Thanks Jeremy. Won't cost anything to give it a try, although I feel it's a little low in frame as I look at it now.
Thanks Jeremy. Won't cost anything to give it a try, although I feel it's a little low in frame as I look at it now.
Looks good to me, though I think might be the small size but a tad oversharp?
My Jetphotos Album
http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=59493
While it's a few pixels high in frame, I say it isn;t that bad for centered (although stabbing the right frame too much for my taste )
It is certainly a bit oversharpened...
Manny Gonzalez
Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS
Guys what do you think of this pic of the helicopter? My other one keeps getting rejected for either soft or too small in frame. I still believe it is a great shot, but whatever it is their loss not mine :). So here is my last try at getting a pic of this chopper on jetphotos. Luckily it isn't the end of the world if it doesn't because I see this nearly every time I go out to GRR!
Also how about this pic? 5th time trying to nail this horizon level...
Last edited by deltaA330; 2013-02-06 at 07:48 PM.
The Beechjet will be rejected for the horizon - use the horizontal of the terminal roof to align that - it will work a lot better. I think the helicopter is a little soft - it also seems a little high in the frame - but - it sure is salvageable!! Shout if you need help with the edit!
Mark Lawrence - KFLL
Davie, FL
Community Manager NYCAviation.com
email: [email protected]
http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=1538
https://www.flickr.com/photos/9633283@N04/
The Beechjet also has jaggies at the nose end of the striping. Don't let Anet/JP be your judge of good photos. I like 'em and I also like the one of the 76 with the snow that you tried getting on there.
Chalk it up to their loss, but put 'em on your own page (Flickr, Smugmug, etc...) they will garner a good number of hits.
I don't think jetphotos is too over picky, plus those come out a lot more in these forums, it is not as bad at the full 1200 pixels. That's not why it has been rejected 4 times (horizon, horizon, horizon, HORIZON!!!)
I agree that it is their loss. Oh well! I guess that's what I get for going for something other than a side shot :).
Alex,
The helo is certainly soft... butthat's not because of sharpening, it is because of Distance... meaning it was really far and you probably only got about 1500 pixels on the frame with the helo in them and then cropped a lot... that's what it looks like. The landing shot, you got it, the terminal is NOT level and should not be... Mark, see my post on the rejections thread... I show the Google Maps sat image with comments... it best explains the problem. With no horizon in sight, your best bet is the verticals... the one above is still slightly CCW even without measuring I can tell.. .One trick used by screeners to quickly tell is to use the frame of the BROWSER to check the level.. so do that too... move the mouse to the edge of your browser and shrink the edge until it touches the lines in the picture you're checking for level... works! :-)
That building is about 45 degrees right yaw to the photographer position... I would expect it to sink even lower
Manny Gonzalez
Thrust Images | General Photography | R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
BRING BACK THE KJFK/KLGA OBSERVATION DECKS
Lucas,
For your personal collection these are really nice shots. I'm sorry to say that jp/ANet probably will reject them.
1) Weird crop, but most important, the prop is soft/blurry
2) Horribly un-level, and no depth of field, only the wingtip in focus. (Personally, fix the level, and this is a great shot to me)
3, 4 & 5) Too much dead space around the aircraft. (Again for me, I love how you framed #4, but that is not what jp/anet wants)
6) Not level & wingtip cut off
7) Probably your best chance, but a little dark
8) Motive. Just an odd angle, that the screeners do not typically find appealing.
Thanks and yeah I liked #2 and #1 but I didn't know how to Corp it right that well hehe, and thanks :), What about corping #4 a bit? I really did not know much to corp without messing the photo completely up,and thanks will fix the photos :)I have more But didn't want to Spam up the page with photos but i can upload the rest later i have a few Hdr's I dont know if they accept that but If you looked at My World war II photos topic i made those are the photos I took that day and thanks for the tips and glad you liked some of them :)
Lucas,
For #4, again, I love it. The way it's framed, it gives the aircraft room "to move" in your imagination. For jp/anet, though, they want them cropped as close to the edges of the aircraft as possible. Without seeing the original, I do not think you could crop it for them and keep the 3x2 or 4x3 ratio.
Anet will outright reject HDR's. JP is a little more forgiving, but they have to be really well done (ie: no halos, nothing grungy or blown out). It can be done, but even the best of us have had our HDR turned away.
Dont get discouraged. You have a good eye, you just need some polishing work. Look at the Spotting review threads, and look at the Anet/JP accepted threads. This will give you a good idea as to what is accepted and what is not.
And to echo William's comment: for props that are moving...get your shutter speed to around 1/250 at the fastest...if you can go slower without overall blur even better. But 1/250 unless they are taxi-ing will give you a nice blur to the props so it gives your subject life.
Thanks :) so would you suggest me not corpping #4 and try uploading to Airliners or should i corp it a little?and i did not want one of them to be too bright but i will fix that aswell and thankyou for your help :) i will Fix them later. I also have more but didn't want to upload which i will later.
Kay fixed two of them Of course without the copy right but how do they look?x:
I think that first one is going to be booted as backlit.
R.I.P. Matt Molnar 1979-2013
#DeleteThePickleSmoocher
LETS GO CAPS!
[URL]http://www.sopicturethis.net[/URL]
Bookmarks