Hi there. I already posted this message in another forum but was told I should post it in this forum as I will get more assistance here. Anyway, up to now I have been doing relatively well here on airliners with a few photos already accepted to the database. But recently I have getting one rejection after another which is frustrating. I don't know what I'm doing wrong now because I have maintained pretty much the same technique (in terms of both editing and camera settings) with the rejected photos that I have maintained with the ones that got accepted. Please help.
Here is an example of one of my photos that recently got rejected.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 37c4c966ed
The reasons given are low contrast and over exposed
Here is another that also got rejected.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 9703f0213d
Reasons given are low contrast and CW rotation
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
-
- Miguel1982
- Posts: 214
- Joined:
Re: Assist with rejected photos
Hi,
Both photos should be easily fixable. A bit more contrast (make the shadows darker) will make the colors pop, and reducing the highlights should take care of the overexposure.
As for the CW, even though there are no clear references, to me it feels that way. On a second look, the Flysafair could also use some CW. You can try saving different versions on your computer with different rotation angles (i.e, 0,5 - 1 - 1,5) and then compare them and see which one feels more natural to you.
Please feel free to post in this thread the re-edited versions so we can also give you an opinion before screening them.
Cheers,
Miguel
Both photos should be easily fixable. A bit more contrast (make the shadows darker) will make the colors pop, and reducing the highlights should take care of the overexposure.
As for the CW, even though there are no clear references, to me it feels that way. On a second look, the Flysafair could also use some CW. You can try saving different versions on your computer with different rotation angles (i.e, 0,5 - 1 - 1,5) and then compare them and see which one feels more natural to you.
Please feel free to post in this thread the re-edited versions so we can also give you an opinion before screening them.
Cheers,
Miguel
Re: Assist with rejected photos
First photo: the brightness is OK for me, but I do agree on low contrast. When you make a new edit, ideally the aircraft should be placed a bit lower in the frame.
Second photo: I agree on low contrast and some CW.
As Miguel mentioned, both should be easy fixes.
Second photo: I agree on low contrast and some CW.
As Miguel mentioned, both should be easy fixes.
Re: Assist with rejected photos
Regarding to the B738, i agree with the Low contrast rejection it could have more. The exposure looks ok to me but i will tend to reduce a little bit.
Second one : It indeed needs more contrast and i agree both of Kas and Miguel that it needs some CW rotation you can try to rotate about 0.6-0.8 etc.. And see which one would be suitable.
Cheers,
Harry
Second one : It indeed needs more contrast and i agree both of Kas and Miguel that it needs some CW rotation you can try to rotate about 0.6-0.8 etc.. And see which one would be suitable.
Cheers,
Harry
Re: Assist with rejected photos
Well, as I noted in your previous thread:
For the 738, it's low-contrast, and has a very flat look, but it's far from overexposed. Actually a bit dark if anything. Can definitely use more contrast, though, and looks a bit oversharpened to me as well. I think it could use a bit of CW.
The second is definitely low-contrast, and I'd say dark too. Also a bit of a blue cast to my eye. I agree with the CW rotation as well, given the angle of the shot.
For the 738, it's low-contrast, and has a very flat look, but it's far from overexposed. Actually a bit dark if anything. Can definitely use more contrast, though, and looks a bit oversharpened to me as well. I think it could use a bit of CW.
The second is definitely low-contrast, and I'd say dark too. Also a bit of a blue cast to my eye. I agree with the CW rotation as well, given the angle of the shot.
-
- afroaviator
- Posts: 16
- Joined:
Re: Assist with rejected photos
Thanks for the feedback guys. I'll post the re edited versions when I'm done with them.
-
- afroaviator
- Posts: 16
- Joined:
Re: Assist with rejected photos
Hi there. Here are the re edited photos.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/42055130@ ... ed-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/42055130@ ... ed-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/42055130@ ... ed-public/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/42055130@ ... ed-public/
Re: Assist with rejected photos
They both look a bit on the bright side and quite oversharpened to me.
Jehan
Jehan
Re: Assist with rejected photos
Brightness looks fine to me. I'd still say a touch more CW rotation on the second, though.
Re: Assist with rejected photos
jelpee wrote:and quite oversharpened to me.
Are they getting compressed/resized by Flickr? That's what it looks like to me.
Re: Assist with rejected photos
Brightness looks OK, but I also agree on a bit oversharpened. But as Vik mentioned, it could be a Flickr issue.
Re: Assist with rejected photos
It`s quite impossible to judge photos on Flickr. When looked at it on the screen when the links opens it looks really oversharpened. After clicking on it it looks soft to blurry. I noticed you have to download the file in original size to see in as it really is (1200px) and than it looks still a bit oversharpened to me
-
- afroaviator
- Posts: 16
- Joined:
Re: Assist with rejected photos
Sorry for the late reply. Is there another way to upload photos on the forums without relying on photo hosting sites like Flickr?
Re: Assist with rejected photos
You could upload them as per the normal procedure and then link us the url. We should be able to respond in a timely manner so that you can delete the photo if it turns out to have flaws.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests