Pre-screening ---Harry

airkas1 · Wed Oct 11, 2017 3:03 pm

Look ok to me.

HarryLi · Thu Oct 26, 2017 3:18 pm

Hi ,
Hope can get some opinions on this one :
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 6d95d23b09

Thank you for your time !

Cheers,
Harry

airkas1 · Thu Oct 26, 2017 4:31 pm

Looks a bit jaggy/OS.

HarryLi · Fri Oct 27, 2017 12:28 pm

airkas1 wrote:
Looks a bit jaggy/OS.

Thanks Kas. I re-edited it again. Is it ok now ?
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 8f0dfefca3
And i didn't add any sharpness to it .
Thank you for your time !
Cheers,
Harry

airkas1 · Fri Oct 27, 2017 12:46 pm

Yes, looks alright.

HarryLi · Thu Nov 02, 2017 1:04 pm

Hi guys,
I edited 2 KLM F70 and hope can get some opinions from you ! Thanks.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 701d9b9c8b (PH-KZA )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... de7364a198 (PH-KZT )

Cheers,
Harry

Miguel1982 · Thu Nov 02, 2017 1:41 pm

Hey Harry, I would go for KZT as I'm not really a fan of the yellow sign in the corner. It distracts too much for my taste. Can't comment about sharpness as I'm not on my home PC.

airkas1 · Thu Nov 02, 2017 5:51 pm

Both photos look fine, although it's nicer without the sign than with.

HarryLi · Thu Nov 02, 2017 10:48 pm

Thank you Kas and Miguel ! I don't like that sign to be honest but KZA I think it was the first F70 of KLM and all F70 of KLM have already retired so I would like to upload this one too. Nevertheless, I took 4-5 photos of it and only this one is ok for sharpness and others have some blurry parts. Anyway , thank you for your time !

Best wishes,
Harry

HarryLi · Fri Nov 03, 2017 2:46 pm

Hi ,
I edited two Jetair Fly just now but i am not sure about them hope can get some opinnions from you guys. Thanks.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... b98d3cc521 (B787 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... a915b8d413 (E190 )

Cheers,
Harry

airkas1 · Fri Nov 03, 2017 3:30 pm

Both look alright to me.

HarryLi · Fri Nov 03, 2017 4:36 pm

airkas1 wrote:
Both look alright to me.

Thank you Kas.
What about these two ?
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... ed16832589 ( Ukraine B738 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... f2fb8659cf ( Transavia B738 )

Thanks again !!!

Cheers,
Harry

HarryLi · Sun Nov 05, 2017 1:43 pm

And i edited 2 more today , also look forward to hearing your opinions ! Thank u guys !
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 86648303e1 ( CA 748 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 727c985e6b (New Zealand 77W )

Cheers,
Harry

Psych · Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:20 pm

Hello Harry.

To my eye both the photos in your Reply 412 look okay to me - though that sign is a bit annoying for you, as it really pulls the eye. But I know we can't always avoid such things.

In Reply 413, The Air China also looks okay. I am slightly less sure about the ANZ 777. Could some think it is a tad soft? I can't tell with some screening these days. If I were the screener I would pass it

Cheers.

HarryLi · Thu Nov 09, 2017 1:22 pm

The newzealand was rejected today with Common Overexposed Soft and personal message which said that Glare.
I can't avoid Glare for 100 % and all of the photos of this aircraft were suffered from Glare this one is the best one in glare situation. Although there are some glare places the sharpness of it should be ok i think i don't conside that this one has Soft problem and the exposure is ok to me too.
Is it so bad ? I appealed it today and i am waiting for the result now. I hope this one could be accepted as it was one of my favorite one !

Cheers,
Harry

jelpee · Thu Nov 09, 2017 1:38 pm

Hi Harry, I screened your Air NZ and think it is too soft for a common air frame. Re. the glare (especially on the tail), perhaps you have another one in the series where the glare is not prominent. Usually, glare only affects a few pictures in a series due to the spot where the sun reflects the most. The nose area is also over exposed. Since this is a common air frame, the acceptance standards are higher. Hope this helps.

Jehan

jelpee · Thu Nov 09, 2017 5:35 pm

Just saw that your appeal for the NZ 777 was successful...I guess the Head Screeners and I have to agree disagree

Jehan

HarryLi · Thu Nov 09, 2017 10:26 pm

jelpee wrote:
Just saw that your appeal for the NZ 777 was successful...I guess the Head Screeners and I have to agree disagree

Jehan

Hello Jehan ,
Thank you for your time to reply me and Screen my photo. I can understand that the glare will just appear for a moment but other photos of this series have other issues that can't be fixed like Blurry but this one is better so I chose this one.

I can understand that the standard is higher than others as I have checked the DB there are lots of about this one.
Nevertheless , thank you for both of you and the Head- Screener 'a time to have a look to it. I would try to upload some photos that don't have this kind of controversial problems next time.

Thanks again !

Best wishes,
Harry

HarryLi · Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:08 pm

Hello guys,
I am looking forward to hearing your opinions on these two pics
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... cb6524c3f9 ( CA B744 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 7ce006bc16 ( MU A333 )
Thank you for your time !

Cheers,
Harry

BB072 · Sun Nov 12, 2017 1:20 pm

HarryLi wrote:
Hello guys,
I am looking forward to hearing your opinions on these two pics
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... cb6524c3f9 ( CA B744 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 7ce006bc16 ( MU A333 )
Thank you for your time !

Cheers,
Harry

I think I'm getting a little how screeners will judge your images. I'd say both 'underexposed/dark' and the 747 'soft'.
(But that's just me. What do I know :-)

)

HarryLi · Sun Nov 12, 2017 1:45 pm

BB072 wrote:
HarryLi wrote:
Hello guys,
I am looking forward to hearing your opinions on these two pics
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... cb6524c3f9 ( CA B744 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 7ce006bc16 ( MU A333 )
Thank you for your time !

Cheers,
Harry

I think I'm getting a little how screeners will judge your images. I'd say both 'underexposed/dark' and the 747 'soft'.
(But that's just me. What do I know )

Thanks for your opinion ! I'll wait more answeres!

len90 · Mon Nov 13, 2017 1:04 am

CA 744: maybe a tad high on the contrast
MU 333: I would say a little underexposed given the similarity to what I have had recently.

airkas1 · Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:30 am

CA: looks ok
MU: could use more brightness. I tried +20 on the mid slider and that looked nice.

HarryLi · Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:57 pm

airkas1 wrote:
CA: looks ok
MU: could use more brightness. I tried +20 on the mid slider and that looked nice.

Thank u Kas. I revised the MU just now and here is the result :
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... c12968a97e
Is it ok now ? :shock:

airkas1 · Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:06 pm

Yes, should be alright.

HarryLi · Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:08 pm

airkas1 wrote:
Yes, should be alright.

Thank you Kas. It's sad to hear that this plane is going stop flying tomrrow and will be retired later :snooty:

HarryLi · Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:41 pm

What about this KE 738 ? It was supposed to be Soft before and i re-edit it again.

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... bf3851a98b

airkas1 · Mon Nov 13, 2017 4:07 pm

Could use a bit more, but not bad.

HarryLi · Fri Nov 17, 2017 4:31 pm

Hi guys,
I am hoping that can get some opinions from you in these two photos:
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 0acb6a9cd1 ( MU B738 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 0bcbb27ced ( 3U A321 )
Thank you !!!

Cheers,
Harry

HarryLi · Sat Nov 18, 2017 8:12 am

And these 4 more ~
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 8709589b4e ( 3U A320 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 785b530619 ( CZ A319 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 2a72b10e73 ( Business )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 2a0e80f9f4 ( CZ A330 )
THANKS.

airkas1 · Sun Nov 19, 2017 11:30 am

All 6 photos look fine to me.

HarryLi · Mon Nov 27, 2017 1:09 pm

Hello guys,
Hope can get some opinions on these three that i am not quiet sure ! Thanks.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... eb8d906eca ( CZ A319 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 567211afde ( MAI A319 )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 67af54746f ( Malta A320 )

Cheers,
Harry

airkas1 · Mon Nov 27, 2017 4:40 pm

All 3 look ok.

HarryLi · Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:05 pm

airkas1 wrote:
All 3 look ok.

Thank you Kas ! Would you please help me have a look these 2 ? :roll:

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 6294ae9958 ( Kenya 77W )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... ecd2f7e724 ( Romanian 737 )

Thanks.

airkas1 · Wed Nov 29, 2017 7:06 pm

Tarom is a bit underexposed (bottom half of the frame only), The Kenya looks ok.

len90 · Wed Nov 29, 2017 10:59 pm

Nice golden lighting on the Kenya. I personally would get rid of whatever is there in that corner though.. so maybe a different aspect ratio or is that allowed to be cloned out?
Agree with Kas on the Tarom.

HarryLi · Thu Nov 30, 2017 12:43 pm

Thanks Kas & Len

. I add little bit exposure to the Tarom and
here is the latest version :
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 386f173d54
Is it ok ?

. I personally would get rid of whatever is there in that corner though.. so maybe a different aspect ratio or is that allowed to be cloned out?

The thing that at the corner is the solar power pad of the light. Well, i don't think it would be ok to colone :shock:

I would consider to use 16:9, actually it looks ok to me :roll:

Besides,
I also edited a LH B735 which also needs your opinions !! Thanks again!
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 63cb8d16b5

And i also did some color changes at the MALTA A320 :
I thought the last one seems bit of too blue/ Purple . So i reduced bit of Blue and Green , here is the result. What do you think ? :?:

The first one ( Last time ) : https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 67af54746f
The second one ( Latest One ) : https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 74d757b6c9
Tell me which one do you think is better

Thanks.

Cheers,
Harry

airkas1 · Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:04 pm

Tarom: looks better now.
Lufthansa: aircraft exposure looks ok, but the rest seems a bit dark.
Air Malta: for me the first one is more pleasing (ID 4711785).

HarryLi · Thu Nov 30, 2017 1:15 pm

airkas1 wrote:
Tarom: looks better now.
Lufthansa: aircraft exposure looks ok, but the rest seems a bit dark.
Air Malta: for me the first one is more pleasing (ID 4711785).

Thanks Kas.I added some " Shadow " to the Lufthansa. Is it ok ?

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... c6ac22dfb1

airkas1 · Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:08 pm

Looks a lot better, yes!

len90 · Thu Nov 30, 2017 2:58 pm

Tarom: looks better
LH: looks better with the brightening. Just wonder if that contrast is now a touch low...
Malta: I can't even tell the difference on my display. Currently on a hospital computer. My personal laptop is getting a new display for blown pixels.

HarryLi · Thu Nov 30, 2017 4:22 pm

Just wonder if that contrast is now a touch low...

The contrast looks not bad to me

.

Currently on a hospital computer.

Wow , hospital can offer computer ? Or are u working or studying at hospital :roll:

Thank you for your opinions.

Cheers,
Harry

len90 · Fri Dec 01, 2017 3:02 am

HarryLi wrote:
Just wonder if that contrast is now a touch low...

The contrast looks not bad to me .
Currently on a hospital computer.

Wow , hospital can offer computer ? Or are u working or studying at hospital
Thank you for your opinions.

Cheers,
Harry

Hospital has computers in the library for doctors, medical students, and staff to use. I'm on my clinical rotations so I basically spend more time in the hospital than I do at home. My personal laptop that I use for photos I purchased and it is in for repairs. Went to edit pictures and what I thought was a spot in the sky were really blown pixels.

HarryLi · Sat Dec 02, 2017 3:13 pm

Hello guys,
I went spotting today as the weather was becoming better today. And i am looking forward to hearding your opinions on these photos !
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... a3317d66ad ( HU 789 Panda )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 0ab930e413 ( QR 77F )
Thank u for your valuable time !!

Cheers,
Harry

airkas1 · Sat Dec 02, 2017 4:38 pm

Both are fine for me.

HarryLi · Sun Dec 03, 2017 3:35 pm

HarryLi · Mon Dec 04, 2017 12:07 pm

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... ac1b269ada and this one~ Cheers.

HarryLi · Tue Dec 19, 2017 2:52 pm

Hi guys,
I edited some recently and uploaded today. Hope can get your opinions on some of them ! Thank you for your time !
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... ce649ec796 ( VS B744 Special livery )
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... c5484f5980 (VS B744 G-VWOW)
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... ef88f201a5 (United B772)
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 3e9e310677 (ET B788 )

Cheers,
Harry

airkas1 · Tue Dec 19, 2017 3:04 pm

They are all OK for me.

HarryLi · Mon Dec 25, 2017 2:23 pm

Hello Guys,
I edited a B-KPB which is one of my favorite livery today. And hope can get your opinions on it !!! Thank you for your time !
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 9edb37ae02

And, Merry Christmas to all you guys here ! All my best wishes to you and your family !

Cheers,
Harry

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net