juicy dust spots can be seen. One above the lamp-post to the right of the tail, and one in the upper right corner.

Good luck Smile

Tom

johnsiebert · Tue Jul 29, 2008 1:54 pm

thank you tom, when i have the time I'll improve that and reupload,

will ask then for quality

thanks

John

NSMike · Tue Jul 29, 2008 9:44 pm

How's this motive-wise?

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b..._Jet_Provost_N300LT_XW354_8102.jpg

acontador · Tue Jul 29, 2008 9:52 pm

Hi Mike,

Personally I like that angle, but I would crop closer to the cockpit (your motive), in particular to avoid cutting the strobe light above the fuselage.

Hope it helps Smile

.

ANITIX87 · Wed Jul 30, 2008 3:15 am

Quoting NSMike (Reply 116):
How's this motive-wise?

I LOVE that angle! As our esteemed Mr. Contador says, however, I think the shot would benefit even more from a tighter crop to the cockpit.

Now that my shots have all gone through screening, I have a new batch! Here are just a few I'm a bit concerned about. Any and all input are greatly appreciated!!

Quality and sharpness?

Sharpness?

Sharpness and, in particular, level. I used the rear-most line to level it, but someone said it still looks a bit cooky. However, the AN-12 is naturally very, very nose-up!

Quality and grain?

Thanks a ton!

TIS

NSMike · Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:03 pm

Quoting Acontador (Reply 117):
Personally I like that angle, but I would crop closer to the cockpit (your motive), in particular to avoid cutting the strobe light above the fuselage.

Hope it helps Smile .

I'm afraid that strobe was cut off during the manufacturing process... damn 90% viewfinders.

How's this?

Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 683 File size: 429kb

acontador · Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:28 pm

Hi Mike,

I would crop it even closer, cutting on the right side just after the canopy. This would have the benefit of centering the cockpit area even more.
Hey Antonis, I like that, and I might even change my signature to "The Esteemed Mr. Contador" rotfl

And sorry, cannot say anything regarding the quality of your pictures as I am not on my editing screen right now.

ANITIX87 · Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:47 pm

Quoting Acontador (Reply 120):
Hey Antonis, I like that, and I might even change my signature to "The Esteemed Mr. Contador"

Go for it. Although, if you're not on your editing screen, I don't know how "esteemed" you can be, hahahaha. The Useless Mr. Contador?

Just kidding! Don't take me seriously! Pre-screen me anyway when you ARE on your good screen!

TIS

NSMike · Wed Jul 30, 2008 1:51 pm

Quoting Acontador (Reply 120):
I would crop it even closer, cutting on the right side just after the canopy. This would have the benefit of centering the cockpit area even more.

OK, thanks Acontador and ANITIX87. I'll play around with it some more and pull the first one.

2H4 · Wed Jul 30, 2008 3:12 pm

What could/should I do to improve this photo?

Big version: Width: 200 Height: 133 File size: 10kb

Large version

I'm a little concerned about how it's cropped.

2H4

ANITIX87 · Wed Jul 30, 2008 3:26 pm

Quoting Acontador (Reply 120):
And sorry, cannot say anything regarding the quality of your pictures

Barring a relocation to your good screen, can you at least tell if the AN-12 shot is level? To me it looks level, and it IS levelled according to the rearmost line, but I've had a couple of people say it may need some CCW rotation.

TIS

acontador · Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:12 pm

Hi Antonis,

I just tried out how it would look like leveled to the taxiway in the front, and I do prefer your choice, but please remember that's just my personal opinion. Tough one with no references at all...

ANITIX87 · Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:18 pm

Quoting Acontador (Reply 125):
I just tried out how it would look like leveled to the taxiway in the front, and I do prefer your choice, but please remember that's just my personal opinion. Tough one with no references at all...

Ok. I uploaded the shot with a comment to the screener justifying my choice to level with the rear taxiway. Hopefully this will motivate him/her to consider both options.

TIS

acontador · Wed Jul 30, 2008 4:21 pm

Hi Jason,

Well, as I am not on my editing screen right now, not much I can say about the quality, but it doesn't look very good.
Anyway, regarding the crop, I would say you have to decide if you want to show the complete plane (no parts cut), or if you want to center the fuselage. Unfortunately, because of the angle, both will not be possible.
If you go for the first one, leave some space right of the right wingtip and cut some empty space out left of the nose.
If you go for the second, I would crop just after the right-most engine (cutting wing and stab), and then also cut a bit of the space in front of the cockpit.
Btw, right now it also looks a bit high in the frame.

Hope it helps Smile

.

2H4 · Wed Jul 30, 2008 8:54 pm

Quoting Acontador (Reply 127):
not much I can say about the quality, but it doesn't look very good.

I'd love some feedback on this when you get to your good monitor.

Quoting Acontador (Reply 127):
I would crop just after the right-most engine (cutting wing and stab), and then also cut a bit of the space in front of the cockpit.

Good call. I think I'll do just that.

Thanks very much for the input....your observations are always very helpful.

2H4

Shanwick · Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:19 pm

Hi @all,

what about this one? Any chance to get it in or which will be the reason for rejection?

TIA
Shanwick

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/IMG_7984b.jpg

TupolevTu154 · Thu Jul 31, 2008 9:14 am

Quoting Shanwick (Reply 129):
Hi @all,

what about this one? Any chance to get it in or which will be the reason for rejection?

TIA
Shanwick

Nice shot, but you need to give it another kick of sharpening, if anything. It's very soft in its current state.

Also bare in mind you've got dust in the top of the photograph.

Tom Big grin

acontador · Thu Jul 31, 2008 4:47 pm

Hi Jason,

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 128):
I'd love some feedback on this when you get to your good monitor.

You asked for it Wink

.
The complete picture looks 'overcooked' to me, that is too much of many things leading to a loss in quality. In detail:
- Too much contrast (shadow areas loosing detail and whites on the edge to overexposed)
- Too much saturation (the blue fin-engines and the red cones are almost glowing)
- Some areas are soft (shadows), some oversharpened (high contrast lines; here the application of too much contrast boosts the overshapening 'feeling')
- All the above result also in a grainy looking picture
- Watch the sky, you have something going on on the right side (like banding or a strange line going upward from behind the tail)
- Finally, you have a bit of a 'wavy' look on the wing and stab leading edges, usually a sign of some heat distortion

ANITIX87 · Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:37 pm

Quoting Acontador (Reply 131):
You asked for it

I did too! Haha.

How's the quality on a good screen? And the sharpness, since I am a bit concerned about vairous issues on those images. You want to go back to being esteemed, don't you? haha.

TIS

2H4 · Thu Jul 31, 2008 6:23 pm

Quoting Acontador (Reply 131):
You asked for it

Man oh man....thank goodness for myaviation.net!

Seriously, though...thanks for the detailed feedback.

2H4

Shanwick · Thu Jul 31, 2008 8:12 pm

Quoting TupolevTu154 (Reply 130):

Thanks for your hints, Tom. Made some USM carefully. Difficult to say, wether there are dust spots. I noticed them too but in my opinion that were parts of clouds. Nevertheless I made some corrections to prevent a rejection. Here's the current version I've uploaded now.

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/IMG_7984c.jpg

acontador · Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:01 am

Hi Antonis,

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 132):
You want to go back to being esteemed, don't you?

Of course! Wait, then why the heck did I accept to become a screener Confused

OK, here we go:
- Swiss: Not crazy about the quality (big crop/long focal length/a lot of tarmac in between?) and a bit dark, but what is the motive? This is not 'Tugs.net', so if you are zooming to the nose of the aircraft, then show it and not the tug! Anyway, just my personal preference of course...
- LH: Again a bit dark and the nose landing gear is soft/slightly blurry. Did you apply noise reduction to the belly, because it looks mighty soft...Also, if you want to show the nose and are already cropping the titles, then why not crop a bit more such as to have the landing gear in the middle? Would look more balanced...
- An: Has some small jaggies at the top (window frames, top fuselage lines) but not too terrible. Whites look pretty 'hot'.
- Belair: Sky looks a bit grainy, like you had sharpened it. Shadows just a bit soft, but otherwise looks ok.

Hope it helps Smile

.

ANITIX87 · Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:05 am

Quoting Acontador (Reply 135):
OK, here we go:

LX: I thought about cutting off the tug, but decided it looks more balanced with it there. Just my personal preference as well, haha.
LH: I didn't apply any noise reduction. I'm actually surprised it looks a bit soft as I was very worried about this entire image being oversharpened.
AN12: Never saw the jaggies until just now. Will get rid of them and re-upload. The whites were very hot to begin with, and using too much recovery tool would reduce quality in the midrange.
BELAIR: I shot this at ISO200 by mistake...Therefore, I actually blurred the sky a little bit to get rid of some of the grain that was in it. Surprised to hear it looks grainy on your good screen. On mine it's quite clean. Shadows are soft, again because of recovery tool, and I didn't want to sharpen them because of grain at that ISO.

Should I correct all four? Or will reducing jaggies in the AN be enough?

Thanks!

TIS

TruemanQLD · Fri Aug 01, 2008 5:20 am

Hi guys..

daPap · Fri Aug 01, 2008 11:08 am

Quoting TruemanQLD (Reply 137):

Bad size, bad light.

airkas1 · Fri Aug 01, 2008 6:02 pm

Not sure of thise one, so I'd love to get some opinions:

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/D-FAXI_GRQ_26-07-08kj.jpg

AirMalta · Sat Aug 02, 2008 4:19 am

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...RCE_2NDEDIT_SMARTSHARP_WASSOFT.jpg

The above was rejected for soft.I have added smartsharp.Does it looks ok?
Malc

daPap · Sat Aug 02, 2008 8:21 am

Quoting AirKas1 (Reply 139):

The aircraft is not centered

ptrjong · Sat Aug 02, 2008 9:05 am

Quoting DaPap (Reply 141):
The aircraft is not centered

I agree, Kas, the fuselage should be more central. Hope you have something left on the right side. The colours also look slightly flat.

Cheers

Peter Smile

TupolevTu154 · Sat Aug 02, 2008 9:59 am

Quoting AirKas1 (Reply 139):
Not sure of thise one, so I'd love to get some opinions:

Looks very blurry to me (see the P&W Logo and decals).

Quoting AirMalta (Reply 140):
The above was rejected for soft.I have added smartsharp.Does it looks ok?

Looks a little grainy, but apart from that, the photograph size isn't quite right.

Try to keep it to 1024x683 or something like that (I don't work in aspect ratios, sorry!)

Tom Big grin

airkas1 · Sat Aug 02, 2008 11:06 am

Alrighty, will try to rework it. Thanks!

withak · Sat Aug 02, 2008 6:26 pm

How about these. I've been forced to edit on the laptop and are having trouble judging quality.

Cheers

Kris

JakTrax · Sun Aug 03, 2008 3:59 pm

OK everyone, how's this? I've done my usual workflow with it but it somehow just doesn't look right to me. Not sure why.

Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 683 File size: 600kb

Anyone?

Thanks,

Karl

Neophyte · Sun Aug 03, 2008 4:17 pm

Here are the two shots which I have currently in the queue. What do you think about them?

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/DAOLC.jpg

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/ICGIA.jpg

Cheers

Timo

JakTrax · Sun Aug 03, 2008 7:43 pm

Nice shots Timo! I'm pretty sure they'll have no problems making it.

Karl

TupolevTu154 · Sun Aug 03, 2008 8:36 pm

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 146):
OK everyone, how's this? I've done my usual workflow with it but it somehow just doesn't look right to me. Not sure why.

It looks good to me, one I'd upload given the chance. The only thing I would comment on - the titles look a little washed out (Due to oversexposure?) But I think that might be a little picky Smile

Quoting WithaK (Reply 145):
How about these. I've been forced to edit on the laptop and are having trouble judging quality.

I think the first could be a tad higher in the frame, otherwise, the second is great!

Ok, my turn:

Level?

Overexposed?

Motiv?

Thanks Smile

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net