Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!

[Cary]

Thanks Cary! I just don't see how much blur could warrant a rejection. Anyways, it's fine because I got a shot of the same a/c taxiing accepted.

No problem. You wouldn't believe how many old (and some new) pics I have, where one side or small area has the slightest bit of motion blur, and the rest of the plane is sharp. It's devastating for me to go through those pics now :) Normally A.net is more strict and JP.net is less strict with borderline cases like that, but maybe JP is getting more picky.

[Delta777LR]

Can anyone see where this is blurry? oversharpened? contrast?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4100026

[gonzalu]

Sergio, it looks oversharpened to me in a lot of places. Perhaps a pass at a lower setting, or use Smart Sharpen which is a much better algorithm than USM.

[Delta777LR]

now this one for backlit, soft, and contrast

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4111731

[RomNYC]

Hey folks, a little help here.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4130475

The rejection is, in my eyes, valid for various reasons. However, I got "undersharpened" and "bad composition". In regards to sharpness, I actually thought I was on the edge of being OVERsharpened. In terms of bad composition, well, I guess I don't handle that kind of angle quite yet. Any suggestions on these issues? (yes, I do realize the shot is too dark, etc.).

Thanks!

Edit: Same here: http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4130469

Slightly too high in frame, so I understand the "bad composition". But I got undersharpened, and this is where I'm puzzled.

[gonzalu]

Rom, that's an easy one to fix...

--Soft
--High in frame
--A little dark...

So just center it more, sharpen it a bit more, the rear of the plane is softer than the front...

If you have the original and want me to give it a go, feel free to send me the file off-line and I will gladly do an edit on it and see if it suits you :-)

[RomNYC]

Hey Manny, thanks :)

I'll PM you a link. So it is indeed undersharpened then... Lately, I have switched from PS to Lightroom which is much noob-friendlier, but I don't seem to be getting results.

[gonzalu]

I do all my MANAGEMENT and initial RAW processing in Lightroom... but final edit is still in Photoshop for me. I have yet to find good formulas for what I do in PSCS5 in Lightroom... I may one day but for now, AUTO-CONTRAST alone in Photoshop is an invaluable tool missing from LR

[gonzalu]

Rom,

Thanks for giving me a chance to edit your image. I think you weren't too far off (to my taste and that of what I think JetPhotos was looking for) .. here is a before and after...



Mine is a bit oversharpened, but that's because I did not mask like I normally would and given that vBulletin will resize it, I overdid it a bit to make it show better as resampled by the forum. But you get the idea. The WINDOWS is what I usually sharpen more ... the rest I pull back a lot. I do usually different passes for windows, wheels, lines, titles etc. depends on the shot/plane...

[gonzalu]

BTW, you should also take a look at your sensor... seems to be a bit dusty and that is a surefire way to get an easy rejection,especially JetPhotos!

[RomNYC]

Thanks Manny! Definitely sharper. Windows: do you select each window individually, or do you select the zone around them? I always find it hard in PS to select specific zones/objects accurately. Like I want to select a window and bang, it selects the entire tail....

Yes, my sensor doesn't look quite right. Not that it carries a considerable amount of dust spots, but I always feel like my images look "foggy" somehow. I think I need to find the thread in this forum that explains how to clean sensors and the tools required (I'm kinda chicken about doing that though!).

In any case, thanks for your input!!

[gonzalu]

Rom,

While I do clean my own sensors, I would suggest just taking it somewhere that does it. Eric knows a great place in NYC that can do it while you wait... (I always forget the place)

So, I never actually select stuff like that :-) Layer Masks are your friend! I will do whatever I need to do to an area in a separate layer.. .apply the effect to the whole image, no selections.. .then I mask the entire layer in black. Using a white brush, I paint over the areas I want to apply the effect to 9essentially I am just REVEALING that layer in those areas) and I can go back and forth revealing more or less as I please... no complicated selections.

Only try to do magic wand selections on large swaths of color.. like blue clean skies. Otherwise, you'll be spending some time at your Psychiatrists office !

Your FOGGY sensor is the Lens you;re using, NOT the sensor. This is the effect of a cheaper lens wide open. I am not knocking you or anyone, but this is just factual. Unfortunately, those lenses will only start to perform well when they are stopped down a lot. The primary reason the 70-200mm f/2.8 is $2100+ and the 70-300mm is less than $500 is because of that.. CA correction and contrast and expensive coatings are not part of the formula. :-( Sadly, it is nothing you can do other than try to stop down a lot which robs you of light meaning higher ISO ... In full sun, ISO 400 and f/8 to f/11 on those lenses will work out to about 1/500sec minimum to a decent 1/1000sec so it would work nicely.

TEST my theory, do not take my word for it. Set up your camera on a tripod and take a series of pictures at different apertures... from wide open to fully stopped down. Make sure you use a far subject that is HIGH above the ground... like a distant building. Try to mimic the conditions a plane will be in ... You will find the lens' sweet spot or the best aperture that will give you the most contrasty and less milky images.

[RomNYC]

Thanks Manny,

It is indeed a cheap lens, and it shows in my aviation photography. Which is why I stopped this activity for a while because each picture is a battle. HOWEVER, it does perform much better in other situations. I have nice results every year at the US Open for instance, it is sharp in spite of the moving "objects" :P

But yes, aviation photography with my current equipment is EXTREMELY frustrating. Oh sure, you'll make it to anet once in a while, but even when I do, I look back at the picture and think that the screener was probably wasted ;) I have compared my photos to those of other folks using the exact same equipment on JP and anet (D60 + 55-200-cheapster), and I could not honestly see any major differences quality-wise. I feel that I am reaching the limit of what my current setup can offer, at least in the aviation photography field.

And of course, there is the KNOWLEDGE, which I am seriously lacking.

[Delta777LR]

Made a little boo boo. This one gets rejected because I forgot to place Night on the category. I wasnt sure what was missing but the screener mention that because of the horizon shadow.

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4132691

[deltaA330]

I'm not sure why these two photos got rejected? Worth an appeal?
This one, subject to far away, but I thought I had motive for doing so.
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4134509
This one they claim is not level, although it looks pretty dang level to me.
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=4134500

Should I appeal?? Thanks guys!