Moderators: richierich, ua900, hOMSaR

 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun Mar 24, 2019 6:52 am

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/7/9/7/5454797.jpg?v=v43ed26dc400
It was rejected again for dark and oversharpened. I appealed it and the HS rejected it for Overexposed and soft.

My last attempt is this, which was again rejected for oversharpened ,underexposed.and noise

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/5/7/5461753.jpg?v=v4019877cd80

I am really puzzled. Should appeal either the first or the last one?
 
User avatar
HarryLi
Screener
Posts: 1003
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:51 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun Mar 24, 2019 8:49 am

Hi Solro,
First of all, the sharpness for all of them look fine for me. Exposure does seem bit of tricky maybe due to weather / light condition in this case because of white background cloud.Your second attempt which to increase the exposure did make the BG seems overexposed to some extent. The reason screener rejected your second try as Dark at first is because screener considered the a/c looks underexposed not the whole Image. But HS mentioned overexposed in terms of BG sky. Exposure looks not bad for your last version, IMO.

Regards,
Harry
I am a Guangzhou Spotter. My photos are here : https://www.airliners.net/search?user=20 ... =viewCount :D
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun Mar 24, 2019 10:21 pm

Thank for your answer Harry. I appealed the last one...

airkas1 wrote:
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, but not with the rest.
Do you think it's worth an appeal?
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun Apr 07, 2019 5:31 am

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
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/7/4/5472475.jpg?v=v44d9fafb43b

Then I tried to fix these. They were apparently fixed, because the screener rejected the pic only for high in frame. I appealed the HS said "screener correct"
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/9/3/5478399.jpg?v=v4772e8dd610

Finally I moved the subject down, and it was rejected for oversharpened, noise and underexposed.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/1/8/5479817.jpg?v=v4036af58c02

Note that this is the first pic with the new Southwest livery.

What should I do?
Thanks Solon
 
Runway28L
Posts: 2069
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 7:35 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun Apr 07, 2019 6:31 am

The third image linked looks the best IMO. I'm having a hard time seeing how that's considered High in Frame.
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun Apr 07, 2019 8:33 pm

This was appealed and rejected. The HS said that I should consider tail as part of the airctaft. Probably I 'll appeal the last one.
 
User avatar
airkas1
Posts: 7904
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:01 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Apr 08, 2019 4:09 pm

Jeez, sorry for this rollercoaster. I realize this doesn't really help, but I'm on #teamphoto2 and am of the opinion that that photo is good enough for the DB. In my opinion the centering is pretty much spot on from this angle... The 4th one is definitely low in frame.
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Apr 08, 2019 6:18 pm

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 obviously spot on
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/3/0/5480033.jpg?v=v4a1f9395b56

I can accept the fact that Southwest 738 may look unbalanced if I put the fuselage right on the center. But in the last pic we are talking about common standards.

Furthermore I got also the exact same message when appealed this Delta 717 for soft. "Sharpness acceptable but too high in frame. Please consider tail as a part of aircraft". I know it's high in frame but my motive is to show the terminal and taxiing aircraft.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/2/5/5454525.jpg?v=v4f1565a34f3
 
User avatar
airkas1
Posts: 7904
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:01 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Apr 08, 2019 7:33 pm

The crop of the 717 is fine for me.
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Apr 08, 2019 7:37 pm

Thanks Kas. I lowered it a bit, and it is going to get screened soon.
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Apr 15, 2019 4:42 pm

After one more rejection and a successful appeal the 5th edit of the Southwest 738 made it!

 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Apr 15, 2019 4:45 pm

Man...you are tenacious! Congratulations.

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon May 06, 2019 12:00 am

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 rejected for underexposed.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/2/9/5516927.jpg?v=v429db6fbee2

The last one was rejected for
Overexposed
Soft
Quality
Low Contrast
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/6/1/5518167.jpg?v=v4c500cfeb71

Do you think anyone of these is worth of an appeal or I should just keep tweaking things?
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Tue May 07, 2019 12:03 am

I would let this one go.

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Tue Aug 06, 2019 9:49 pm

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



I understand that they are from the same sequence but the motive and the frame is really different.

What are your thoughts on this?
 
310815
Posts: 1039
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 4:03 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Wed Aug 07, 2019 12:23 pm

Hey Solon,

I am sorry to say, but there are no real "thoughts" on this.
The rules state it pretty clear: Same side, same day, same phase of flight (both taxiing) is a double. It would have to be at least a 90° different angle (one head on, one side on) to be acceptable.
Closer or wider view doesn't matter on a.net - we still considere as same side - same day.
That's why the appeal had no chance anyway, sorry.

I think you should have chosen the second shot first, but it is as it is... Next time chose the shot you want to have on here carefully.

Julien
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Fri Sep 13, 2019 12:05 am

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 picture qualify as a "talk of the town" priority at the weekend of the US Grand Prix which is held there.
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:02 am

For me: Overexposed for starters. Also the image looks a bit "Smudgy/pasty"...like there's been too much noise reduction applied.

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
User avatar
airkas1
Posts: 7904
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:01 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:08 am

I'm not seeing an airport nor the wing of your aircraft, making this a motive rejection to start with. If the top right is an airstrip, it's too insignificant.
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Oct 14, 2019 6:28 am

Thanks for your replies and excuse me for the delayed answer.

airkas1 wrote:
I'm not seeing an airport nor the wing of your aircraft, making this a motive rejection to start with. If the top right is an airstrip, it's too insignificant.

I d like to argue that in many similar cases the parts of the aicraft visible at window shots (engine cowling wing tips etc) are more of a nuisance rather an element that plays a role in the composition of the frame. One can find numerous example in the db.

The new version of the image is this.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/1/1/5723115.jpg?v=v4935c823a33
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Fri Nov 15, 2019 12:12 am

I had this Norwegian 787 rejected 4 times.

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/3/0/5677037.jpg?v=v49cbc6c18b2
High contrast

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/7/9/8/5710897.jpg?v=v4525246f312
Quality, high contrast ,Underexposed

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/9/3/5730395.jpg?v=v4e28d58b90f
High Contrast, Underexposed with "Barely a difference to your previous upload. Please try to lift the shadows a bit as light is really not attractive" message

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/4/1/5753143.jpg?v=v4a762d47ec8
High Contrast with "Still very harsh contrasty light" message

Yes I know it's a cloudy picture, but especially in the latest picture the histogram definetely doesn't show any excessive contrast.

Should I appeal?
 
310815
Posts: 1039
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2011 4:03 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Fri Nov 15, 2019 7:57 am

Hi Solon,

Yes the light is rather unattractive (sorry to say), problem are not the clouds but the high sun that also comes from behind that makes the underside of the front really dark.
If you feel like you absolutely have to get this one in, you can appeal of course - contrast is okay.

Julien
 
User avatar
airkas1
Posts: 7904
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2003 7:01 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Fri Nov 15, 2019 11:09 am

I agree with Julien.
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Fri Nov 15, 2019 4:52 pm

Thanks for your fast response. I ll procced with the appeal.
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun Dec 08, 2019 11:08 pm

This was rejected as soft.

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/2/5/5776523.jpg?v=v4e6e80434fd
I cant see any major softness. Do you think an appeal has chances?
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Dec 09, 2019 2:30 am

Looks softish at this size to me. I would run another pass at some sharpening and put it back in the screening queue.

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Feb 03, 2020 1:38 am

Hello again.

I d appreciate your opinions on this shot.

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/6/3/5876369.jpg?v=v4914c7e1c3f

I am pretty sure that the halo around the shadow is not a defect of the window but an atmospheric phenomenon of some kind that's why I decided to upload this one.

Any feedback is appreciated. (Exposure, contrast sharpness etc)
 
User avatar
HarryLi
Screener
Posts: 1003
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:51 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:28 pm

Hey, Solro
Sorry for the late reply. The exposure is iffy for me since the light on the wing is ok but as you can tell the light from the further sky is very white / bright. I would suggest to try to reduce some highlight or white slightly.
Regards,
Harry
I am a Guangzhou Spotter. My photos are here : https://www.airliners.net/search?user=20 ... =viewCount :D
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun Mar 29, 2020 2:22 am

Hello again

This image was recently rejected for Soft and Motive

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/5/3/5928353.jpg?v=v402aea1cac8

Regarding to "motive" I am having a really big trouble identifying what the screener tought was inappropriate for this website. My only thought is that the jet-bridge is covering part of the titles, which is really unavoidable.


Regarding to "soft", I can't see anything really soft but it was a difficult handheld shot through the glass, so I ll take it.

Any thoughts about sharpening, re-framing, or appealling?
 
User avatar
Crosswindphoto
Posts: 322
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2018 5:21 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun Mar 29, 2020 10:33 am

I suspect the motive rejection comes from the jet-bridge blocking the titles. Sharpness looks ok to me though.

Tim
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Sat Apr 04, 2020 11:52 pm

Thanks Tim.

The jet-bridge is for sure blocking but I don't think that eliminating it will make the frame any better. I ll try to appeal for now.
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:10 am

The jet bridge is blocking the rest of the aircraft on the side facing the viewer, including wing, engine, etc...ergo the “Motive” rejection. You could trying a crop that eliminates the jet bridge from the frame. E.g. a portrait style orientation just featuring the nose. Don’t see softness as an issue.

Regards,

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Apr 06, 2020 3:51 am

Thanks for our feedback Jehan!

I did the portrait crop eventually.

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/3/4/5960435.jpg?v=v4f0e9ac280c

Any thoughts on this?
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon Apr 06, 2020 5:43 pm

The crop looks much better for me and you'd be safe from a Motive rejection. With the focus on the nose however, it looks dark. Perhaps a slight increase in brightness would do it. I would also recommend some BR on the darker side of the nose as well as inside the cabin.

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Wed Apr 08, 2020 7:38 am

Thanks Jehan!

I followed your advice. I think the minor issues are fixed with this edit

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/8/4/5963485.jpg?v=v4bacbe1bfcf


I had one more rejection.

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/4/5/5935543.jpg?v=v4b9356e5eea

This was rejectied for
Blurry, Soft, Heat Haze, Left in frame

It might be a bit soft but for sure not blurry. I can see no heat haze. The "left in frame" is actually a 5-10 pictures but it can fixed.

The weird thing is that this is registered in the as "EC-MLT" (Air Explore 787) which for sure I haven't entered. So I am suspecting a kind of bug, and maybe the rejection was for another photo.
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Wed Apr 08, 2020 4:33 pm

That does sound weird. I checked the screening log and do not show this image as having been rejected. The last activity was a request for a second opinion on march 30th. Not sure what has happened to this image since it does not show as having been accepted as well. There have been cases of lot images in the database.

Let me suggest that you appeal this on the basis of the listed reasons and your comment about perhaps it being a rejection for a different image. I don't see any flaws for which I would reject it.

Cheers,

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Wed Apr 08, 2020 8:52 pm

It was added as priority!!! Thanks for your support.
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Wed Apr 08, 2020 9:38 pm

Glad to help out!

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun May 03, 2020 6:39 am

This photo was rejceted three times

This was rejected for Oversharpened and dirty.

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/2/3/5928325.jpg?v=v4bc3d272632

I deleted the spots/background traffic and I reduced sharpening.

Then this was rejected for CCW rotation and soft,

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/5/4/5941455.jpg?v=v49c6e9d330d

I broutght shaprening back up and then it was rejected again for Soft and High Contrast.

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/7/7/5971779.jpg?v=v44782ee8996

I am really puzzled with that.

Should I appeal the last one or just tweak and re-upload?

Thanks
Solon
 
User avatar
kann123air
Posts: 1634
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:35 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun May 03, 2020 7:12 am

solro wrote:
This photo was rejceted three times

This was rejected for Oversharpened and dirty.

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/2/3/5928325.jpg?v=v4bc3d272632

I deleted the spots/background traffic and I reduced sharpening.

Then this was rejected for CCW rotation and soft,

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/5/4/5941455.jpg?v=v49c6e9d330d

I broutght shaprening back up and then it was rejected again for Soft and High Contrast.

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/7/7/5971779.jpg?v=v44782ee8996

I am really puzzled with that.

Should I appeal the last one or just tweak and re-upload?

Thanks
Solon


I agree with soft, and I honestly think the contrast is a bit harsh, though you might be able to leave it as is. If I were you, I'd reduce the image size to somewhere between 1200 and 1600 wide and re-upload, but you have some phenomenal high-res images already on the site so you seem to definitely prefer going that route. It's ultimately personal preference, I suppose.
Going for great
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1011
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun May 03, 2020 2:24 pm

Sharpness/soft and contrast looks fine to me. Soft and High Contrast typically don't go together since sharpening is increased by enhancing contrast. Therefore I'm not sure what the screener saw. The lighting is not the best with the nose being dark. But, with nothing to lose, worth an appeal, IMO.

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
User avatar
kann123air
Posts: 1634
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:35 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun May 03, 2020 6:48 pm

jelpee wrote:
Soft and High Contrast typically don't go together since sharpening is increased by enhancing contrast.


That's really interesting, Jehan. I had never thought of that, though I suppose it does make sense!
Going for great
 
User avatar
kann123air
Posts: 1634
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:35 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Sun May 03, 2020 11:05 pm



Great to see this one up! Nice work!

Amrit
Going for great
 
solro
Topic Author
Posts: 117
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 8:22 pm

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon May 04, 2020 2:26 am

It was taken using the last usable light of the day! It was appealed and accepted.

kann123air wrote:
If I were you, I'd reduce the image size to somewhere between 1200 and 1600 wide and re-upload, but you have some phenomenal high-res images already on the site so you seem to definitely prefer going that route.


First of all thank you for that kind words! I try to use all of my equipment's capabilities. I only down-size when there is absoutely no choice and the photo is worth uploading.
 
User avatar
kann123air
Posts: 1634
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:35 am

Re: Post screening Solro

Mon May 04, 2020 3:12 am

solro wrote:
First of all thank you for that kind words! I try to use all of my equipment's capabilities. I only down-size when there is absoutely no choice and the photo is worth uploading.


I respect it buddy. I'm just lazier, I suppose! Haha.
Going for great

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 30 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos