Pre-screening photos - fsx98

fsx98 · Sat Oct 27, 2018 1:33 pm

I would also like feedback on this one:
N218NV: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 01d17b3f31

DL747 · Sat Oct 27, 2018 7:23 pm

I can only get the Allegiant to load, looks like the 502 errors have returned. As for that one, it is borderline OS in spots, blotchy/noisy sky, and low in frame. Again, its probably best to be shooting in better weather with a low ISO.

Runway28L · Sun Oct 28, 2018 12:48 am

N942NN #1: Hazed, noise, blotchy sky
N942NN #2: Underexposed, hazed, blotchy sky, cyan cast

N218NV: Rear of the fuselage is blurry indicated by the registration and tail. The rest of Preston's assessment I agree with.

fsx98 · Sun Oct 28, 2018 1:53 am

Thanks Preston and Evan; I'll bin both of N942NN and probably upload a different photo of N218NV.

Updates as of 10/27/18:
N7869A rejected for soft and N246NV rejected for OE/OS; both will be re-edited and re-uploaded...

N8520Q is in the database!

fsx98 · Sun Oct 28, 2018 2:02 am

Here's a different photo of N218NV that I would like feedback on:
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 0ea427668c

fsx98 · Thu Nov 01, 2018 9:18 pm

Updates:

One of the shots for N254NV got accepted; the other was rejected for blurry, double, noise, and quality.

Still awaiting feedback for N218NV: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 0ea427668c

Runway28L · Thu Nov 01, 2018 10:31 pm

50/50 on quality regarding N218NV.

fsx98 · Fri Nov 02, 2018 2:41 am

Fair enough; I'll have the other screeners voice their opinions on N218NV.

fsx98 · Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:06 am

Some more updates:

N254NV #3 rejected for OS and UE; just re-uploaded the photo w/ such edits:

N246NV (note this is not a re-upload of the same rejected photo, as lighting was harsh and difficult to fix):

N7869A rejected for soft; re-uploaded the photo w/ an extra kick of sharpness:

Let me know what you guys think of these photos!

fsx98 · Sun Nov 04, 2018 1:54 am

And also a few more:

N202HA #1 rejected for High Contrast and OS; reuploaded w/ lower contrast and sharpness:

N202HA #2 rejected for Double; High Contrast; Noise; OS; and Quality; will be binned.

N478WN #1 rejected for blurry, noise, quality, soft, UE, and vignetting; reuploaded w/ reduced size and other fixes:

Runway28L · Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:03 am

N254NV: 50/50 quality
N246NV: Needs some CCW
N7869A: Slightly high in frame, 50/50 quality
N202HA: Still looks a little bit on the high side in terms of contrast IMO, although I think someone else should also comment regarding that.

Re N478WN I would probably just bin it unfortunately. Still looks blurry at 1024. Lighting isn't really helping things in that image either.

fsx98 · Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:09 am

Thanks Evan; will bin N478WN; I will let other screeners voice their opinions on the other photos as well.

fsx98 · Sun Nov 04, 2018 2:52 am

I have reworked on N698CB from a couple of weeks back; resized the photo to 1024 to mask the blurriness of the nose area as well as reduce noise of the sky even further:

fsx98 · Sun Nov 04, 2018 4:02 am

I have also reworked N900PC from a different shot that was not yet uploaded to the a.net database:

DL747 · Sun Nov 04, 2018 7:18 am

N698CB: blurryish, OS in areas to compensate, noisy, overall quality not very good
N900PC: blurry, noisy, blotchy, needs CW
I'd strongly advise to binning 900PC, and probably 698CB as well.

fsx98 · Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:18 am

Thanks Preston; I will bin N900PC but will let other screeners decide on N698CB, since I may have some second opinions on that photo.

fsx98 · Mon Nov 05, 2018 4:32 am

Here are some more photos for feedback:

N569JB (rejected for magenta color cast; re-uploaded with the magenta cast eliminated):

N723YX (resized to 1024 to mask blurriness):

N461UA (rejected for sharp; re-uploaded w/ an extra kick of sharpness):

airkas1 · Thu Nov 08, 2018 10:58 pm

569JB: blurry, quality
723YXL blurry tail/nose/titles. marginal at best
461UA: slightly OS titles, noisy bottom half of fuselage, quality

fsx98 · Fri Nov 09, 2018 2:42 am

Thanks Kas; will definitely bin 723YX; will try to downsize 569JB to see if that will mask the blurriness; will try to apply the same amount of sharpness on 461UA but erase jaggies on titles after applying a third pass on sharpness and even reduce noise further.

fsx98 · Fri Nov 09, 2018 4:34 am

Here are the re-uploaded photos of N569JB and N461UA:

N569JB: I didn't resize it to 1024 but somehow, I got rid of the blurriness; I just simply have forgotten to duplicate layer to sharpen the image from the previous upload:

N461UA: Applied the same number of passes for sharpening, but used the eraser tool to eliminate OS on the United titles in the fourth pass of sharpening; also reduced noise further:

Let me know what you guys think!

fsx98 · Fri Nov 09, 2018 1:11 pm

N218NV Update: Photo is accepted to the database!

fsx98 · Sun Nov 11, 2018 3:38 am

Here are two more photos in the queue for feedback:

N698DL:

N771SA:

fsx98 · Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:02 pm

Updates:

N698CB rejected for OS and quality
N202HA rejected for CW rotation and UE
N7869A rejected for Blurry, noise, quality, and soft, w/ Personal Message
N254NV (#2) rejected for Blurry, Noise, and UE w/ Personal Message
N246NV rejected for Blurry, Quality, and UE w/ Personal Message

N202HA should be fixable and maybe even N698CB; may try to either sharpen more or downsize N7869A; may upload a different sequence of N254NV; for N246NV, it's either downsize or bin for the other earlier sequence of the same aircraft after editing.

fsx98 · Tue Nov 13, 2018 2:35 pm

I have re-uploaded N202HA and N698CB; N202HA should have a higher chance of passing but not sure about N698CB - thought about giving this a final chance before binning this one for good:

DL747 · Wed Nov 14, 2018 7:01 am

Okay so due to the large number of posts I don't know if I missed anything, but here's feedback on the six linked images. Eyes are also very tired so might be missing things.
N569JB: borderline OS in spots, feels a bit flat
N461UA: blurry towards the rear, OS in areas probably to mask blur
N698DL: OS in spots to mask blur, feels a bit flat
The WN: blurry, dark, CW needed, flat, soft...no chance for this one I'm afraid
N202HA: harsh, OS in areas, greenish
N698CB: as before, quite blurry

fsx98 · Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:17 pm

Thanks Preston; will definitely bin this shot of N771SA and upload a different sequence of the same aircraft, and maybe even N698CB; will let the other screeners decide on the remaining photos.

fsx98 · Wed Nov 14, 2018 1:35 pm

Here's two more uploads for feedback:

N771SA (different angle):

N7869A:

N254NV (different angle):

DL747 · Wed Nov 14, 2018 9:54 pm

N771SA: still quite blurry, not worth editing imo
N7869A: OS in spots, blotchy/noisy in spots, quality borderline at best
N254NV: borderline OS, borderline noise

fsx98 · Wed Nov 14, 2018 10:11 pm

Thanks Preston; will consider binning N771SA but will give other screeners their opinions on the remaining photos in queue.

fsx98 · Fri Nov 16, 2018 3:56 pm

Here's a downsized photo of N771SA of the previous upload (1024 from 1800, in which I had intended to downsize that to 1280 but forgot to do so):

Here's a window view of N7817J in a different sequence:

HarryLi · Fri Nov 16, 2018 5:57 pm

Both of them do not have very nice light condition. The first one looks pretty blurry for me, overall quality seems not so great.
Window shot is definitely Oversharpened as you can see some jaggys. BTW, it could be slightly brighter IMO, but need to take care of noise especially sky.

fsx98 · Fri Nov 16, 2018 6:17 pm

Thanks Harry; will bin N771SA but will try to fix the window shot.

fsx98 · Sat Nov 17, 2018 4:53 pm

Updates:

N569JB rejected for low contrast; fixable, will re-upload with increased contrast
N461UA accepted to the database:

fsx98 · Sat Nov 17, 2018 7:15 pm

Here is a re-upload of N569JB with contrast increased slightly:

And here is a re-upload of the window view from N7817J with increased exposure and decreased sharpness:

fsx98 · Sun Nov 18, 2018 5:06 am

And here are several more for feedback:

N414WN (re-uploaded to further reduce noise, increase exposure, and sharpen less):

N248WN (reduced size to mask blurriness and attempt to increase exposure):

N769UA #1 (re-uploaded to increase contrast, eliminate grain, and increase exposure):

N769UA #2 (first upload of this sequence):

N965AT (first upload of this sequence):

N995AT (first upload of this sequence):

HarryLi · Sun Nov 18, 2018 7:27 am

N569JB : Contrast seems fine for me but the title seems bit of blurry to me.You can wait more opinions as i would give it SO.
Window : Better but still Marg due to the light condition.
N414WN : The whole a/c is quiet blurry to me.Serious halos around the a/c especially tail and wing.
N248WN : I suppose you took this one inside the terminal or a building because it has tad cyan/green cast. Too noisy and blurry (tail and Reg).Underexposed.
N769UA : Poor light condition. Slight oversharpened.
N769UA 2 : Quiet blurry and overexposed at the top side of the a/c. Heat hazed and halos as well.(Halos surround the tail.)
N965AT : Blury toward Reg,title, and nose.Poor sky quality due to noise probably.Obvious halos surround tail as you see.
N995AT : The same as N965AT.

fsx98 · Sun Nov 18, 2018 12:58 pm

Thanks Harry; will keep N569JB and probably the window shot of N7817J for SO but will probably return to the drawing board for N414WN, N965AT and N995AT to downsize these photos in an effort to mask minor blurriness, if possible; will definitely bin N248WN and both photos of N769UA.

fsx98 · Sun Nov 18, 2018 2:38 pm

Here are some downsized and de-haloed photos for feedback:

N414WN:

N995AT:

N965AT:

Runway28L · Sun Nov 18, 2018 6:28 pm

N414WN: Blurry, OS in spots, overexposed sky
N995AT: Quality, haloing around tail
N965AT: Blurry, grainy, quality, underexposed, looks like some weird effect happened near the right edge of the tail

fsx98 · Mon Nov 19, 2018 3:14 am

Thanks Evan; will probably remove N414WN from queue, since the southwest.com URL still appears blurry; in the N965AT photo, I forgot to mention in the comments that a radio tower is in the distance with visibility affected by cloud; will let screeners decide further on N965AT.

Runway28L · Mon Nov 19, 2018 7:07 am

fsx98 wrote:
I forgot to mention in the comments that a radio tower is in the distance with visibility affected by cloud; will let screeners decide further on N965AT.

I do see it, but that's not what I was referring to.

I went ahead and circled the area where I noticed the effect. If you zoom into that circled region, then you can see that white line that follows along the edge of the vertical stabilizer.

fsx98 · Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:57 am

I see; will delete this one from queue then.

fsx98 · Mon Nov 19, 2018 7:36 pm

N698DL update: photo is accepted to the database!

fsx98 · Tue Nov 20, 2018 4:09 am

I have uploaded the following for feedback:

N902BC:

N965AT (re-upload in a different sequence, downsized to 1024 to mask blurriness and also sharpened the photo more):

airkas1 · Tue Nov 20, 2018 9:32 pm

902 looks soft and blurry and the front.
965 is obviously blurry and is never going to make it, sorry.

fsx98 · Tue Nov 20, 2018 10:03 pm

Thanks Kas; will bin 965 and try to downsize 902.

fsx98 · Sat Nov 24, 2018 4:35 pm

Recent Updates:

N202HA rejected for OE and High Contrast; will tone these settings down;
N7869A at HQ1
N254NV #2 is in!

fsx98 · Sun Nov 25, 2018 1:21 am

Updates:

N902BC re-uploaded w/ an extra kick of sharpness:

N569JB rejected for OS and Noise; re-uploaded with decreased use of sharpness and further noise reduction:

N202HA re-uploaded w/ decreased exposure/contrast:

N7817J is about to be screened soon...

fsx98 · Sun Nov 25, 2018 2:09 am

N7817J Window View Update: Rejected for soft, re-uploaded w/ an extra kick of sharpness:

fsx98 · Sun Nov 25, 2018 12:05 pm

N7869A Update: rejected for OS and noise; will tone down sharpness and further reduce noise on next re-upload.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net