Screening help.

wiggy · Tue Dec 25, 2018 9:20 am

airkas1 wrote:
The crop could be a little wider, but otherwise there is nothing wrong with the crop. Can’t judge the quality from my phone.

I agree with kas

airkas1 · Tue Dec 25, 2018 1:09 pm

Now seen on my screening PC, the sky does look noisy at the least.

Crosswindphoto · Fri Dec 28, 2018 6:08 pm

Can I get these two pre-screened?
Thanks
Tim
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 9db3098dd8
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... baa838ac34

airkas1 · Sat Dec 29, 2018 10:44 am

Both look nice and passable in any case. However, for future images I would advise a bit looser crop on the sides.

Crosswindphoto · Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:22 am

Will do. Thanks Kas.
Tim

Crosswindphoto · Wed Jan 02, 2019 6:55 pm

Can I get thses few pre-screened?
Thanks.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 2a5e2da9f6
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... dfd1b0d6b2
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 166ddf44b2
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 28d2f86bb3

airkas1 · Wed Jan 02, 2019 7:08 pm

82AJ is a little (too) sharp.
-FXKN has a noisy sky (or atleast looks like it).
The Dash is nice.
The King Air has a not so great glare on the fuselage & windows, so not sure about that one.

Crosswindphoto · Wed Jan 02, 2019 8:49 pm

Thanks Kas!
Regarding -FXKN, the last photo of it in the DB it had engines, in my photo it doesn’t. Does it count for priority screening? (Once the changes you suggested are made of course.)
Thanks
Tim

airkas1 · Wed Jan 02, 2019 9:30 pm

Although different, it doesn’t really count as a priority photo.

Crosswindphoto · Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:00 pm

is it better now?
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 1ecd518821

airkas1 · Thu Jan 03, 2019 3:24 pm

I don't see a difference in sharpening.

Crosswindphoto · Sat Jan 05, 2019 9:12 pm

Can I get this shot pre-screened?
Thanks.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... f1d6ce62d7

jelpee · Sat Jan 05, 2019 9:21 pm

Looks acceptable for me.

Cheers,

Jehan

Crosswindphoto · Mon Jan 14, 2019 10:51 pm

Hey guys!
Can I get this shot pre-screened?
Thanks!
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 7928fbfde5

jelpee · Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:34 am

Beautiful lighting on the C130. I would crop a little closer to the prop blades on the right side in order to balance it with that on the left side. Otherwise, seems acceptable for me.

Jehan

Crosswindphoto · Tue Jan 15, 2019 11:09 am

Thanks Jehan!

airkas1 · Tue Jan 15, 2019 11:24 am

I agree with Jehan.

Crosswindphoto · Wed Jan 16, 2019 1:09 pm

Can I get these shots pre-screened? Thanks!
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 165871761a
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... b81cc2337b
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 80ec183a52
https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-co ... to/5364353

HarryLi · Wed Jan 16, 2019 1:17 pm

757F seems passable for me although i would like to use a smaller size since this one seems bit of noisy at this size.
Second one looks fine IMO.
Motive of AE is iffy for me i would probably give SO for this one about this issue. However, the color also seems weird in my screen. Tad cyan & blue.
The last one is not the link to the image. Plz check.

Crosswindphoto · Wed Jan 16, 2019 1:25 pm

Oops!
here is the correct link: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 4cc4bdccb1

HarryLi · Wed Jan 16, 2019 1:44 pm

RCAF : Cyan/Green in my screen. Low contrast for me. BTW, there is a dirty spot in the sky,above the tail.

jelpee · Wed Jan 16, 2019 2:08 pm

Adding to Harry's comments, my take:
1, Cargojet:OK fr me.
2. Kingair: OK for me as well.
3. American Eagle E145: Insufficient motive for placing it Left in the Frame. Also very contrasty. No for me.
4. RCAF: Same opinion as Harry. Therefore, No for me. Nice prop blur though.

Cheers

Jehan

Crosswindphoto · Wed Jan 16, 2019 5:27 pm

AE has been pulled from the queue.
Reworked Aurora: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 948da14e72

airkas1 · Wed Jan 16, 2019 5:32 pm

Aurora is still very cyan/green.

Crosswindphoto · Wed Jan 16, 2019 5:44 pm

Better?:
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... e3f2822363

airkas1 · Wed Jan 16, 2019 6:11 pm

Not really. I guess the aircraft itself is that color too, so that makes it extra hard. Try adding some (more) magenta.

Crosswindphoto · Wed Jan 16, 2019 6:36 pm

Magenta added:
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... f261216343

airkas1 · Wed Jan 16, 2019 8:20 pm

Much much better!

Crosswindphoto · Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:05 pm

Can i get these 3 pre-screened please?
Thanks!
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 7aabeacee2
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 4e3d0b1bf3
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 4ef6d89cec

airkas1 · Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:34 pm

The shadow on the Lear isn't great. The other 2 look nice and fine.

Crosswindphoto · Sat Jan 19, 2019 8:39 pm

Would it be taken into consideration that the last uploaded photo of the lear was 2006?

airkas1 · Sat Jan 19, 2019 9:45 pm

Most recent one seems to be 2012. Keeping that in mind, I'd probably give you a pass on the shadow.

Crosswindphoto · Thu Feb 07, 2019 1:49 pm

Can I get a pre-screen on this shot please?
Thanks
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 58391eea42

airkas1 · Sun Feb 10, 2019 12:33 pm

Looks passable.

Crosswindphoto · Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:20 pm

Thanks Kas!
One for the pre-screen:
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... ef9534ac99
Tim

airkas1 · Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:24 pm

A little low in frame, but otherwise nice.

Crosswindphoto · Fri Feb 15, 2019 5:47 pm

Hey guys, how should I upload this photo category wise?
Thanks
Tim
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 90a23e7fb4

jelpee · Fri Feb 15, 2019 7:14 pm

Crosswindphoto wrote:
Hey guys, how should I upload this photo category wise?
Thanks
Tim
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 90a23e7fb4

Hi Tim,

I would designate it as an "Airport Overview".

Jehan

airkas1 · Fri Feb 15, 2019 7:18 pm

It's not that much of a tower view though. And the right pole has the tip cut off, which I would fix.

Crosswindphoto · Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:15 am

Hey guys,
This photo was rejected for blurry, oversharpned, and quality. I personally don’t think it’s OS because it’s had very minimal amounts of sharpening applied. Nor do I see anywhere that it’s blurry. This was the first photo that I had the guts to submit at 1920 pixels because of how sharp it was when I was editing it.
Just looking for some feedback on it.
Thanks
Tim
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 3b6d20f0d6

airkas1 · Sun Feb 17, 2019 11:33 am

It does seem a little sharp and marginal quality (blur), expecially at the wings, nose gear. The cheatline edges looks jaggy. I would use a less sharpening there. Should be fine at 1600px wide.

Crosswindphoto · Sun Feb 17, 2019 9:12 pm

What owner category would this photo fall under?
Thanks
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 293f679dae

airkas1 · Mon Feb 18, 2019 10:56 am

Other (the default option).

Crosswindphoto · Mon Feb 18, 2019 11:12 am

Thanks Kas!

Harry765 · Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:06 am

Oh, and Kas, about the possibility of a motive rejection on the Cessna 172 shot, It has had a slight livery change since the last upload of the reg.

airkas1 · Thu Feb 21, 2019 10:44 am

Harry765 wrote:
Oh, and Kas, about the possibility of a motive rejection on the Cessna 172 shot, It has had a slight livery change since the last upload of the reg.

?

Crosswindphoto · Thu Feb 21, 2019 11:09 am

??
I asked that question a long time ago. I think you posted in the wrong thread!

airkas1 · Thu Feb 21, 2019 11:57 am

So Harry is trolling and quoting you?

Crosswindphoto · Thu Feb 21, 2019 5:56 pm

I have no idea. can I get a pre-screen on this shot though?
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 25e80fab40

airkas1 · Thu Feb 21, 2019 6:00 pm

The nosegear door and nose gear looks a little jaggy, but otherwise nice.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net