Page 52 of 92 FirstFirst ... 24248495051525354555662 ... LastLast
Results 766 to 780 of 1369

Thread: Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!

  1. #766
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    Jeremy,

    From what I see in your image (the large version you linked) the cockpit area looks to have serious CA. Here is a set of 100% crops:



    Cockpit is easily seen... the right of the cockpit, take a look at the tug. The driver's leg shows it, the wheel also shows blue/red shift which is typically CA. On the oher hand, the cockpit windows are likely showing lens flaring... or registration errors... meaning some of the color channels were not properly rendered by the CCD/CMOS as the lens did not bring it to the proper focus (it is hard for me to explain this stuff... others are better at it :-) like Wikipedia or Cambridge in Colour)

    Look at the left side, the areas I highlighted show CA (red/purple/blue shifting)

    You may have to ZOOM IN to about 500% to make it more obvious.

    As far as sharpening, you may be killing yourself with the 100,0.2,0 setting as NO TWO IMAGES require the same sharpening setting. I usually will end up with 5 layers and each with different sharpen setting if needed and then mask the rest. Some areas with super fine detail benefit from super small USM settings while others can benefit more from higher settings.

    50,0.5,0 will work VERY WELL on larger areas of contrast with a single pass. Depending on how much small/medium/large detail there is, you should use lower/higher as needed.

    The best way in my opinion, but it is more time consuming and even more obnscure to some :-) is using a find edges process and sharpening that. This has a way to AUTOMAGICALLY finding areas that need more and areas that need less sharpening in a dynamic way dictated by the image itself.
    Last edited by gonzalu; 2011-01-04 at 10:56 PM.
    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

  2. #767
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    I have been really troubled by this lately on JetPhotos.net. I have a lot of rejections of "JPG Aritfacts" and I can;t imagine how they arrive at these conclusions. My workflow for the following images is absolutely the same and the end result which is the final output to JPG is using PSCS5 JPG 12 and I can;t see how JPG artifacts would be there. I can;t see them :-( Are they solely basing the decision on image size? I say this because the ONLY TIME I appealed it, the head screener got really angry and said with a file size such as the one submitted, there HAS to be JPG artifacts. :-( Any help would be appreciated. I am not sure how else to make the artifacts (if indeed there) go away as I have no higher setting for the JPG output module ??? thanks all.

    These have been resized by the vBulletin theme visually. The image itself is the full size from JP.net so feel free to right-click and view image or download to view on your PC using an editor of choice





    I've posted this one before ...

    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

  3. #768
    Senior Member seahawks7757's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edgewood, Washington, United States
    Posts
    1,241
    I honestly don't understand what the heck JPG Artifacts is.
    http://brandonsaviationblog.blogspot.com/ My continuing updated Aviation Blog
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/seahawks7757/ My continuing updated photostream from BFI and sometimes SEA

  4. #769
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    Well, I totally know and understand what it is, so that's why I am puzzled I got rejected on these for that reason. I don't see artifacts even at high magnification. The Evergreen I can see a bit of it at 500% magnification. Here is a good writeup

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compression_artifact
    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

  5. #770
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    Brandon, congrats :-) JP.net liked it

    [jetphotos]7015908[/jetphotos]
    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

  6. #771
    Senior Member seahawks7757's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edgewood, Washington, United States
    Posts
    1,241
    Yep! Was about to post that lol
    http://brandonsaviationblog.blogspot.com/ My continuing updated Aviation Blog
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/seahawks7757/ My continuing updated photostream from BFI and sometimes SEA

  7. #772
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    Sorry for stealing your thunder. When I saw it I immediately recognized it LOL
    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

  8. #773
    Senior Member seahawks7757's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edgewood, Washington, United States
    Posts
    1,241
    Ah it is all good.
    http://brandonsaviationblog.blogspot.com/ My continuing updated Aviation Blog
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/seahawks7757/ My continuing updated photostream from BFI and sometimes SEA

  9. #774
    Senior Member JDANDO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    KMSP, KANE
    Posts
    863
    this one had multiple issues :(

    http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3273158

    Any clue on how I hosed up categories and location.
    Jeremy in Minnesota

    My pictures on jp.net

  10. #775
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    KCLT
    Posts
    552
    Adam Sheinhaus

  11. #776
    Senior Member seahawks7757's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Edgewood, Washington, United States
    Posts
    1,241
    I would agree, not centered would have been more appropriate in my opinion though for that rejection.
    http://brandonsaviationblog.blogspot.com/ My continuing updated Aviation Blog
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/seahawks7757/ My continuing updated photostream from BFI and sometimes SEA

  12. #777
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,041
    That's size ratio. For JP it has to either be 3:2 or 4:3.

  13. #778
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    The EDGES I think has to do with balance...

    --Your wheels should either be touching the bottom edge or the rear vertical stabilizer has to be equi-distant from the top border as the bottom wheels.

    --The right engine is much further from the frame than the left engine...

    Here are two optional crops

    3x2



    4x3

    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

  14. #779
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Queens NY
    Posts
    1,360
    Got 2, back 2 back Rejections today on Jetphotos, both for the same reason: - Cropping / Photo edges / Size Ratio




    Last edited by Roush6NY; 2011-01-18 at 02:17 PM.
    Kaz T

    My Photos:

    JetPhotos
    KT Images NY

  15. #780
    Senior Member gonzalu's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    The Bronx, New York
    Posts
    6,028
    Kaz,

    Your aspect ratio is wrong... here is an example of the two accepted ratios



    For A.net and J.net, you can;t just crop to your taste, it should always be a 4:3 or 3:2 ratio.

    Cheers!
    Manny Gonzalez
    Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
    BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •