Amongst other things....
Might as well try and get some feedback here as my rejections are wildly inconsistant.
Below are two photos rejected for soft, the top one also heat haze. I would like to note that it was around 8deg, in October in the UK. No heat haze anywhere. As for soft, I've had very similar shots from the same day with very similar sharpness applied that were accepted.
Thanks in advance for any help.
Cheers
Colin
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Re: Heat haze/soft rejections
Hi Colin, The links are not accessible. Is it possible to link it from an alternate source? Not sure if the current problem is within a.net.
Re. heat haze, even though the air temps may be cool, what causes heat distortion (haze) is the difference in temperature between the ground and the air above it. Typically, if the ground is warmer than the air above it, you will see heat haze. That can happen in winter time as well.
Re. soft, without seeing the larger images, I am unable to provide specific comments. However, soft rejections fall within a spectrum of acceptable and unacceptable which (unfortunately) can be based on what the screener sees. Also, if the airframe/registration is rare, there is more leniency. For my own images, I sharpen on a layer to the point of seeing jaggies and then erase the visible jaggies. I rarely get rejections for soft, but tend to get them more for over-sharpening since I might miss some jaggies.
Hope this helps.
Jehan
Re. heat haze, even though the air temps may be cool, what causes heat distortion (haze) is the difference in temperature between the ground and the air above it. Typically, if the ground is warmer than the air above it, you will see heat haze. That can happen in winter time as well.
Re. soft, without seeing the larger images, I am unable to provide specific comments. However, soft rejections fall within a spectrum of acceptable and unacceptable which (unfortunately) can be based on what the screener sees. Also, if the airframe/registration is rare, there is more leniency. For my own images, I sharpen on a layer to the point of seeing jaggies and then erase the visible jaggies. I rarely get rejections for soft, but tend to get them more for over-sharpening since I might miss some jaggies.
Hope this helps.
Jehan
Re: Heat haze/soft rejections
Although Jehan is spot on with what he says about heat-haze, I can safely say that the 23L mound is too close to the runway for it to be an issue at this time of year (look at how many shots get accepted from this location at 1300 in summer!); however aircraft taxiing onto 23L immediately after a departure are subject to jet-wash. It's unusual for the next one to taxi right into the exhaust of the last but it does happen, particularly at peak times.
Re: Heat haze/soft rejections
Hi guys,
Try these now. Unfortunately they are on FlickR and I find that they add compression. Should give a good indication.
Jet2a321GPOWNatMAN061017 by Colin, on Flickr
TCXa332OYVKFatMAN061017_2 by Colin, on Flickr
JakTrax, yes totally correct. Jet-wash is something I keep an eye on as it has caught me out before.
My sharpening technique hasn't changed in the years I've been at this. Duplicate layer, USM, paint it on with a brush tool.
Thanks again
Colin
Try these now. Unfortunately they are on FlickR and I find that they add compression. Should give a good indication.
Jet2a321GPOWNatMAN061017 by Colin, on FlickrTCXa332OYVKFatMAN061017_2 by Colin, on FlickrJakTrax, yes totally correct. Jet-wash is something I keep an eye on as it has caught me out before.
My sharpening technique hasn't changed in the years I've been at this. Duplicate layer, USM, paint it on with a brush tool.
Thanks again
Colin
Re: Heat haze/soft rejections
There may be a tiny bit of (undetectable to me) haze there but I've seen FAR worse accepted here. The first TCX 332 departs at around 0930-1000 so a chance for some haze to get up, however sunrise on 6th Oct was around 0730, so I'm not entirely convinced. I wasn't at MAN on 6th (I decided on BHX for the MON repat flights) but it was an unusually cool and windy morning.
Ultimately you cannot really see minor heat-haze on such a small edit - is there any sign of it in the full-sized image?
Ultimately you cannot really see minor heat-haze on such a small edit - is there any sign of it in the full-sized image?
Re: Heat haze/soft rejections
Hello Colin.
Nice to see a name from the past! Long time no speak.
I really don't see anything that could be indicative of heat haze in the TCX shot. I agree with the point Karl makes - even when there is heat haze around it wouldn't generally affect such pictures, because we are so close to the aircraft in these shots. But either way I see nothing. I am surprised by the 'soft' reason too. Though I am still 'getting my eye back in' for A.net neither of these appear to me to show areas of softness worthy of a rejection. If I work hard to try to find something, or introduce that into someone's mind, the 'Airbus A330' titling on the fuselage of the TCX might do that - if you are looking for it. On the Jet2, some jaggies on the forward edge of the horizontal stabiliser could have made me think over-sharpened may have been the verdict. I am uncomfortable at the degree of latitude being used for sharpening generally - and things look so vastly different on different screens, I really don't know how we can ever find consistency.
Hope to bump into you sometime soon.
All the best.
Paul
Nice to see a name from the past! Long time no speak.
I really don't see anything that could be indicative of heat haze in the TCX shot. I agree with the point Karl makes - even when there is heat haze around it wouldn't generally affect such pictures, because we are so close to the aircraft in these shots. But either way I see nothing. I am surprised by the 'soft' reason too. Though I am still 'getting my eye back in' for A.net neither of these appear to me to show areas of softness worthy of a rejection. If I work hard to try to find something, or introduce that into someone's mind, the 'Airbus A330' titling on the fuselage of the TCX might do that - if you are looking for it. On the Jet2, some jaggies on the forward edge of the horizontal stabiliser could have made me think over-sharpened may have been the verdict. I am uncomfortable at the degree of latitude being used for sharpening generally - and things look so vastly different on different screens, I really don't know how we can ever find consistency.
Hope to bump into you sometime soon.
All the best.
Paul
Re: Heat haze/soft rejections
Hi Paul,
Great to hear from you. Been seeing your photos again, which is great to see. I'm doing the same and it's coming into my favourite time of year for lighting.
I can see what you mean about the vert stab on the Jet2. Looking again and again, the forward Jet2 titles look a little soft, but that's about it. The consistency is very frustrating, I've seen a few photos in the top 10 recently that I'd consider very soft, on my screen anyway.
Be great to catch up. Have tried messaging you through the forum but it doesn't seem to work very well.
Cheers
Colin
Great to hear from you. Been seeing your photos again, which is great to see. I'm doing the same and it's coming into my favourite time of year for lighting.
I can see what you mean about the vert stab on the Jet2. Looking again and again, the forward Jet2 titles look a little soft, but that's about it. The consistency is very frustrating, I've seen a few photos in the top 10 recently that I'd consider very soft, on my screen anyway.
Be great to catch up. Have tried messaging you through the forum but it doesn't seem to work very well.
Cheers
Colin
Re: Heat haze/soft rejections
Hello Colin.
I will try a message and see if that gets to you.
We've been here many years, and the issue of consistency just will never go away. There's been an interesting discussion on the main 'Photography Forum' about image standards, posted by Karl. I have some more time now and am thinking about getting back into my old ways and posting wordy, irritating posts in the Forum like I used to do to get things off my chest
I feel this is so relevant these days, because the competition out there for hosting images is so different to 10 years ago. I am keen to understand more about screening standards and attempts to ensure consistency and promote a welcoming, photographer-friendly community.
Hope to speak soon.
Paul
I will try a message and see if that gets to you.
We've been here many years, and the issue of consistency just will never go away. There's been an interesting discussion on the main 'Photography Forum' about image standards, posted by Karl. I have some more time now and am thinking about getting back into my old ways and posting wordy, irritating posts in the Forum like I used to do to get things off my chest
I feel this is so relevant these days, because the competition out there for hosting images is so different to 10 years ago. I am keen to understand more about screening standards and attempts to ensure consistency and promote a welcoming, photographer-friendly community.Hope to speak soon.
Paul
Re: Heat haze/soft rejections
Hi Collin,
I looked at the images and while they seem a tad soft in the nose, I would consider them passable unless they are very common air frames (i.e. 100+ already int eh DB). Actually I see some jaggies in the horizontal stabilizers. I don't see any heat haze.
Re. consistency, some of the attributes such as softness are tricky. There's clearly a range from soft to over sharpened and unfortunately there is not a tool to judge where in the scale it falls. As screeners (being human), as much as we try, we don't always see things the same way. So at anytime if you disagree with the results, feel free to use the Appeal option in order to get another look. Just so you know, we do screen to accept.
Cheers
Jehan
I looked at the images and while they seem a tad soft in the nose, I would consider them passable unless they are very common air frames (i.e. 100+ already int eh DB). Actually I see some jaggies in the horizontal stabilizers. I don't see any heat haze.
Re. consistency, some of the attributes such as softness are tricky. There's clearly a range from soft to over sharpened and unfortunately there is not a tool to judge where in the scale it falls. As screeners (being human), as much as we try, we don't always see things the same way. So at anytime if you disagree with the results, feel free to use the Appeal option in order to get another look. Just so you know, we do screen to accept.
Cheers
Jehan
Re: Heat haze/soft rejections
Thanks for the reply Jehan, appreciate it. I'll do a new edit for both of these and upload them again.
Cheers
Colin
Cheers
Colin
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests