Hello!
Been here a while, never posted until now.
I have this photo I uploaded that got rejected for:
Blurry
Compression
Personal message
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... cea8ad4a73
So, first I am confused what Personal message means? I thought maybe I got a message from the screener but cannot seem to find anything anywhere.
Second, looking at the picture on the rejection page it is a lot blurrier than the picture I submitted, not sure if it's just a low quality version on the rejection page or if somehow the quality got degraded in the upload?
edit: changed link to the correct link everyone should be able to see
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Personal message .... confused
Last edited by 71sbeetle on Tue Jun 20, 2017 4:24 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Personal message .... confused
I am not sure if the link I posted works, so here is the shot I uploaded:
Re: Personal message .... confused
You can only find the personal message in the screening mail, unfortunately not in your photographer's corner.
What is the size you uploaded it to airliners? Is it 1.920px? Then the message was surely "Quality not there for such a large size"
And that's it, judging from your flickr shot it doesn't seem blurry to me, but concerning a.net's standard you would need to choose a smaller size, I would say 1.400 max, the official answer would be something around 1.200px.
Additionally you should be careful when resizíng -> always safe at the highest amount possible to avoid compression.
Julien
What is the size you uploaded it to airliners? Is it 1.920px? Then the message was surely "Quality not there for such a large size"
And that's it, judging from your flickr shot it doesn't seem blurry to me, but concerning a.net's standard you would need to choose a smaller size, I would say 1.400 max, the official answer would be something around 1.200px.
Additionally you should be careful when resizíng -> always safe at the highest amount possible to avoid compression.
Julien
Re: Personal message .... confused
Thank you sir for the answer! I will try to re-upload at a lower resolution, I have a 1280x853 version so I may try that one.
I checked the email and rechecked and triple checked, I do not see any personal messages on there, maybe they forgot to write the message?
I checked the email and rechecked and triple checked, I do not see any personal messages on there, maybe they forgot to write the message?
Re: Personal message .... confused
Well, the 1280x853 got rejected also
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... b6c01f1b51
Blurry
Compression
High in frame
I'm confused about the blurry and the compression
My workflow is :
Open RAW in Lightroom, adjust what I need to adjust
If needed export to Photoshop as 600 dpi 16 bit TIFF to do additional processing (if needed) then re-import TIFF to LR
Export from Lightroom to JPG at 100% quality no file size limit
What am I doing wrong?
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... b6c01f1b51
Blurry
Compression
High in frame
I'm confused about the blurry and the compression
My workflow is :
Open RAW in Lightroom, adjust what I need to adjust
If needed export to Photoshop as 600 dpi 16 bit TIFF to do additional processing (if needed) then re-import TIFF to LR
Export from Lightroom to JPG at 100% quality no file size limit
What am I doing wrong?
Re: Personal message .... confused
Hi beetle,
You are correct that there was no personal message attached to the rejection. Most likely the screener forgot, sorry for that.
Seeing your second rejected image for the first time now and it's indeed high in frame. The fuselage is center, but the tail/wing needs to be taken into account as well. Centering is not an exact science, but more of how it looks. Right now, there's a lot more 'dead' space below the fuselage than there is above it. I'm not seeing the compression, but the blurryness is visible to me, mostly in the forward half of the fuselage. The type of blurryness/very very soft parts of the image leads me to think that heathaze is a likely culprit. As such, it would have nothing to do with your workflow in Photoshop (which seems fine the way I read it).
You are correct that there was no personal message attached to the rejection. Most likely the screener forgot, sorry for that.
Seeing your second rejected image for the first time now and it's indeed high in frame. The fuselage is center, but the tail/wing needs to be taken into account as well. Centering is not an exact science, but more of how it looks. Right now, there's a lot more 'dead' space below the fuselage than there is above it. I'm not seeing the compression, but the blurryness is visible to me, mostly in the forward half of the fuselage. The type of blurryness/very very soft parts of the image leads me to think that heathaze is a likely culprit. As such, it would have nothing to do with your workflow in Photoshop (which seems fine the way I read it).
Re: Personal message .... confused
airkas1 wrote:Hi beetle,
You are correct that there was no personal message attached to the rejection. Most likely the screener forgot, sorry for that.
Seeing your second rejected image for the first time now and it's indeed high in frame. The fuselage is center, but the tail/wing needs to be taken into account as well. Centering is not an exact science, but more of how it looks. Right now, there's a lot more 'dead' space below the fuselage than there is above it. I'm not seeing the compression, but the blurryness is visible to me, mostly in the forward half of the fuselage. The type of blurryness/very very soft parts of the image leads me to think that heathaze is a likely culprit. As such, it would have nothing to do with your workflow in Photoshop (which seems fine the way I read it).
Thank you for your answer!
No problem on the personal message, had me looking everywhere, searching Google to see what I was missing lol, I thought maybe it meant there was some type of "personal message" in the photo
The high in frame is not a problem, easily corrected. I wasn't sure, it looked odd to me but another photographer told me "use only the fuselage don't use any parts sticking out of it for centering up/down" I guess that'll teach me to listen to other photographers :p
Now for the bluryness, I am still confused, is there a way you could help me on this as I do not see this heat haze effect on the picture but then again I am not a screener and my eyes are not trained for it.
What I usually do when selecting the picture to edit is to look at several parts of the picture for sharpness, on this airplane I looked at the front, I can see the AOA probe mounting screws, I looked at the back and I can see individual stars on the American flag, all shaped the same, and I can see rivets/hardware on various parts of the airplane, so I thought this was a good candidate.
Here is an extreme close up of the AOA probe (it's low quality because, well, it is an extreme close up lol):
More realistically this is a front about 100% crop:
And this is an example of what I thought heat haze was, to my untrained eye:
So I guess my question is, what should I be looking for that are tell tale signs of heat haze?
Thank you again!
Re: Personal message .... confused
In my opinion ,the photo is ok. There is no heat haze. The most serious issue is size. I downloaded the photo and found the size is 1920*1280. It is quite large and needs more detail and better quality . Of course it is hard to pass the screeners unless your photo is unique and much too interesting. You'd better use 1200*800 and spend more time on sharpening（part sharpen & whole sharpen）
Re: Personal message .... confused
ben811118 wrote:In my opinion ,the photo is ok. There is no heat haze. The most serious issue is size. I downloaded the photo and found the size is 1920*1280. It is quite large and needs more detail and better quality . Of course it is hard to pass the screeners unless your photo is unique and much too interesting. You'd better use 1200*800 and spend more time on sharpening（part sharpen & whole sharpen）
Thank you for the feedback! I did re-upload at a smaller size of 1280 long but it was rejected for blurry, compression and high in frame. I was trying to upload as there is no photo in the database of this aircraft but I guess it wasn't good enough
Re: Personal message .... confused
1.Mostly we keep the window line(the line consists of the windows from head to tail ) on the middle of the pic and it is accepted by screeners. The body is high.
2.Blur is quite different from soft . That means your shutter speed isn't fast enough and it is a useless photo. Soft means you need to sharpen carefully for the whole or parts of the pic.
3.You can use small size and reupload, before that you must do sharpening work (never oversharpen, if some parts oversharpened, use blur tool and set it to 8% or low to smear ) and use the best quality to output . If the screeners still think the pic is blur , give up .
2.Blur is quite different from soft . That means your shutter speed isn't fast enough and it is a useless photo. Soft means you need to sharpen carefully for the whole or parts of the pic.
3.You can use small size and reupload, before that you must do sharpening work (never oversharpen, if some parts oversharpened, use blur tool and set it to 8% or low to smear ) and use the best quality to output . If the screeners still think the pic is blur , give up .
Re: Personal message .... confused
ben811118 wrote:1.Mostly we keep the window line(the line consists of the windows from head to tail ) on the middle of the pic and it is accepted by screeners. The body is high.
2.Blur is quite different from soft . That means your shutter speed isn't fast enough and it is a useless photo. Soft means you need to sharpen carefully for the whole or parts of the pic.
3.You can use small size and reupload, before that you must do sharpening work (never oversharpen, if some parts oversharpened, use blur tool and set it to 8% or low to smear ) and use the best quality to output . If the screeners still think the pic is blur , give up .
Thanks!
1. It's an easy fix for this shot
2. Shutter speed was 1/640 in this shot should be fast enough I think, plus looking in details pixel peeping even the small words on the doors don't have motion blur trails
3. I'm not reuploading this shot, it was rejected twice for the same reasons that means the problem is there, I'm not contesting that, I'm just confused as I do not see the blur and I want to learn how to see it, so in the future I don't try to upload a picture that will get rejected
Aviation and photography are my 2 top passions, combining both is the best but I want/need to be better at it so basically I'm asking if someone can explain to me what to look for that I'm not seeing
Re: Personal message .... confused
Also at f/8 234mm and subject at 520ft from me I have over 200' on visible side and over 1100' beyond the airplane of depth of field so I already ruled out shallow depth of field
Re: Personal message .... confused
The 100% crop is noisy and somewhat blurry, but that is relatively normal for 100% crops. But when having another look at it your 1280 rejected photo, it doesn't seem that bad anymore, although I do still see some slight traces of blur that make me look at the image a bit harder. In the end, if it's a new frame, I'd say passable.
Re: Personal message .... confused
Honestly I can't see blur. I think the pic is ok after resize. Give you a suggestion. Turn off IS when the shutter speed is fast enough. You may find that the photo is unbelievable and sharper than it used to be, Try and enjoy.
Re: Personal message .... confused
I worked on it some more, it appears a little sharper now. Just re-uploaded, we shall see!!!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests