Hi Stefan,
I would go for number 2 anyway, looks more spectacular with the smokey / wet touchdown.
Otherwise I fully agree with Kas. They are a bit too bright.
Julien
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
Better, but still bright. I've noticed that in a lot of your photos. Do you overexpose them when shooting or adding a lot of brightness while editing?
You could selectively sharpen the front section a little bit, but be careful not to overdo it.
[Edited 2016-04-05 00:56:43]
You could selectively sharpen the front section a little bit, but be careful not to overdo it.
[Edited 2016-04-05 00:56:43]
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
Hi Kas, thanks for the feedback. I never overexpose during shooting but because of the dark rejections and the fact that I have the idea that brighter photos are more accepted I brighten them a bit during editing. Most of the time the level-diagram also shows that there is some room for this. In this case the tail was already very bright, probably because of the dark sky and the way the camera measures the light in the image. I shoot in AV-modus. I have still a lot to learn in this matter. Maybe choose another lightmetering like "spot metering"? Also would like to notice that in real the conditions looked like how it appears on the photo: lots of bright sun and dark sky in the background. I'll sharpen the front more.
[Edited 2016-04-05 02:38:36]
[Edited 2016-04-05 02:38:36]
-
- trevisan26
- Posts: 440
- Joined:
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
| Quoting spompert (Reply 53): In this case the tail was already very bright, probably because of the dark sky and the way the camera measures the light in the image. I shoot in AV-modus. I have still a lot to learn in this matter. |
KLM tail always look very bright, just check for some pictures on DB, not sure why, maybe they use some different kind of white paint as it dont happens very often with other airlines.
Nice pic!
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
Thanks Thiago, I'll try to get it accepted. I have a new rejection. This time it's a photo of an DC-10 engine at Schiphol plaza. I found it strange it was not yet in the database in close-up. I think a lot of people have seen it at the airport while being there but I thought it would still be interesting.
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...20160408_f1459358139.3509dc-10.jpg
It was rejected for category (preserved), info and motive. There was no personal explanation. I guess this motive is not allowed as it's just an engine? If this is not the case I would like to know what the problem is with the motive. If it is not interesting for A'net no problem but I don't know for sure if that's the case.
Greets
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...20160408_f1459358139.3509dc-10.jpg
It was rejected for category (preserved), info and motive. There was no personal explanation. I guess this motive is not allowed as it's just an engine? If this is not the case I would like to know what the problem is with the motive. If it is not interesting for A'net no problem but I don't know for sure if that's the case.
Greets
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
Category is not preserved. Check the upload page, which says:
Just an engine is definitely not preserved.
Motive: In this case the screener forgot to leave a personal message as to why it is motive. I will ask him.
Info: Aircraft should be "McDonnell Douglas DC-10-..." in stead of "McDonnell Douglas DC-10 (C-10 Extender)".
And to be complete, only the outer shell of the engine is real. The rest is not.
[Edited 2016-04-08 10:59:16]
| Quoting Upload page: Check this box if the photo is picturing a non-flying aircraft preserved in a museum, a collection, as a gateguard or monument, or in use as a bar/restaurant/nightclub/disco, or as an instructional airframe at a technical school. So, an aircraft in a scrapyard, or abandoned in the corner of a field, or used as a firebrigade burn trainer, or stored pending a decision on their future, are NOT preserved aircraft. |
Just an engine is definitely not preserved.
Motive: In this case the screener forgot to leave a personal message as to why it is motive. I will ask him.
Info: Aircraft should be "McDonnell Douglas DC-10-..." in stead of "McDonnell Douglas DC-10 (C-10 Extender)".
And to be complete, only the outer shell of the engine is real. The rest is not.
[Edited 2016-04-08 10:59:16]
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
The motive was indeed for the subject itself. A close-up of an engine should be alright, but in this case the engine is also not real for the most part.
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
Thanks for all the information and asking the screener. I'll not re-upload it in this case. Good to know the story behind this engine at Schiphol Plaza.
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
Hi there, had this fighter from Vietnam war museum in Hanoi rejected for soft/blurry. Motive was removed in appeal and a nice personal message was added by one of the head screeners saying: "Motive removed, but still soft and top of cone blurry. Needs selective sharpening as the wings start to show jaggies".
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...20160409_v1459445874.57314324a.jpg
So my question is, where should I do this selective sharpening apart from the top of the cone ofcourse. Thank you in advance!
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...20160409_v1459445874.57314324a.jpg
So my question is, where should I do this selective sharpening apart from the top of the cone ofcourse. Thank you in advance!
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...421_x1460618477.7922heemskerkb.jpg
Rejected for soft. Personal message was soft wing. Tried to sharpen it but probably not enough? It was rejected before for oversharpened so I don't know what to do next. Some tips?
Rejected for soft. Personal message was soft wing. Tried to sharpen it but probably not enough? It was rejected before for oversharpened so I don't know what to do next. Some tips?
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
| Quoting spompert (Reply 59): So my question is, where should I do this selective sharpening apart from the top of the cone ofcourse. |
Probably everywhere on the aircraft except the top of the cone.
| Quoting spompert (Reply 60): Some tips? |
You could try to increase sharpening with a bit lower sharpening values.
[Edited 2016-04-22 10:38:27]
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
I don't think that's what the screener meant.
He said that the wings start to show jaggies, so you need to focus there as to not oversharpen that part. So work in layers and use the eraser. The rest of the plane is still somewhat soft, which is why I said
Although I just realized I misread. It should read "except the wings".
Don't forget that the ruling also was 'blurry top of cone', which could be reason for a rejection (depending on the rarity of the subject).
He said that the wings start to show jaggies, so you need to focus there as to not oversharpen that part. So work in layers and use the eraser. The rest of the plane is still somewhat soft, which is why I said
| Quoting airkas1 (Reply 61): Probably everywhere on the aircraft except the top of the cone. |
Although I just realized I misread. It should read "except the wings".
Don't forget that the ruling also was 'blurry top of cone', which could be reason for a rejection (depending on the rarity of the subject).
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
Hello Kas,
Thanks for your feedback. To be honest there is some misunderstanding. I was referring to my last photo https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...421_x1460618477.7922heemskerkb.jpg
Should I only sharpen the wing a bit more you think? The wing was mentioned by the screener. Sorry for the mistake.
Greets
Thanks for your feedback. To be honest there is some misunderstanding. I was referring to my last photo https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...421_x1460618477.7922heemskerkb.jpg
Should I only sharpen the wing a bit more you think? The wing was mentioned by the screener. Sorry for the mistake.
Greets
RE: Post/pre-screening Spompert
Oh right, my bad.
Yes, just the wing. You can selectively sharpen that. But be careful not to oversharpen it, so play around a bit with the numbers until you're satisfied.
Yes, just the wing. You can selectively sharpen that. But be careful not to oversharpen it, so play around a bit with the numbers until you're satisfied.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests