Post/pre-screening Spompert

spompert · Wed Jan 06, 2016 9:17 am

Hello I am starting a new thread because of the length of the old one. I had this one rejected yesterday for oversharpened, grainy and dark:

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...160105_o1451410038.8514ph-bfvb.jpg

Before it was rejected for dark and soft:

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...20151227_k1450611803.96ph-bfva.jpg

I know the quality is not that great (dark, backlit) but maybe given the conditions the screeners might be a bit lenient. Can I fix this and if so which version should I try to improve? Or maybe somebody can help me trying to edit this one?

Thanks en greetings
Stefan

airkas1 · Thu Jan 07, 2016 8:05 pm

Did you rework the latest image from scratch? Because it seems like you used the old edit and brightened/sharpened it. You run the risk of affecting the quality in negative way.

The recently rejected image is already better, but still a bit dark. Especially on the left side it appears that there is a darker area that I can't really explain. I also agree that it is oversharpened and slightly grainy.

spompert · Sat Jan 09, 2016 4:37 pm

Thanks Kas for the remarks. I indeed edit the rejected photo most of the time. That's because otherwise I can get new rejections which I did no had at first. Well that's my experience. But you are right about the effect of editing already edited photos, there is a limit. Can somebody tell me where it is oversharpened, or is this generally all over? And grainy in the air and/or the fuselage?

Bye

310815 · Sat Jan 09, 2016 10:14 pm

Hi Stefan,

the sky is quite grainy. And I agree with Kas that the left side is a lot darker, which looks kinda strange.
Oversharpening: A bit allover, especially visible around the titles.

Julien

spompert · Wed Jan 13, 2016 10:14 pm

Thanks. I'll try to edit it from the start all over. Now I have this one rejected for level, grainy and colour. My question is about the colour rejection. What is wrong exactly with the colour? I didn't change anything while editing. There was no further info given, maybe a mistake?

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0160112_b1452119692.2979a6-eey.jpg

Bye

vikkyvik · Thu Jan 14, 2016 5:09 am

Quoting spompert (Reply 4):
What is wrong exactly with the colour? I didn't change anything while editing. There was no further info given, maybe a mistake?

Maybe a little yellow? Not sure, looks fairly normal for the angle of the light.

310815 · Thu Jan 14, 2016 9:27 pm

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 5):
Not sure, looks fairly normal for the angle of the light.

Absolutely, after all it was shot in winterlight on one of the shortest days of the year. Light will look like this during that time.

angad84 · Fri Jan 15, 2016 11:00 am

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 5):
Maybe a little yellow? Not sure, looks fairly normal for the angle of the light.

The colour temp (warm) looks ok to me, but the whole frame seems to have a slight green tint.

Cheers
A

spompert · Fri Jan 15, 2016 11:33 am

Interesting! Thanks for the responses. I noticed that by sliding the blue color level histogram a bit to the left there was some improvement (fuselage a bit more white). What about this edit? It's also more level now (rotated cw) and I got rid of some noise in the sky. Interesting is that by rotating a photo at a small size like 1200px it becomes softer and I might have to sharpen it again....

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b.../ready/u1452799944.2801a6-eeya.jpg

airkas1 · Fri Jan 15, 2016 11:41 am

The color looks ok in the new edit. I agree that it's soft, especially the nose section.

kulverstukas · Fri Jan 15, 2016 1:18 pm

Quoting spompert (Reply 8):
Interesting is that by rotating a photo at a small size like 1200px it becomes softer and I might have to sharpen it again....

Rotation is the most destructive transformation for digital photo. It's why you must begin your edit from scratch every time you get level rejection.

spompert · Sat Jan 16, 2016 4:34 pm

Hi, I sharpened it a bit and re-uploaded. We'll see what happens. So now I have a new rejection of a KLM737. The rejection was that "the pic is a bit blurry". So where is it blurry exactly and is it salvageable?

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...160115_r1452346251.8432ph-bxca.jpg

Thanks
Stefan

vikkyvik · Sat Jan 16, 2016 5:03 pm

Quoting Kulverstukas (Reply 10):
Rotation is the most destructive transformation for digital photo. It's why you must begin your edit from scratch every time you get level rejection.

Agreed. That's basically the one thing I don't do to already-edited photos.

310815 · Sat Jan 16, 2016 10:34 pm

Hi Stefan,

I think the EK would be better at a smaller size, at least judging from your latest edit reply 8 I can see some quality issues. But that might be due to some compression.

Quoting spompert (Reply 11):
Hi, I sharpened it a bit and re-uploaded. We'll see what happens. So now I have a new rejection of a KLM737. The rejection was that "the pic is a bit blurry". So where is it blurry exactly and is it salvageable?

Seems Blurry / soft towards the back (tail), whereas the front seems slightly oversharpened to me.

spompert · Tue Jan 26, 2016 10:53 pm

Oversharpened: https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0160126_k1453225415.4564ph-ckb.jpg

Someone who can tell me where? Thanks in advance.

vikkyvik · Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:20 am

Quoting spompert (Reply 14):
Oversharpened: https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0160126_k1453225415.4564ph-ckb.jpg

Someone who can tell me where? Thanks in advance.

Mostly noticeable at high-contast edges. Wings, h-stab, bottom of fuse, cheatline. Overall sharpening could probably be reduced a bit.

Joshu · Wed Jan 27, 2016 3:26 am

I dunno, doesn't seem that sharp to me.

310815 · Wed Jan 27, 2016 9:19 am

Quoting Joshu (Reply 16):

I dunno, doesn't seem that sharp to me.

I actually fist thought it was due to my work monitor, but even when I look at it on my notebook the front seems soft to me as well. So have to agree with Joshu.

spompert · Wed Jan 27, 2016 11:54 am

Thanks all, what should be done in a case like this? Sharpen a bit more or sharpen less? Or appeal and see what the HS has to say?

vikkyvik · Wed Jan 27, 2016 4:38 pm

Quoting spompert (Reply 18):
Thanks all, what should be done in a case like this?

There's no really good answer to that. Ultimately, if you want to appeal, go for it. If you want to re-edit and re-upload, go for it.

No big deal either way in the end.

Joshu · Wed Jan 27, 2016 4:55 pm

I rarely say this because I like to stand behind the hard work of the screening team, but I would appeal this.

vikkyvik · Wed Jan 27, 2016 5:58 pm

Quoting Joshu (Reply 20):
I rarely say this because I like to stand behind the hard work of the screening team

I'm not trying to be a dick, but you know that doesn't exactly me think that you're giving your honest opinion about photos in this forum...

310815 · Thu Jan 28, 2016 8:22 am

Hi Stefan,

I just wanted to say that I had another look on it on my edit monitor last night.

The soft nose I saw was probably due to my work equipment, on my editing monitor it looks absolutely fine, again it didin't look oversharp , so if it was mine I would appeal.

Cheers,
Julien

Joshu · Thu Jan 28, 2016 2:29 pm

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 21):
I'm not trying to be a dick, but you know that doesn't exactly me think that you're giving your honest opinion about photos in this forum...

I know how that might come off, but I am willing to give the screener the benefit of the doubt if there is some sort of disagreement in the screening of a photo if I feel there is even a bit of a reason to reject a photo.

[Edited 2016-01-28 06:31:52]

vikkyvik · Thu Jan 28, 2016 6:27 pm

Quoting Joshu (Reply 23):

And here I thought it was "look to accept" and "give the photographer the benefit of the doubt".

Oh well, sorry to derail the thread.

spompert · Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:51 pm

I have tried an appeal for the KLM Cargo. I also have another appeal waiting. It's there for almost a week now and I am wondering if others are also waiting that long for their appeals at the moment? No problem ofcourse but I am wondering if it's just a long queue or maybe something did not came through.

len90 · Fri Jan 29, 2016 10:38 pm

My last appealed image accepted was on 1/26/16 after being in the appeal queue for 1-2 days.

spompert · Sat Jan 30, 2016 11:26 am

Great, appeals are taken care off. The KLM Cargo is still oversharpened and overexposed was added. I guess they mean the bright flares on the tale and fuselage. So probably not fixable now (especially while it was also common so standards are pretty high).

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0160126_k1453225415.4564ph-ckb.jpg

vikkyvik · Sun Jan 31, 2016 1:46 am

Quoting spompert (Reply 27):

I still agree with some oversharpening as noted before, but if that's overexposed, then fully 50% of the photos in the database are overexposed.

spompert · Mon Feb 08, 2016 8:29 am

Hello, this night one photo was rejected for dark and oversharpened. It doesn't look that dark and oversharpened to me so maybe somebody can help me with this. Maybe the nose it too dark?

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...160207_e1454246553.2258tc-jrya.jpg

Thanks and good day!
Stefan

310815 · Mon Feb 08, 2016 10:34 pm

Hi Stefan,

the oversharpening is pretty minor, I think this is a case of large size = very high requirements. So okay..

The shot is a tad dark overall, especially as the light wasn't in your favor, light is coming from the back. I opened it in PS and increased exposure by 0,1 and it looked better to me.

See you
Julien

kann123air · Mon Feb 08, 2016 11:43 pm

Quoting JKPhotos (Reply 30):
I think this is a case of large size = very high requirements.

Quoting JKPhotos (Reply 30):
The shot is a tad dark overall

Amrit

spompert · Wed Feb 10, 2016 8:26 am

Thanks, I will try another version! I was wondering if this kind of photo would make a chance motive-wise? It's something different from my normal sideshots so I have no clue.

Joshu · Wed Feb 10, 2016 4:29 pm

Nah, it's not showing much. Not a bad shot though.

spompert · Wed Mar 02, 2016 8:11 pm

Hi there, this one was rejected for soft again.

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...160302_n1456163176.0182b-6136g.jpg

I am afraid I'll oversharpen it as this is most of the time the case with my photos lately. Maybe someone can tell me which parts I should focus on when sharpening more?

And this one was rejected for oversharpened.

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...160302_h1456163221.6865tc-jryf.jpg

Where? It was soft before and it seems I can't get this one right...very frustrating.

Thanks
Stefan

len90 · Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:08 pm

China Southern A380: Doesn't look too bad but maybe soft on the wings

Turkish A321: Looks a bit OS (to me) on the tail, registration, and cockpit windows

airkas1 · Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:39 pm

Quoting spompert (Reply 34):
Hi there, this one was rejected for soft again.

I agree it's not too bad.

Quoting spompert (Reply 34):
I am afraid I'll oversharpen it [...]

Probably.

Quoting spompert (Reply 34):
And this one was rejected for oversharpened.

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...160302_h1456163221.6865tc-jryf.jpg

Where? It was soft before and it seems I can't get this one right...very frustrating.

Overall a bit on the sharp side, but even now it still has a very soft/blurryish. Is the original sharp?

spompert · Thu Mar 03, 2016 6:56 pm

Thanks both, I looked at the original of the Turkish A321 and it was not as good as I thought it was to be honest. Decided to upload in smaller size. Don't know what to do with the China A380 still.

spompert · Sun Mar 06, 2016 5:54 pm

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...160306_i1456507962.0575ph-bgc2.jpg

This was rejected for dark. Is that because of the too dark nose maybe, so not fixable? Or should I just brighten it a bit overall and it would be an easy fix?

Joshu · Sun Mar 06, 2016 11:39 pm

Quoting spompert (Reply 38):

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...160306_i1456507962.0575ph-bgc2.jpg

This was rejected for dark. Is that because of the too dark nose maybe, so not fixable? Or should I just brighten it a bit overall and it would be an easy fix?

The darks are pretty intense. I would ease up on the contrast and brighten it a bit.

spompert · Mon Mar 07, 2016 7:56 pm

Thanks Joshu, I have edited the photo like you said and will try it again.

Greets
Stefan

spompert · Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:34 am

Hello, this one was rejected for oversharpened. I find it strange because it was only rejected for borders (1px around the edges which I fixed) and after that a second time for dark so I brightened a bit. I also did not sharpen the photo at all after uploading it from my camera.

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...160331_t1458593983.9081ph-ezbb.jpg

Really oversharpened? Greets Stefan

[Edited 2016-03-31 03:34:54]

angad84 · Thu Mar 31, 2016 2:13 pm

Quoting spompert (Reply 41):
Really oversharpened? Greets Stefan

Picky rejection IMO, but given my sharpening woes of late, wait to hear from someone else.

Cheers
A

airkas1 · Thu Mar 31, 2016 2:16 pm

I agree it's a bit oversharpened.

spompert · Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:29 pm

Hello Kas, is that along the cheatline and registration maybe? Thanks

airkas1 · Thu Mar 31, 2016 5:46 pm

Quoting spompert (Reply 44):
is that along the cheatline and registration maybe?

Yes, plus the winglet logo and windows. All just slightly oversharpened.

spompert · Fri Apr 01, 2016 8:17 am

Thanks, I'll have a look at those specific parts and re-upload. Now this one was rejected for the third time. It is "dark". I might brighten it a bit more. But it was also marked as "better in smaller size". This was not mentioned before but if you agree I will downsize as well. Does it has to do with the not perfect light conditions?

https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...160331_v1458645270.2726g-fbjhb.jpg

airkas1 · Fri Apr 01, 2016 8:50 am

Quoting spompert (Reply 46):
Does it has to do with the not perfect light conditions?

The lighting conditions don't really help. It's very toplit and usually I avoid shooting in these conditions if I can.
However, that's up to the photograhper what he/she wants to do.

spompert · Sat Apr 02, 2016 5:02 pm

Thanks all. I would like to upload this one. Really like the contrast with he rain in the background. But what about the quality. Will it stand a chance? Had to do some cropping you see.

I can also choose for wider crop so quality will improve some more. What about this one.

Which should I choose (if one of them is good enough)?

Greets
Stefan

[Edited 2016-04-02 10:41:31]

airkas1 · Sat Apr 02, 2016 8:17 pm

Both are overexposed/too bright. First one has a blurry nose section, so I would go for #2 after making it less bright (plus that'll bring your dark sky out nicer as well).

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net