Hi All,
I got this one rejected for being underexposed because half the aircraft is in the shadows, and also because the ladder is blocking the nose wheel (I get that one).
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 7b9b92436f
However, I had this one accepted before it.
https://www.airliners.net/photo/Belgium ... 01/5180619
Pretty much the same photo of two different aircraft, one accepted and one rejected. Any help?
I also got this one rejected for being blurry in the rear with not enough depth of field. I think the DOF is ok, and it's not really that blurry towards the tail.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 4868d2abd3
Thanks,
Colin
-
- dutchspotter1
- Posts: 198
- Joined:
Re: Post Screen - A Tail of Two F16s ... And an A10.
Ref. the F-16: the first one has a bigger part of the nosegear blocked than the second one. I don't know why the first one would be underexposed, but it could certainly use some contrast.
Ref. the A-10: I agree with the rejection as the tail looks soft at best (which may or may not have been caused by heathaze from the engine)
Ref. the A-10: I agree with the rejection as the tail looks soft at best (which may or may not have been caused by heathaze from the engine)
NO URLS in signature
Re: Post Screen - A Tail of Two F16s ... And an A10.
Considering you would probably have some very unhappy people with some very menacing weapons if you towed the aircraft into full sun, the shadow/sun rejection is a bit silly. I would say it is borderline overexposed, but imo acceptable. I can't explain why one is accepted and one rejected. The tail of the A-10 is a bit blurry/OOF, as are parts of the engine. However, I would also say it is acceptable, even more so with some re-edits. Perhaps try a smaller size and another round of sharpening on that one. The composition is awesome, I'd love to see it added.
Hey, thanks for stopping by! My photos can be found here: http://www.airliners.net/search?user=17 ... lay=detail
Re: Post Screen - A Tail of Two F16s ... And an A10.
DL747 wrote:Considering you would probably have some very unhappy people with some very menacing weapons if you towed the aircraft into full sun, the shadow/sun rejection is a bit silly. I would say it is borderline overexposed, but imo acceptable. I can't explain why one is accepted and one rejected. The tail of the A-10 is a bit blurry/OOF, as are parts of the engine. However, I would also say it is acceptable, even more so with some re-edits. Perhaps try a smaller size and another round of sharpening on that one. The composition is awesome, I'd love to see it added.
Exactly. The aircraft was roped off, so the ladder was unmovable, and as the day went on, the aircraft was completely in the shade. They also accepted the other one with a little les of the nose being blocked, and a tiny bit more of sun on it. should I appeal or make a lower res?
As for the A10, a little more sharpening in the rear and lower res should work ok?
Colin
Re: Post Screen - A Tail of Two F16s ... And an A10.
50/50 on if the A-10 gets in, I think it should. I would maybe boost the contrast and drop the highlights on the F-16 just slightly and then in a message to screeners explain the previous rejection and the situation.
Hey, thanks for stopping by! My photos can be found here: http://www.airliners.net/search?user=17 ... lay=detail
Re: Post Screen - A Tail of Two F16s ... And an A10.
DL747 wrote:50/50 on if the A-10 gets in, I think it should. I would maybe boost the contrast and drop the highlights on the F-16 just slightly and then in a message to screeners explain the previous rejection and the situation.
Ok cool. I'll do that. I'll get back to you in a week or so. haha.
Re: Post Screen - A Tail of Two F16s ... And an A10.
Hey CJ,
I screened the first image of the F-16 that was referenced. Let me explain my reason for rejecting it. The substantial blockage of the nose gear was the primary reason. One could argue if it was unavoidable or not, but at the end of the day, I felt it was too much of a distraction. In your second F-16 (which I did not screen) , the wheel is less than 50% blocked and would be considered acceptable. As for the shadows, I find the uneven lighting to be too much of a distraction and will admit that it is a subjective issue. If that was the only issue, I would likely have accepted the first image.
Hope the explanation helps. I enjoy screeening your images and look forward to seeing more here.
Cheers,
Jehan
I screened the first image of the F-16 that was referenced. Let me explain my reason for rejecting it. The substantial blockage of the nose gear was the primary reason. One could argue if it was unavoidable or not, but at the end of the day, I felt it was too much of a distraction. In your second F-16 (which I did not screen) , the wheel is less than 50% blocked and would be considered acceptable. As for the shadows, I find the uneven lighting to be too much of a distraction and will admit that it is a subjective issue. If that was the only issue, I would likely have accepted the first image.
Hope the explanation helps. I enjoy screeening your images and look forward to seeing more here.
Cheers,
Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Schmave and 26 guests