Congratulations Colin! Always nice to see your photos here and on instagram :smile: Happy holidays! Cheers I know I was kinda a turd (the PG way of saying it) in the early days when a screen didn't go my way, and I appoligze. I guess many of us can relate and see there is no reason to be like this m...
Jump to postVery interesting read as usual! Thank you for taking the time to write about job related travels.
Jump to postIt's a very nice photo! Quoting the video linked below: "This is a drone video that I made with the footage I got of the United 747s in Tupelo Mississippi. They were retired here and are in the process of being recycled. I was the photographer hired to take photos at the "Dinner Under the ...
Jump to postHi Thiago, Hi Julien, thanks for the feedback. Fortunately, by the time you posted, the KC-46 shot was one day off from being screened and was accepted as it was. I agree light on LATAM is not good, especially for exposure purposes. I tried two new editions with LATAM and the Cessna (links below). ...
Jump to postFor the LATAM 767, I'm pretty sure it's on the fuselage above the main titles on the plane's left side that is causing confusion. For the Cessna, I would try reducing the exposure and apply another kick of sharpness or two. For the USAF KC-46, I'm much concerned about the motive, as the "X&quo...
Jump to postHello everyone! Since my last thread is already way down the forum page and got a little long, I'm creating a new one for pre/post screening. Would appreciate feedback on the images below: Post Screening: LATAM 767 - Overexposed/Heat Haze Is heat haze overall the image or specifically on the fuselag...
Jump to postThanks four your opinions. I’ve not been editing for a.net on last weeks and my monitor don’t display them correctly while navigating on database. I was really far with the edits and blindly assumed the first screener was correct, but in reality it was the exactly opposite. Both pictures were taken ...
Jump to postThank you all for the answers, really appreciate it. :smile: Just to be safe, I checked the settings on Picture Control and Sharpening was set to 3/10, but from last comments and a quick search on internet, RAW files are not affected by these settings. When I open Camera RAW in “Detail” tab, it auto...
Jump to postI forgot about the thread here and just saw your answer DL747, really appreciate your feedback.
Any other feedback about LH/NZ shot?
Hello everyone, I'm creating this thread here in Aviation Photography (instead of Feedback) because its more about the editing process than my specific images. I received two oversharpened rejections this week, but didn't add any sharpness. Trying to correct, I duplicated the layer, applied "bl...
Jump to postHello everyone. Three more shots if anyone wants to chime in. QF 767 - Editing/Colour/Soft/Underexposed. I can't see the personal message even on the e-mail but I guess its related to colour/editing. https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/9/2/6/5051629.jpg?v=v4362dc261c8 Exposure looks on pa...
Jump to postFantastic shot (and I'm not talking about the livery).
I have stayed at Renaissance Heathrow twice. I don’t remember the room numbers but both times they’re able to give me a room facing the runway. The downside is the double glass and it was quite dirty in March so any strong light will have a glow around. The other time (2015) I had access to the loun...
Jump to postCathay: Fuselage looks a bit marginal, but I would probably give you a pass on it. Virgin: Looks fine. Eilat: Embraer looks a bit blurry, but the ATR should be OK with less sharpening (I'm guessing OS was a reason?) KE: better. Thanks once again. Eilat overview was rejected by blurry, cyan cast, lo...
Jump to postThree more if someone wants to give some feedback :smile: Cathay Pacific (1/1000s, f8 and 280mm) First by overexposed/soft/compression, now blurry, soft, oversharpened. http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/6/1/5057165.jpg?v=v471e9107e11 Virgin Australia (1/1250s, f8 and 100mm) Blurry/over...
Jump to postThanks Julien, just uploaded a new edition with this changes. Lets see how it goes
Jump to postHi Thiago I am not too familiar with interior shots that's why I skip them. Otherwise I would like to say something different, but the Boeing factory shot is definitely rather soft (or even blurry - hard to tell on that size) and would need more sharpening. I don't think it is overexposed, but I wo...
Jump to postThanks Harry and Kas. - A few more I would appreciate some feedback. Qatar new business class. First rejected by CCW rotation and on last edit by blurry (shallow DoF). The pair of middle seats in the bottom is out of focus but this issue have always been tolerated for cabin pictures as long as the r...
Jump to postScreening is really fast this days! The LAN Cargo at a smaller size (1100px instead of 1400px) got rejected for underexposed, soft and blurry. Exposure was already increased a little, I feel that anymore will lead to an overexposed rejection by the fuselage and top of the engine. Any thoughts about ...
Jump to postThanks Kas. Both AA/DL and OR got accepted. The front section of AA at SXM looks similar in terms of sharpness to the rest of the image on the original. I will apply just a little more sharpness on this area. LAN Cargo is already on the queue in a smaller size. :smile: - A few more rejections from l...
Jump to postThanks Len, I'll rework them sometime. - Would appreciate some feedback about this images: AA 757 SXM - Oversharpened http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/7/9/4985973.jpg?v=v4c9c75b0e48 AA/DL LAX - Oversharpened http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/7/9/4978975.jpg?v=v41b1188f11...
Jump to postAgree with high in frame. For contrast I would push the blacks to 10 and whites to 240 (if not 235) on the levels.
Cheers
The link you shared is not visible to everyone. You need to open the image and copy the file address.
Size ratios allowed are between 16:9 and 4:3 for landscape and 3:4 and 2:3 for portrait by the acceptance guide.
https://www.airliners.net/faq/photo_acce ... uide/#size
Regards
I'll just leave this one here. Amazing colors.
cpd wrote:
That is how you photograph a plane! Wow. Nice shot Thiago.
But only 454 views so far? It deserves more than that.
The first thing I would do is to check the most used runways on the airports you will be flying and then use suncalc.org to determine exactly the sun position and which side of the aircraft you want to be, of course it can be a hit or miss in some airports. No sun going directly into the window (eve...
Jump to postThe Avianca A330 was rejected on appeal by Oversharpened, Overexposed and LIF... Another three with blurry as reason, any thoughts? Westjet 737: Blurry, Oversharpened and CW rotation. Taken at 58mm, f8 and 1/1000s. http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/6/2/4868263.jpg?v=v4c49ed683da ROKAF ...
Jump to postHelicopters Northwest for SEA, PAE, BFI and RNT.
Jump to postBA A318: looks alright. Not great, but not great conditions either. AV A330: titles maybe a little soft, but otherwise ok. GOL: looks fine AF A340: not OS/OE, blurry is debatable, but passable for me Thanks as always Kas. About the A340, a new edit with small changes on contrast and crop would be o...
Jump to postThank you Kas. The 747-8 was accepted and LAN rejected by overexposed, underexposed and oversharpened. From the last month. Low in frame, soft and overexposed. (First time by soft and underexposed. Small amount of brightness applied). http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/5/4/4828453.jpg?v...
Jump to postHappened to me as well. Should be glitch or change on the backend. Started happening maybe 1 or 2 months ago.
Jump to postBy the tail, the airline is Xiamen Airlines. Speaking exclusively about crop and level: The first one is to tight on the wings, should be a problem and looks like it needs clockwise rotation in my opinion. On the third link, I would crop slightly to the left of the end of the yellow construction beh...
Jump to postThe Westjet and other Gol edit were accepted on appeal. More rejections: 1) LAN Cargo 777 Rejected for underexposed. http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/5/9/4774953.jpg?v=v403532e107f Same edit with some more brightness rejected for blurry, oversharpened and underexposed. http://imgproc....
Jump to postI guess this one gets the place in 2017. Air France delayed by a few hours and the sun just showing up during sunset after being largely covered by the clouds for a few minutes make it not only my favorite but also luckiest photo of the past year. 4209075 For me it`s this one from Baku`s airport in ...
Jump to postThanks very much Harry and Jehan for the specific feedback. I'll let the freighter and Caribbean go and reworked the Delta, lets see how it goes. Any opinions about motive and HIF on this one? Low contrast and soft looks like an easy fix. Motive was to show how close you could get for spotting witho...
Jump to postThanks a lot Jehan. I reworked the An225 and the An12 since the color cast bothered me and I could easily reduce the amount of sharpness on the nose. Will appeal the Westjet. A few more rejections... Any feedback would be appreciated. In my opinion, blurry (many times with oversharpened together) is...
Jump to postFirst, although a little late, happy new year for everyone. Had 3 rejections today and would appreciate some feedback. An225. Rejected by blurry, soft and quality. http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/5/9/0/4771095.jpg?v=v4df0fbc9cab Westjet. First rejected by left in frame and oversharpene...
Jump to postHello, I uploaded a picture of Qatar Airways Cargo on its first visit ever to the airport, which was quite a big event for the av geek local community since we don't receive 777's regularly (maybe 2 or 3 specific operations year round, but never of Qatar Cargo). It has been deprioritezed an hour lat...
Jump to postHi all, In addition, we now also offer priority screening to local newsworthy events. This also includes newsworthy first visits to your airport. Basically, any type of movement that is the talk of the town. To further increase your chances and since we are not always aware of the things that might...
Jump to postHarry, Kas and Len, thanks once again for the feedback. I'll follow the advices and correct the color balance on both An124 photos. Gol will have a increase in brightness and reduced color cast. About Azul, I'll add a little sharp to the tail and see how it goes, it was taken at f7,1 and 170mm. Both...
Jump to postThe two appeals were accepted :D I think its worth saying that on Antonov Airlines, the color on the right bottom is the result of the light from the car on the right, it was so strong I decided do crop the image at the engines instead of showing the full wingspan because it was a little distracting...
Jump to postHarry, Karl, Vik and Kas, really appreciate all your comments and tips. There is indeed some dust spots on GOL and TAM, already cleaned up them and add a small amount of sharpness and uploaded again. About TAME and Ethiopian, I'll give a try with appeal. Skygates I'll reduce sharpness a bit (oversha...
Jump to postHello everyone, hope everything is fine. Decided to give a try uploading a batch last week. It was all going well the first nine, three accepted e and six rejected, considering I’ve not edited any photo for a.net since the first half of February it was very reasonable. The last five pictures all got...
Jump to postWhile I'm not a fan of military aviation, this one looks fantastic.
Thanks for the reply Chris, the answers were very helpful. I've answered your private message right now.
Jump to postHello everybody, I'll be in Sydney for some days in March 2018 and already start to search for spotting locations. Below are the questions, but I really appreciate any other recommendations. For this kind of shot I read they were normally taken from Rydges Hotel but its terrace is closed. Now they r...
Jump to postHum, what a coincidence. I was on the skydeck at HKG that exactly day (judging by the Global Africa Cargo, which is very rare at HKG and a nice catch, and other regs you photographed). Was talking with one local guy for maybe one hour, and there was another 2 groups of young spotters, were you with ...
Jump to postProbably consequence of this: viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1355289
Jump to postNice to see a trip report about Azerbaijan Airlines. I've had flown on their A319 in the GYD-TBS leg, quite impressive service for such a short leg. Thanks for writing about this long haul flight.
Jump to post