airkas1 wrote:Centering is fine. Any lower will be low in frame.
,yes i think is fine. And i am considering to upload it again. Is it worth uploading again ?
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
airkas1 wrote:Centering is fine. Any lower will be low in frame.
airkas1 wrote:Well, it's already been through the appeal, so nothing to do about it.
So I would just re-edit it and lower it a bit. Not by a lot, but by enough that it won't be seen as a reupload without change.
airkas1 wrote:You didn't place it lower, it's still more or less the same centering.
airkas1 wrote:Yes, should be ok.
airkas1 wrote:Yes, should be ok.
airkas1 wrote:The wingview looks ok (if it's not a double). For the rejected photo - you linked to the photo corner instead of the photo.
airkas1 wrote:It's oversharpened, not soft.
airkas1 wrote:It's oversharpened, not soft.
len90 wrote:Harry,
The A330 the screeners agreed with my thinking and it was accepted.
The two year old photos was that the same equipment you are using now? Colors just don't look nearly as good.
SQ 330: Slight CCW rotation. Maybe like 0.25-0.50. May have a color cast there, just something looks off about that white
MD 343: Might also benefit from a slight 0.25 CCW rotation.
Sharpness and grain I can't judge on the current display I am using.
len90 wrote:That equipment change makes a big difference. Colors are night and day between your two set-ups. Looks a bit better. Just wonder if it is still a little too dark/contrasty.
HarryLi wrote:I re-edited the MD A343 again. The color seems better than before .
Is it ok ?
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... ef7825a14f
jelpee wrote:Color looks OK to me, but quality is very poor.
Jehan
len90 wrote:Lots of pictures...
EY A332: may be a bit OS on the tail and blurry on the window line... could just be the sun glare on it
IL-96s: IF both were taken around the same time they differ a lot in contrast and color. 96022 might be a bit low on contrast and over exposed
HU 789: Fine
HU 789 Kung Fu: Fine
SQ 388: Okay.
FX MD11: Okay
SAS 340: Low in frame
JAL 763: Looks to just be not of as good quality. That's tough lighting.
airkas1 wrote:A343: Look ok.
IL96 (22): Nice, but a bit high in frame.
IL96 (21): Looks ok.
A330: Looks ok.
A319: Looks ok.
airkas1 wrote:Yeah, it should be ok.
airkas1 wrote:Yeah, it should be ok.
airkas1 wrote:The 737 looks passable.
The 767 is soft, oversharpened and hazed. I would let that one go.
airkas1 wrote:A343: Look ok.
IL96 (22): Nice, but a bit high in frame.
IL96 (21): Looks ok.
A330: Looks ok.
A319: Looks ok.
HarryLi wrote:Hi guys, i try another one of this : https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... c037d73fcb
Is it ok ?
Cheers,
Harry
len90 wrote:HarryLi wrote:Hi guys, i try another one of this : https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... c037d73fcb
Is it ok ?
Cheers,
Harry
To me it still looks like quality issues persist.
airkas1 wrote:- The A330 is not OS for me, noisy isn't that bad.
- I would let the B767 go. Light is quite marginal and just not a super shot in total. I would wait for better circumstances to shoot it in.
- The wingview looks passable.
airkas1 wrote:- The A330 is not OS for me, noisy isn't that bad.
- I would let the B767 go. Light is quite marginal and just not a super shot in total. I would wait for better circumstances to shoot it in.
- The wingview looks passable.
HarryLi wrote:airkas1 wrote:- The A330 is not OS for me, noisy isn't that bad.
- I would let the B767 go. Light is quite marginal and just not a super shot in total. I would wait for better circumstances to shoot it in.
- The wingview looks passable.
Hi, Kas
Sorry to disturb again. I edited some photos recently but some of them i am not pretty sure if they can be passable so would you please help me have a look ? Thank you for your valuable time !
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... aa1c1c3afa (CUA B738)
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 99e15cc92f (CA B738)
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 4e682870e3 (UNI-TOP AB6 )
Best wishes,
Harry
airkas1 wrote:- The A330 is not OS for me, noisy isn't that bad.
- I would let the B767 go. Light is quite marginal and just not a super shot in total. I would wait for better circumstances to shoot it in.
- The wingview looks passable.
airkas1 wrote:- The A330 is not OS for me, noisy isn't that bad.
- I would let the B767 go. Light is quite marginal and just not a super shot in total. I would wait for better circumstances to shoot it in.
- The wingview looks passable.
airkas1 wrote:CUA: passable for me
CA: soft windowline, otherwise OK
UNI: not super, but passable for me
EK: bit on the bright side
Wingview: as long as the subject (a wing for example) is sharp, we generally don't reject for a blurry ground scene. Except when it just creates a messy photo and it looks ugly (I've had that happen to me before).
CUA: same photo as posted earlier...
CA: same photo as posted earlier...
CH: heathaze, oversharpened
SU: passable
Mahan: bit oversharpened
Dragonair: passable
CZ: passable