Is It Anet Worthy 2016?

airkas1 · Fri Jan 01, 2016 10:39 pm

It is too yellow (despite the low afternoon sun) and the nose seems a bit soft/blurryish.

kulverstukas · Sat Jan 02, 2016 5:32 am

Quoting airkas1 (Reply 1):
It is too yellow

Oh, my! But it was real color of a scene, and it wasn't midday, it was half an hour before sunset that day! What about this photos then?

airkas1 · Sat Jan 02, 2016 10:12 am

Kind of the same colorwise. In the Tu-95, I'd remove the spots above the aircraft. They're probably birds, but can't identify them as such.

kulverstukas · Sat Jan 02, 2016 5:05 pm

Hm... I definitely saw your answer, Kas! Why did you remove it?

[Edited 2016-01-02 09:09:32]

Ups... Now it's back again. Something wrong with forum engine?

[Edited 2016-01-02 09:10:02]

scbriml · Sun Jan 03, 2016 12:13 am

Quoting Kulverstukas (Reply 2):

Possible motive rejection for clipping the wing in the last shot.

vikkyvik · Sun Jan 03, 2016 1:26 am

I don't find the color objectionable in any of those shots. I have had lots of shots with equivalent or even stronger evening colors accepted.

Quoting Kulverstukas (Reply 4):
Hm... I definitely saw your answer, Kas! Why did you remove it?

The forum is a bit screwed up right now. Click "Check for New Replies" to see any new replies.

kulverstukas · Sun Jan 03, 2016 9:19 am

Quoting scbriml (Reply 5):
Possible motive rejection for clipping the wing in the last shot.

Horizontal stab. But I don't feel like upload this one, it's bit blurrish despite nice composition.

kulverstukas · Mon Jan 04, 2016 10:57 am

kulverstukas · Mon Jan 04, 2016 12:46 pm

Quoting airkas1 (Reply 3):
In the Tu-95, I'd remove the spots above the aircraft. They're probably birds, but can't identify them as such.

Hehe, down for "quality lacking for such a large size", also blurry, oversharpened and dirty

Not that I'm surprised... No mention of color cast, so not anything SOOO bad

airkas1 · Mon Jan 04, 2016 2:08 pm

Fair enough, I'm not perfect either

For your last photo, I take it you don't have any photo without the wing overhead?
I would try to center the IL-14 a bit more and perhaps use a 16:9 ratio.

Something like this:

[Edited 2016-01-04 06:09:02]

kulverstukas · Mon Jan 04, 2016 2:26 pm

Quoting airkas1 (Reply 10):
For your last photo, I take it you don't have any photo without the wing overhead?

However I have a lot, I just wonder if it suitable for A.net as such funny composition: one Il-14 from under a wing of other.

airkas1 · Mon Jan 04, 2016 3:37 pm

Quoting Kulverstukas (Reply 11):
I just wonder if it suitable for A.net as such funny composition

I've seen them being accepted, so you can always try

kulverstukas · Mon Jan 04, 2016 7:06 pm

Woo!

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kulverstukas

kulverstukas · Tue Jan 05, 2016 9:57 am

Is this car ruined the shoot?

scbriml · Tue Jan 05, 2016 1:47 pm

Quoting Kulverstukas (Reply 14):
Is this car ruined the shoot?

It's not ideal, but IMHO should be acceptable as it is providing a sense of context - that the plane is on display in a public place.

kulverstukas · Fri Jan 15, 2016 8:17 am

Seen a couple of snow shoots, I wonder if this one is acceptable for A.net?

BTW, it's Hero of Kandahar.

airkas1 · Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:37 am

kulverstukas · Fri Jan 15, 2016 10:18 am

Thanks for directon, Kas. Is it acceptable in other terms (blurriness, grain etc)?

airkas1 · Fri Jan 15, 2016 10:45 am

For me it is (considering the conditions), but we both know how that sometimes turns out..

[Edited 2016-01-15 02:46:19]

kulverstukas · Fri Jan 15, 2016 5:08 pm

As Airport overview?

airkas1 · Fri Jan 15, 2016 5:28 pm

Nice shot, but I wouldn't be surprised if it got done for motive (crates blocking the first aircraft). It's more a line-up of planes than an airport overview.
Good light though. Looks like a good airport to go airside some time

Joshu · Fri Jan 15, 2016 5:43 pm

Quoting Kulverstukas (Reply 20):
As Airport overview?

That isn't an airport overview. It would be rejected for motive due to the crates blocking the plane. The sky is also blotchy.

kulverstukas · Fri Jan 15, 2016 6:10 pm

Quoting airkas1 (Reply 21):
It's more a line-up of planes than an airport overview.

It's parking at UUBW.

Quoting airkas1 (Reply 21):
Looks like a good airport to go airside some time

Yup. Il-76LL with PD-14 in hangar, SKIP, Tu-16 remnants, another SKIP, two more LL...

kulverstukas · Fri Jan 15, 2016 8:44 pm

Joshu · Fri Jan 15, 2016 8:59 pm

Not bad, I am ok with the motive, but the sky is grainy. I am not on my screening comp but is the pole level?

Might be better at a smaller size!!!

kulverstukas · Fri Jan 15, 2016 9:26 pm

Quoting Joshu (Reply 25):
Might be better at a smaller size!!!

No way!

Quoting Joshu (Reply 25):
the sky is grainy

ok. will take care

Joshu · Fri Jan 15, 2016 11:38 pm

Seriously though, fix the grain. This is near wallpaper level for me. Nice shot.

kulverstukas · Sat Jan 16, 2016 12:32 pm

Pity, it's from one with not perfect quality shoots. It can stands 1500 px, but not enough for A3 poster or 4k wallpaper

kulverstukas · Mon Jan 18, 2016 8:27 am

scbriml · Mon Jan 18, 2016 10:25 am

Quoting Kulverstukas (Reply 29):

IMHO a motive rejection - not sure what you're trying to show us.

Get the man and the piece of junk in the foreground out of the way and show us the An-2 in that light.

kulverstukas · Mon Jan 18, 2016 10:39 am

Quoting scbriml (Reply 30):
Get the man and the piece of junk in the foreground out of the way and show us the An-2 in that light.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Kulverstukas

kulverstukas · Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:32 pm

Joshu · Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:34 pm

The lower part and right of the image are blurry/out of focus

kulverstukas · Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:55 pm

Quoting Joshu (Reply 33):
The lower part and right of the image are blurry/out of focus

Yes. It's means rejection? There is no room for some blurriness because of wide lens shoot?

PS: on the other famous website it was rejected for overexposed landscape in the windshield Wink

[Edited 2016-01-20 08:05:16]

kulverstukas · Mon Jan 25, 2016 9:41 pm

airkas1 · Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:27 pm

Sorry, but that one is quite blurry. Won't make it unfortunately.

Joshu · Tue Jan 26, 2016 3:30 am

Very blurry - How can you nitpick us when this photo is clearly lacking in quality? If you're so good with what should be and should not be accepted, why even ask with this photo?

kulverstukas · Tue Jan 26, 2016 6:42 am

Motive?

airkas1 · Tue Jan 26, 2016 10:32 am

Quoting Kulverstukas (Reply 38):
Motive?

Yes

kulverstukas · Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:53 am

Will be glad if somebody dares to edit them for me up to A.net standards (at least in color cast and brightness).

YQZ380 · Wed Jan 27, 2016 1:00 pm

Both seem flat. First one is also grainy.

kulverstukas · Sat Jan 30, 2016 6:47 pm

Motive? I can use one of the next frames from sequence (without annoying part of the concrete truck at the left) but she is turning back after engine malfunction on takeoff position so they are like 3/4 shoots and looks less interesting for me.

kulverstukas · Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:24 am

Comments on quality are welcome.

angad84 · Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:53 am

Hind is broadly ok but soft.

Tupolev/SKIP is ok.

MiG-29K is soft, heat hazed and too much NR.

Cheers
A

airkas1 · Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:13 am

1: soft, low contrast
2: bit low in frame, but otherwise ok
3: blurry, soft, too much heathaze

kulverstukas · Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:24 am

Thanks. Strange that Mi-35 looks soft, for me it's almost OS but easy fix then. No issues with motive for Tu-16/SKIP shot? As for MiG-29, will it be better if I shrink it to 1200-1000px? This point for preflight check is too far from my shooting place. I have more shoots of better quality from closer distance but this one I like because of this guy in the inlet

airkas1 · Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:29 am

Quoting kulverstukas (Reply 46):
No issues with motive for Tu-16/SKIP shot?

I'd say the obstructions are passable.

Quoting kulverstukas (Reply 46):
As for MiG-29, will it be better if I shrink it to 1200-1000px?

Just tried in PS, but even at 1024px it's too obviously hazed, sorry.

Quoting kulverstukas (Reply 46):
but this one I like because of this guy in the inlet

It does make a good photo for a caption contest

kulverstukas · Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:53 am

Quoting airkas1 (Reply 47):
Just tried in PS, but even at 1024px it's too obviously hazed, sorry.

This one then?

Quoting airkas1 (Reply 47):
It does make a good photo for a caption contest

LOL

airkas1 · Thu Mar 31, 2016 12:04 pm

Quoting kulverstukas (Reply 48):
This one then?

Better, but not sure of the quality at this size.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net