I did a couple of different levels of sharpening to see what looked best in the saved JPEG. That one was the most sharpened. This one is middle of the road.
http://i1046.photobucket.com/albums/.../IMG_8784b.jpg
Printable View
I did a couple of different levels of sharpening to see what looked best in the saved JPEG. That one was the most sharpened. This one is middle of the road.
http://i1046.photobucket.com/albums/.../IMG_8784b.jpg
Looks better center wise but now the sky looks weird and over sharpened.
Nathan, if you care, I'd love to get a crack at the original and see what I can do with it for you :-) You should be able to get it accepted as it is a fine image. I am betting the rejection(s) are strictly re: processing, not the image :biggrin: If you wish, my e-mail is manny (at) manny (dot) org
I've been geting alot of Dark rejections lately,and I was hoping to get some help on what I need to do to fix the problem,other than waiting for a sunny day!:smile:
Doug
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...9197n836rp.jpg
Hi Doug,
I think that had this been on Jet Photos, it may have made it... it is not that much off. That being said, it is a bit on the dull side and that is because the histogram has bit of missing data towards the highlights end of the house.
http://manny.smugmug.com/photos/1217773253_qbvRt-O.jpg
Now, we can easily correct this by re-distributing the data so that the current highest level data moves a bit further to the right thereby gaining a bit of amplification and ultimately the image becomes brighter.
http://manny.smugmug.com/photos/1217773285_GWYGb-O.jpg
However for my taste, it is still a bit dull because of the lack of contrast due to the poor weather... I like using Curves better than Levels. Curves lets you act on different parts of the image independently. Levels works on ALL data evenly (unless you're working on individual channels, and even there, it is a global type of adjustment)
Here is what curves I would apply to enhance not only the highlights and midtones, but also cut back the shadow areas and increase overall contrast.
You may ask yourself, why not just use the easy contrast control? Well, you can not select the mid point and how much to shadow and how much to highlight... Contrast is an even split, equally opposing :-)
http://manny.smugmug.com/photos/1217773290_ky2GT-O.jpg
Given more time, you could do some selective layer masking and control your different areas differently ... for example, the UPS trucks in the BG are now a bit too dark for my taste ... so I would correct that on a separate layer and mask it to blend in naturally
Hope you like my attempt :-)
Thanks Manny,I'll give it a shot. I was only using the contrast,and it wasn't working.
Doug
I usually measure the whites on the TOP of the plane, or the most exposed part to the sun or the clouds on a cloudy day, and if the level is not at least 245-250, I keep cranking :cool:
However, if it is over 255 in RAW, or 100% in Lightroom (I don't know why they measure it differently, but I digress) WITHOUT any compensation, it is likely blown beyond repair. Especially if it is a JPG.
Setting the Black Point and White Point will usually yield a remarkably contrasty image, but yet it can help show you the POTENTIAL for the image... I use that trick sometimes to see how far I can go with the other control. Rarely does setting the points yield an acceptable image for screeners at the top two DBs. Artistically it can be a dynamic image.
Accepted on A.net
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Trans...lle/1879257/L/
rejected on JP..:confused:
Same thing happened to me recently, Joop. If anything, I would have expected it to be the other way around. What was the reason for the JP rejection?
I would venture to guess that it's the left side of the photo looking soft/blurry - maybe just from the edge of the lens. I've had a few JP.net rejects that were first accepted on A.net, too. In one case, it was completely justified because A.net missed a faint speck of sensor dust, that JP.net caught.Quote:
Originally Posted by moose135
Indeed it was rejected because of blur. but what annoys me is that initially it was rejected because I didn't tick the category 'warbird/vintage' as the cockpit is in a museum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cary
Now, after reuploading they come with 'blurry'. I've had it a zillion times that after the second or maybe the third upload of the same pic (including adjustments of course) they end up with different reasons for rejections each time.
And of course, the vintage category I should havbe selected but I had initial rejections for unlevel, 2nd time blurry and 3rd time overexposed..
It is not done with pissing people off in mind. Remember how many pictures these guys are screening. They always check info first and go from there. If info is wrong and warrants a reject they cease screening at that point.Quote:
Originally Posted by TallDutch
True, but how much time would be saved if they fully screened the photo, rather than a quick rejection, followed by several more runs through the queue? If I get an "info" rejection, and realize I forgot to check a box when uploading, I'm not going to take another look at the photo, I'm going to simply resubmit it unchanged, save for the correct info. Then, a week and a half later I get a "level" rejection, so I fix the 0.02 degrees that it is off and resubmit again, only to get a rejection for a dust spot you can't see when you look at the photo....and so on, and so on....Quote:
Originally Posted by NIKV69
John let's be real here. If you (not saying you but in general) are submitting pics that are not level and are dirty with sensor dust your problems are way more than how anet handles it info rejections. Fact is most info rejections are of pics that are fine otherwise and only need to be resubmitted with proper category. Let us not tie in shots that have major flaws too. Is the system used now a pain in the rear end? Sure but I think anet does it to save the 3-4 minutes to go on to another photo which over the long haul saves a bunch of time in the screening process. One can make arguments that the screener could fix the category or that when we resubmit a pic with just info reject it gets priority but it seems this is the way they will always do it and one should prescreen and edit more aggressively.Quote:
If I get an "info" rejection, and realize I forgot to check a box when uploading, I'm not going to take another look at the photo, I'm going to simply resubmit it unchanged, save for the correct info. Then, a week and a half later I get a "level" rejection, so I fix the 0.02 degrees that it is off and resubmit again, only to get a rejection for a dust spot you can't see when you look at the photo....and so on, and so on....
Don't really get this one...got rejected for "centered" with personal note "high in frame":
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...04_mg_3380.jpg
I appealed, saying the fuselage at the center was almost equidistant (360px to top, 362px to bottom), and the head screener rejected it again, saying "You are ignoring the winglet and fon, it is high".
I've never had a photo where the winglet was a factor in centering, even when it looks higher than the tail, and other people have centered using the fuselage and been accepted (all accepted in the past 2 months):
Any suggestions on how much lower I should put the plane? I don't think the winglet down to MLG would work, as the fuselage would be really low in the frame.
EDIT: I just overlaid my photo with the last example, and the fuselage and tail almost match up, with the only difference being that my wing is actually *lower* in the frame as the accepted photo, mainly because of the difference in angle:
http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u.../lanreject.jpg
I don't really get it either Cary. Do you think rotating the image cw pre-crop would help with the appearance? On a side note, that image overlay is ****ing my eyes all up bro lol.
A little rotation might help, but I'd prefer not altering the original angle just to get a photo accepted. I might just push the fuselage down by 5px instead, and hope for the best.Quote:
Originally Posted by wunaladreamin
Sorry, I wanted to simulate spotting while drunk in that overlay :)
It's like 3D man!
I'm with you on the centering Cary - I've never had that - a winglet factored into the centering - I've always used the center of the cropping tool on the window line of the aircraft - and never had a centering rejection...that's all kind of angles as well - can you post anything on the a.net forums?
Well, I guess I pushed a wrong button, because one of the head screeners thought I posted the examples because I thought they were flawed. I thought it was obvious I posted them because those were examples where the fuselage was centered, regardless of where the winglet was. My gosh.
LOL. How did I know you were going to use the same pics on anet as you did here.
The images you linked are all high in the frame. Of course, that doesn't mean that yours can slip by too
I almost pissed myself after I read this.
Cary using pics already in the DB is never a good idea. Even when you have an argument. Better to just post rejection when asking for help. Personally I think your shot needed maybe 3 minutes to redo by just dropping the fuselage in the frame ever so slightly to get it accepted. Not sure you needed to start two threads on it. Not to mention alienating the people that screen your shots.
Why is it such a no-no to post examples that you think are good/the standard? If you want to figure out how to center something that might have different centering criteria than normal, you look to the database to find what screeners accept, and those were examples I found, where a 767 with winglets were at a high angle. So my point was "I thought it was the standard to center the fuselage regardless of how high a winglet is, based on all the photos I looked at - can you tell me how to fix it?" Sure, I can drop the fuselage ever so slightly, but what if it's still too high? What if it's too low? That's why I needed to know what specifically should be centered in this case. Don't know how that question alienates screeners.Quote:
Originally Posted by NIKV69
Cary,
I think you are correct... I always center on the ENTIRE fuselage, not the center of it. I use centered HOR and VER guides and then using the marque tool I draw equally while snapping the center (ALT+CLICK+DRAG) and draw until I touch the entire fuselage. If it is not centered perfectly, I will go back to the Lightroom original and re-crop/center. Unfortunately I can not do this with LR and must use visual queues to help me.
I see what they're saying but at the end of the day I'd rather center by the fuselage. But you're also talking to someone who thinks the concept of centering is kind of crap to begin with.
Nothing as long as they don't include pictures already accepted. You could have done a re-edit and posted that. Or asked what they look for when centering.Quote:
Why is it such a no-no to post examples that you think are good/the standard?
As for the centering issue you really can't focus on the fuselage only in shots that include banking and not flying level. The wing and or winglet will represent part of the entire subject and need to be taken into account. If you notice here.
If you just take the fuselage into account when centering the wing would be chopped so I had to center taking the wings and fuselage together as one as just looking at the fuselage it's well below the centerline.
In other words, they know they're inconsistent. Problem is, you're not supposed to know it. So keep it under your hats!
Well, I think it's only because there's a stigma attached to people posting database photos to say "hey, these are so much worse than mine...why didn't I get accepted?" If you are using database examples with the understanding that they were accepted because they were correctly screened, and that is how your photo should look if you want it accepted, I don't see the problem. But yeah, I probably won't be posting examples in any context again, and doing a re-edit and posting that for opinions is a good idea.Quote:
Originally Posted by NIKV69
Yeah, I would obviously move the fuselage if something would be chopped off, but it was always my understanding to center the fuselage if nothing is getting cut off.Quote:
Originally Posted by NIKV69
Well, I'll just center it so it looks centered in thumbnail view, and we'll see how it goes.
Just got this one from my "2011 Phoenix AZ Airport Tour"
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=3405800
Think there is any hope for it editing or a smaller size?
Jeremy,
Send me an original and let me see what I can pull off... if it is minor, you can usually make it look more acceptable using Smart Sharpen. Let me see what I can do...
manny (at) manny (dot) org
Thanks Manny, coming your way.Quote:
Originally Posted by gonzalu
I just got this one rejected for level, I appealed it because the I checked the verticals are really vertical, I checked them with the grid in Photoshop, I'm very puzzelled with this one.
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...78f-hpjc_r.jpg
What about your horizontals? It may just be an optical illusion, but the runway and the background building do not seem horizontally leveled to me *at first glance*, which is most likely the only glance you will get from screeners. Otherwise, lovely shot! Hope it'll make it.
It does look unlevel on first glance, but you can appeal and argue that the light pole right behind the A380 is perfectly vertical.
I submitted a shot of an NCPD helicopter making a medevac pickup at the Oyster Bay train station parking lot once. When I cropped it appropriately, nothing in the photo looked level, and there was a light pole, at an angle, prominently placed to the side of the helicopter. I made sure I included a note to the screeners explaining that the light pole was not level, and that I had leveled the photo to a building that was cropped out of the edge of the frame. It was accepted.Quote:
Originally Posted by heeshung
Mark, Ive had a few rejected for that reason too, I feel like they will accept it if its cropped right behind the wheels, I have some in queue like that, lets see ! That is one heck of a shot by the way :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by heeshung
This one for level :mad:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seahawk...in/photostream
For me that is caused by the angle you are shooting at from the top of the parking garage.
As Kaz said, they and A.net have the same criteria to crop tight on the wheels if not showing full aircraftQuote:
Originally Posted by heeshung
I think if you align the right side doors it would get accepted... being close to the frame they are obviously concentrating on it as your eye is drawn to it. Give it a whirl ;-)Quote:
Originally Posted by seahawks7757
At first glance it does look like it is level, but two things to keep in mind:Quote:
Originally Posted by acote
--A.net is really strict about this. I have had many of a long discussion about leveling in the forums. They are really strict about it
--They screen your images at not only normal size but also zoom in to look at various details such as leveling
If you see my example below, note that you are a bit off the mark by a hair on the left side mostly. Toss in a little CCW and you should be all in. RIGHT-CLICK | VIEW IMAGE to see the full size version.
http://manny.smugmug.com/photos/i-gK.../i-gKmVh7M.jpg
- Subject too far / too much dead space
http://www.jetphotos.net/img/2/9/4/3...1304874349.jpg