Airliners.net Rejection

[Ben Montgomery]

Massive batch of soft rejections today, somewhat confused as they look fine to me!

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... 333bm2.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... j560bm.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... x894bm.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also told to apply CW rotation to these two - but checking the horizon its level!
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... w544bm.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... x900bm.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... w212bm.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[tc2324]

Massive batch of soft rejections today, somewhat confused as they look fine to me!

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... 333bm2.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... j560bm.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... x894bm.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Also told to apply CW rotation to these two - but checking the horizon its level!
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... w544bm.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... x900bm.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... w212bm.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Think the word you are looking for is...., fickle...

[Flyingmonster]

Got to agree with TC!

[TonyO]

The Navy Bucc looks a little over-exposed to me...

[Wallace]

One thing to bear in mind that sharpening is directly related to exposure. The more over or under exposed the less effective the sharpening will be due to the nature of how Unsharp mask (USM) works by local contrast enhancement.
USM is not the only method of sharpening a picture by the way, others are sometimes better such as Lab mode and High Pass Filtering. (I use both.)

I would agree that Fickle is a good description. The problem is the poor a.net screeners have mountains of pictures to get through, they can ill afford to be choosy, they have to work within a rigid framework and they will most likely get skelped by their betters if they make a mistake, so they tend to err on the safe side

[Wallace]

It is quite possibly blurred than not sharpened. The engines are running so one should expect some vibration on the aircraft. Still, it's sub standard even for a.net.

[richpittman]

I thought the standard had dropped in havng lots accepted recently.
But wheres the consitency
Noisy sky
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... 7xz595.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Now look at the different levels of light and quality on the top 5 of these including a Tony O shot

http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.s ... arch=ZK067" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Soft
http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... 82-649.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... th2006.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... 4za600.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[sg-andel]

Congratulations and it,s a special bird too .

[zacwatson]

Hello,

Im not a photo expert or anything but im not silly. Last week I uploaded some shots and they've just got screened and all 4 of them got rejected and I thought some of the comments the screener gave me were a bit odd.

Photo 1 http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... 904553.jpg

Comment from screener: "top centre" and the reason the photo is "Dirty"! I cant see anything on it, can any of you?


Photo 2 http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... 3zh002.jpg

Comment from screener: "editing halo-glowing effect" I did read in the guide about this but didnt really understand.


Photo 3 http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... za1484.jpg

I got no comment from the screener about this photo but it got disallowed for being "Blurry, Soft and Dark", right is it just me or is silhouette's not a good effect?? I think they are as I have seen many on airliners.net so that's "Dark" out the way, and I cant see how its blurry and yes it is a little soft to be honest.

and the last one for now is http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... 6zj994.jpg

Comment from screener: "halo around aircraft" errrrrrrrrrmmmmm do you see a halo?? It's probably the best photo quality wise out of the lot and he sees a halo!! Is it just me or did this screener get carried away with spotting "halo's"?


If possible I would like some opinions off some other people to see if im looking at it from the wrong perspective or not, that would be greatly appreciated very much as I am still learning!


Cheers

[Wallace]

Photo 1, It's not sharp enough, There is a dust spot above the RH edge of the raydome near the top of the frame
Photo 2, Highlights/Shadows tool produces a local contrast enhancement that causes a glow. Look at an equalised version, the top wing tip and horizontal stabiliser. It's not sharp enough.
Photo 3, judgement call. The VC10 is soft but it is a low contrast shot and they do not sharpen that well. It could be saved.
Photo 4 Maybe the screener is wrong... may possibly have made some reference to the rotors but nothing shows on an equalised version. Note the small vortex on the rotor tip above the tail boom.

[KINROTATE]

Rejection is always a pain. But to be honest I wouldn't have posted 2 or 3 on this site, let alone submit them to the uber gods. Two isn't a nice image at all. Shot three is all out of balance as a composition - and I believe that if you don't get that instant 'kerb' appeal, then the uber god will look for excuses.

[zacwatson]

Cheers for the help guys its appreciated

[Wallace]

Balance is another one of the very misused term, what they mean by balance is a perfectly symmetrical image centrally located in the frame, that's bad composition. This composition is OK in my book, the subject is in the upper corner and you can see where it is going, into the sunset and land. The dark silhouette is balanced against the setting sun.

[Flyingmonster]

Radleigh

feel free to post the shot here and that way we can see what it may need

[Wallace]

Sharpening.
Every photo needs it and every photo is different.

If you use JPEG then sharpening will be applied at the very beginning, which is not such a good idea as it should be the last thing before saving.

Sharpening relies on local image contrast, ie the difference between a white fuselage and black writing. Unsharp Mask (USM) Sharpening boosts this local sharpening, too much and you get a halo.

A grey fuselage with black writing will not sharpen all that well due to reduced contrast.

There are other forms of sharpening other than USM. USM is not the best method, sometimes a masking layer can be used to selectively reduce the amount of sharpening in one particular area, avoiding jagged edges or halos.

Sharpening will not turn a pigs ear into a silk purse. Your photo has to be in focus to start with.

---------------
The Lear jet photo is under exposed, so sharpening is harder to achieve. A Levels adjustment improves the exposure (under exposed due to the lights point and the sky into your camera) Note the side of the fuselage is very over exposed with clipped white tones.

[Neil D]

I had a rejection because I didn't include the serial number, it was a night shot, head-on with the jet running and I wasn't going to run around an active ramp for a serial. Uploaded again and it was accepted!

Neil

[Ben Montgomery]

Rejected for soft - so I sharpened quite a bit more - and rejected for soft a second time:

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... n426hf.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Comment from the screener (kudos for actually leaving one!) was that it's on the fuselage of the nearer UH-1H?

[Ben Montgomery]

If you are using Photoshop:

Create a new layer

On this layer, Filter-Adjustments-Equalize.

You can then use the healing brush tool on the original layer to clone out the dust spots, and hide the equalized layer to check it still looks OK on the original.

It's a different menu route for the Filter tool for Photoshop CS I think - the above is for elements, but there is the same tool in both.


I'm sure there are other methods, but this is what I use.

Ben

[davedubya]

Rejected for soft - so I sharpened quite a bit more - and rejected for soft a second time:

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rej ... n426hf.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Comment from the screener (kudos for actually leaving one!) was that it's on the fuselage of the nearer UH-1H?

I would guess he's referring to the lettering on the fuselage?

[TonyO]

Hi all, I've been noticing this thread popping up quite often.
There is an alternative site to which to upload our photos. It's called plane-mad.com. Its an English site based in the UK and was started by an enthusiast who unfortunately recently died.
The site remains in safe hands and is likely to grow ever larger.
At the moment upload times are around 24 hours and crucially maybe not quite as stringent as A.Net.
Take a look see what you think,and I'm not sure but I think they could use a few more screeners.

I'd like to see some comments why people upload to A.Net anyway.

Interesting question. Speaking as someone who has been banned from uploading to the site several times, I will continue to upload there, no question about it. No other website out there gives your aircraft pictures attention like A.net does. Magazines, advertising agencies, large companies all use it to find decent aircraft images. I have made a four-figure sum of money over the years from having my pictures on there and that extra money goes a long way towards buying camera gear, going on trips or just funding a few pints down the pub. The screeners get some harsh criticism, but it is their website and no-one is entitled to have their images on there, but if you want to sell or just get your aviation pictures noticed, A.net is certainly the place to do it.