Dear all,
Got this one rejected on first screening (that is, directly by the first screener, without any second opinion or so), and while most of the times I can see and agree with the rejection reasons, and work on them, that doesn't happen this time.
The shot: http://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/airliners/3/1/0/4262013.jpg
* Overexposed. Fuselage is white, plane is basically brand new. There aren't any blown out spots.
* Oversharpened. Can't see any obvious jaggies or halos. I took special care on the registration and the other markings below.
Please let's not start the size debate, as the shot was perfectly sharp out of the camera, and only a handful of pixels were cropped on each side.
Thanks in advance!
Miguel
Re: PostScreening - Miguel
Well, i think the exposure is ok but i am not sure about the sharp
I am a Guangzhou Spotter. My photos are here : http://www.airliners.net/search?user=20 ... =viewCount 
Re: PostScreening - Miguel
Hello Miguel, very nice shot. The fuselage looks very bright on the top but maybe technically not overexposed. The left wing, "dreamliner" and "787-8" signs look oversharpened to me.
Re: PostScreening - Miguel
I'm not on my screening monitor to judge sharpness. I see a hint of jaggies on the leading edge of the wing and the horizontal stabilizer, but it looks passable. There is only one other image of this registration in the database--therefore it may be worth appealing. Exposure looks OK to me.
Jehan
Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
-
-
Miguel1982
Screener
- Posts: 142
- Joined:
Re: PostScreening - Miguel
Thanks for your opinion all. I hadn't considered the leading edges of wing and stabilizer that much, but I can see how that can lead to an oversharpen rejection. Even if it's passable, I will try to do a new edit paying more attention to those areas.
Cheers,
M
Cheers,
M
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: solro and 7 guests