Screening issues

dfu · Sun Aug 11, 2019 6:57 pm

Would someone like to help me understand how if the picture on the left here gets rejected for being "oversharpened" (I see some of that), the right one is deemed "soft" and rejected for that reason?
These are 100 and 200% zooms, respectively.

Originals at
https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-co ... to/5605401
https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-co ... to/5622445

Also, screeners bemoaned a "spec" (sic), which in fact is a bird. Are birds to be deleted? What other parts of nature surrounding the plane in the picture are to be removed?

Another image rejected for being "soft" was https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-co ... to/5622439,
while https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-co ... to/5608671 was accepted.

100% comparison:

(Hint: the one on the right was rejected for being "soft" and of low quality)

Along with another one, these images led to my account being temporarily banned with the kind advice to "consider my actions".
I would, if screening were more consistent and decisions reproducible, or if the line between "soft" and "oversharpened" weren't so thin.

spompert · Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:08 pm

Hi, the links from your photocorner are not working. Better to link the location when opened in a separate page. The comparison I was able to see. The AirBridgeCargo on the left shows a lot of jaggies on the cheatlines and texts. So there is a lot of difference in my opinion with the one on the right. Strange that you are banned, because rejections only are not a reason for banning as far as I know.

airkas1 · Sun Aug 11, 2019 7:21 pm

Links to your photo corner don't work for this purpose, it always takes the user to his/her own photo corner.

ABC originals:
Soft - https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 4dbdbf6ed2
OS - https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 0331d6f6c3

The version rejected for soft isn't actually soft, it's already quite oversharpened. That explains why the OS version is SUPER oversharpened. Not ticking the correct box is our bad, although the 'soft' version was already quite jaggy looking. The image is likely heat haze affected. We prefer that unidentifyable specks in the sky are removed.

Rejected image: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... e0c30e6d99
Accepted image: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... d058cc57a1
For the latter, the wing and engine look blurry/hazed and you got lucky with this one. Quite borderline. And with borderline images, some might get accepted, some get rejected. Despite that they may look similar.

spompert wrote:
Strange that you are banned, because rejections only are not a reason for banning as far as I know.

The ban is for continously uploading poor quality images at sizes that the quality doesn't support. Despite us asking him not to.

dfu · Sun Aug 11, 2019 8:31 pm

airkas1 wrote:
Links to your photo corner don't work for this purpose, it always takes the user to his/her own photo corner.

So how do I post correct links? Testing, one, two: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 4dbdbf6ed2

airkas1 wrote:
Rejected image: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... e0c30e6d99
Accepted image: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... d058cc57a1
For the latter, the wing and engine look blurry/hazed and you got lucky with this one. Quite borderline. And with borderline images, some might get accepted, some get rejected. Despite that they may look similar.

But that doesn't explain how the rejected picture is "soft" - or was the wrong button hit in two cases? In comparison, it is hardly softher than the accepted one.

airkas1 wrote:
spompert wrote:
Strange that you are banned, because rejections only are not a reason for banning as far as I know.

The ban is for continously uploading poor quality images at sizes that the quality doesn't support. Despite us asking him not to.

Comments were on individual images, no reason to assume you'd go that far. And the only comment that could be taken like that came after I uploaded the latest rejects... I find it hard to agree with the rejections at times, esp. with the thin line between "soft" and "oversharpened", not the first time I've encountered it.

dfu · Tue Aug 20, 2019 7:36 pm

dfu wrote:

airkas1 wrote:
Rejected image: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... e0c30e6d99
Accepted image: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... d058cc57a1
For the latter, the wing and engine look blurry/hazed and you got lucky with this one. Quite borderline. And with borderline images, some might get accepted, some get rejected. Despite that they may look similar.

But that doesn't explain how the rejected picture is "soft" - or was the wrong button hit in two cases? In comparison, it is hardly softher than the accepted one.

Guess that will remain a mystery....

clickhappy · Wed Aug 21, 2019 3:40 pm

No mystery. Soft and Oversharp often go hand in hand. The rejected image also looks blurry and the contrast is way off; take a look at the main landing gear, its just a black blob, no shadow detail at all.

Easiest thing to do is look at previously accepted images of the subject in question and go from there.

dfu · Wed Aug 21, 2019 4:50 pm

clickhappy wrote:
Easiest thing to do is look at previously accepted images of the subject in question and go from there.

Only this wasn't the image I was talking about, nor the plane....

Crosswindphoto · Wed Aug 21, 2019 5:04 pm

You’re missing the point,
Point is he said to look at similar images to get an idea of how yours need to look.
Also that your images lack shadow detail, and don’t have the best over-all quality.
I speak for everyone when I say that you should:
A: Read the upload guidelines ( viewtopic.php?f=7&t=1426915 )

B: Only shoot photos in the early morning or the evening.

Tim

airkas1 · Wed Aug 21, 2019 6:45 pm

The LH Regional looks rather sharp, but hazed as well. Did you apply clarity to the image? It kinda looks like that/similar.

dfu · Fri Aug 23, 2019 10:40 am

airkas1 wrote:
The LH Regional looks rather sharp, but hazed as well. Did you apply clarity to the image? It kinda looks like that/similar.

No, I didn't, and I don't assume you are suggesting I should have... Where do you see haze? It wasn't the brightest of sunshine on that day, that's for sure.

Crosswindphoto wrote:
You’re missing the point,
Point is he said to look at similar images to get an idea of how yours need to look.

As it were, you are missing the point here - I asked specifically how the LH Regional plane is "soft", when at least the fuselage looks sharper to me than the one that was accepted... Nothing to do with shadows. Your "I speak for everyone" is rather condescending, by the way.

Crosswindphoto · Fri Aug 23, 2019 1:54 pm

Condescending? Not really, anyone on here will tell you what I said.
He said you should overall look at images accepted here and compare them to yours, not a certain image, etc.

airkas1 · Tue Aug 27, 2019 8:24 am

No, I don't suggest using clarity unless you know exactly what you're doing and how clarity affects a photo.In most cases, it will look overedited when used on a photo. I'm seeing wavey lines at the runway and 1 side-effect from heat haze is that a photo may look soft and oversharpened at the same time. Heat haze can also exist on cloudy days without bright sunshine, as it is causes by air vs ground temperature.

dfu · Sat Sep 07, 2019 9:09 am

More of the above (of course).

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... f2b039ba87 is "soft"
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 37f965b38a is "oversharpened"

Where is the line between these two? Does it even exist?

Meanwhile, if it weren't for someone here on this forum (in an image standards thread) who had mentioned Instagram (I actually didn't know about the spotters scene there), I would have long given up and thrown away my cameras. Waiting two weeks in vain attempt after vain attempt to please screeners is just too frustrating eventually, for pictures that do not even get many views, much less any interaction. My IG account is small, but currently gaining around 10 followers per day, and posts get likes in the range of 80-120. Much better than rejection after rejection. I find myself wondering whether I should "waste" a picture for another futile attempt here or use it to get some likes and comments on IG...
No doubt that it's also frustrating to see lots of likes for totally blurry IG pictures out of mobile phones with heavy digital zoom, but oh well... I think I'm well above average by IG standards. Just no luck here. I just have to assume the focus (pun not intended) of the screening still lies on finding reasons to reject.

airkas1 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 9:28 am

Both are very blurry and of insufficient for 1920px wide. While I agree they look similar upon a quick look, there are hints of oversharpening on the Saab (reg., main gear) that aren't there on the A320. Either way, these photos as-is never stood a chance to begin with, so let's start there instead of whether one is soft/oversharpened.

dfu · Sat Sep 07, 2019 9:38 am

airkas1 wrote:
Either way, these photos as-is never stood a chance to begin with

Why is that? Which camera does it take to be "good enough"? This one was accepted, same day, same gear. Accident?
And I'd say the line between soft and oversharpened would need some clarification...

Miguel1982 · Sat Sep 07, 2019 9:44 am

Look at the details on the Saab. Look at the registration, the lines below it, the exhaust pipe of the engines, wheels, windows, etc. All of those show thin light halos and jagged edges. That is the oversharpening. Now compare that with the LH and with the Iraqi.

If you see all three the same, maybe the issue lies on the monitor you are using. I can very clearly see large differences between them.

airkas1 · Mon Sep 09, 2019 5:19 pm

dfu wrote:
Why is that?

Because the quality is quite poor.

The Iraqi looks underexposed, but otherwise passable.

It doesn't take a specific camera to take good photos, developing an eye for good photos is much more important. The fact that 1 photos with same day/same gear/same blabla gets accepted doesn't mean all photos of that session ar eny good. Or the fable that for images taken during the same session, the exact same workflow applies. Photos may need different editing, even if they were taken only minutes apart. Plus not every photo is good enough at 1920px wide *hint*.

Screening issues

Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Re: Screening issues

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net