This very helpfully text was written by Thomas Wirtenberger.

To complete my work, which started by posting an easy photo-editing
guide http://www.planepictures.net/thomas/ i will now approach
this issue the other way round. I will try to explain you the best i can, what
the rejection reasons mean and where the problems might be, using
examples to make them visible.

The posted pictures where altered in a way to make clear what we screeners probably see when looking at your photos. They are basically
all overdone, but should give you an idea where to start when receiving
a rejection.

I will not comment very much about how to correct the problems, as this
part should be basically included in my workflow.

Some bigger pictures are linked to Imageshack, smaller ones directly
pasted into the posting. Depends on how important the visibility is for
comparisons.

I tried to keep it halfway funny on some parts, given that a rejection is
sad enough for everyone of us :wink:

All pictures or parts of them are copyright protected by :twisted:
So don't mess around with them.

Let's start:

SHARPNESS
- Soft
- Blurry/out of focus
- Oversharpened/Jagged
- Bad Quality

On this example i just sharpened the BA-Logo and the word "British"
The rest of the image was left soft to show you the difference

http://www.planepictures.net/thomas/img/softsharpyx0.jpg

On this example the whole image was not sharpened, should give you an idea of what softness means, if you compare it to the edited version linked
to our database



Here the version in the database: http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=536525

Softness is just another term for undersharpened. When using Photoshop
for example, instead of 300% USM -> 400% could have been the right
value.

A blurry/out of Focus picture can not be saved. Camerashake, mostly visible when using a lower shutterspeed can not be repaired. The same problem when you are pointing your autofocus to anything else as on the plane. Here an example from my early days, as i don't save blurry originals:

http://www.planepictures.net/thomas/img/blurrynr1.jpg

We already know the BA747 shot, so i used the same procedure here,
but instead of sharpening the Logo and "British" i oversharpened it, without removing the jagged lines. Rest of the plane was left soft again to show the difference

http://www.planepictures.net/thomas/img/oversharpened01jz0.jpg

This example is completely oversharpened, showing jaggies/halos
on the whole plane



Oversharpening can be avoided by using a lower USM or otherwise sharpening value, or by investing some time removing the jaggies/halos
as described in my workflow

Here are the correctly edited versions of BA747 and AA777

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=542634

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=536527

The "Bad Quality" rejection is not used very often by me, because it
doesn't give the photographer a good feedback about what's wrong.
When i check it, i always try to include a personal comment. The issues
could be haze due to the sun or focal length of the shot, overmanipulation with noise reduction programms (NeatImage...) or a "general"
low quality - hard to describe. No examples for this one.

EXPOSURE/LIGHTNING/CONTRASTS/COLORS
- Pallid/Grey/Weather
- Backlit
- Exposure
- Bad Contrast/Color Balance
- Color Cast

When shooting in overcast/rainy conditions you run into danger
to get your shot rejected because its pallid and
grey, which is simply a result of going out to
the airport in bad weather, instead of staying
at home and posting something usefull in our forums like i am
doing now :wink:

I think everybody knows why we check that box here and than



This rejection can be perfectly combined with a bit of "bad exposure", so you will get the full thing for your money. Yes i once uploaded this shot and nearly got a triple-rejection for it :lol:



When you are shooting not having the sun in your back, you may get a backlit shot. The lightened up part of the aircraft is not on the side where you are shooting at

A classic backlit shot, note the overexposed nose and dark/pallid side



And the perfect combination – an underexposed, backlit shot



Some dark images can make it into the database though, but you’ll need a bit of luck to get an “artsy” shot like this http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=458001
to win the screeners heart.

Be sure to have some cool condensation effects, that works pretty good when shooting
in bad WEATHER, when your photos are PALLID and GREY. The screener might accept
also a bit of SOFTNESS, when the motive justifies it

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=564428

When your camera is not set to the right values, or you meet difficult
light conditions (dark clouds in bright sunlight...) the exposure of your
shot can be set wrong. A not properly done postprocessing can increase
the problem with every step. This rejection reason goes hand in hand
with wrong contrasts in your shot. Thats why i often check the exposure box together with bad contrast/color balance

Here we go with an overexposed photo, visible on the blown out whites on
the plane and the sky, while the rest of the plane is a bit dark. Sun
was shining but clouds where also there. The camera has problems getting the whole plane rightly exposed, because of the different lightning on the same subject.



Of course this shot can also turn out underexposed, meaning that it
is overall to dark, lacking contrast.



Finally we all know what happens during dawn/dusk. Look at that overexposed nose, horrible.



Here is a halfway good compromise for the MAS747

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=541263

Next point is to talk about wrong contrast and oversaturated colors
on your photo. This may lead to a Bad Contrast/Color Balance rejection

I was a bit lazy, and packed up the two problems in one shot



The colors look unnatural and the whole photo looks unbalanced, because
it doesn't show any bright/dark nuances and light differences taking into
account the position of the sun

Be carefull on your editing job, there your problem may be sitting.

I think this version of the glorious Triple 7 is much nicer

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=421955

Sometimes, depending on the given light or other circumstances like
reflecting snow, or a lens tending to do strange things with your images colors you will notice a dominant colortone in the picture. Setting the right
whitebalance on your camera or playing around with the colorbalance in
your software may help you to get rid of the color cast.

Like it yellow? naaah.



or red/purple?



Lets keep the colors as they should be

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=464932


FRAMING/PICTURE COMPOSITION
- Obstacles
- Motive/Crop/Framing
- Horizon unlevel
- Not Centered
- Bad Angle
- Small/Distance
- Cut off/Incomplete

Following situation: Mr. President - George W. Bush is coming to my
local airport VIE. I know the exact day weeks before he arrives. It will be
on June 21, 2006. So i tell my boss at work, that i'll need a day off to
get a picture of Mrs. Air Force 1 - maybe a once in a lifetime chance.
So i make my way to the airport, i know that the big lady is parked
at the cargo ramp, near the GAC-Terminal. I arrive at the usual spotting point for this position, a very polite policeman tells me to leave because today its a restricted area. Did i get my shot? Yes of course!
Did i upload it? Never ever. Why? OBSTACLES!!



And some more of them







One thing is sure. If you don't upload pictures with obstacles in front
of the plane you will never get them rejected for this reason. Sounds
logical, doesn't it :wink:

...and still, there is sometimes a chance to get some good obstacles into
the database...keep it as an overview, plus the bonus of a nightshot. Not
everytime, but here and than we will accept such shots if they look interesting and quality is up to standards.

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=566754

While screening pictures there is always a little bit of personal taste involved. Not when talking about quality or basic rules a picture has
to apply, but when it comes down to the judgement if a picture simply
"looks good" or not. Whats fine for me, may bring up a Motive/Crop/Framing issue for a a fellow screener and viceversa.
There are some motives which are generally not accepted on PP.net.

Here are some examples of my own portfolio, which i would reject when
seeing them in the queue.

It's Planepictures.net, right? Not winglets.net or boring-engine.net



It's also not plane-windows.net



The focus should always be the plane



And yes, though an In-Flight photo may be something special, window-reflections are not acceptable.



Sometimes when i had a longer party the night, before going to the airport, i wonder myself what the hell i was doing with the camera. It was
maybe that one last beer on that party, or maybe i'm getting old
and my view of things is turning my Horizon unlevel these days.

When you read Horizon unlevel in the evil-mail you should simply check the horizon :wink: . Buildings, or funny things an airport has like antennas and little towers, not to forget about our beloved lampposts, should be level.

Unlevel



Level



Completely drunk



Quick and Dirty: Your plane has to be centered (vertical/horizontal).
So be it.

Too low in frame - Not centered



Too much dead space on the left, also Not centered



And this is what we (basically) want

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=540881

Exception can be made, when there is something interesting in the pic
that justifies an uncentered plane, some examples:

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=562404

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=449080

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=529000

It's around midnight now, and i'm running out of ideas to keep you
interested in this topic. So the next one is a straight forward explanation.

Don't shoot planes from nearly or completely behind. Sometimes shooting
them overhead can also lead to a bad angle rejection
"Always show the plane to its best advantage"

Examples for bad angle candidates





Exceptions (like always, when there is something interesting to see)

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=540531

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=337320

When you haven't got enough zoom or you are just too lazy to walk
a bit nearer to the desired object, you will get a small/distance rejection. I think its quite self-explaning.



And now the correct version

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=420460

Now we come to the last point of the Picture composition rejections.

You can now decide for yourself, which of this three pictures is
the "right" one





or maybe this one is the good one??

http://www.planepictures.net/netshow.php?id=548562

Everyone who liked 1 & 2 most has won - a cut off/incomplete rejection!

It's all about the right crop. Don't cut off the horizontal stabilizer on
a side-on shot - that makes no sense. Don't chop off the landing gear.
Well yes, dont cut off the planes nose (I've seen such photos in the queue..) Basically it must be visible that the chosen crop is intentionally and makes any sense.

And now..the final ones. As short as possible

Bad Size

Keep the right size-ratio between width and height of your picture.
It should be either 3:2 or 4:3

We will basically accept any width between 1000 - 1280 pixels, as long
as the size ratio is kept right and within the given limits.

Here are the limits for the most common sizes:

Width Height
1000 667 to 766
1024 683 to 784
1100 733 to 841
1200 800 to 916
1250 833 to 954
1280 853 to 976

Bad size



Was funny to make the T7 look that way :wink:


Right size



Bad Compression

Be sure to save your jpeg with highest quality settings in your editing
programm. Always shoot your photos with the highest quality settings
on your camera (jpeg-superfine, RAW...). Otherwise you may get
your stuff rejected because of visible jpeg-compression.

Uncompressed



Badly compressed (Watch out for the artefacts that appear)



Incorrect description

Always make sure to include:

The right location (3-Letter airport IATA-code, 111 for In-Flight, or 000 to enter the location yourself)

The registration when known (D-AKNR, OE-LAN, N177UA)

The aircraft-type (Airbus A320-214)

The airline

Before pressing the final OK button while uploading, check if all entries
are complete and right!! If not, overwrite them manually

People/Permission

If peoples faces are clearly visible, you need a written permission from
this person(s) in order to publish the photo. Don't clone out the faces or make them "not recognizable" - this will lead to a rejection.

Similar shots available

Well, like it says. When we have lets say about 4 pictures of the
same aircraft/airport/angle, your upload may be rejected.

Exceptions are if your shot is of far better quality as the ones we have. The special lightning in this situation (nice dask/dawn shot - interesting clouds, rainbow) justifies an acceptance. The livery has changed or any special markings where applied. The shots we have in the database are 2+ years old...

Uuups, one last i nearly forgot:

Dirty/Spots/Grainy/Sky

Always make sure, you don't have dustspots on your Cmos sensor. They
will mostly show up on your photos. When shooting at high ISO values, digital pictures get grainy. Try to shoot at a lower ISO or use a programm
like NeatImage to remove the grain, but be very carefull to not ruin your
photo with a noise-reduction programm.

Sky? hmmm, don't send us photos with just a sky visible.

just joking...the above mentioned dustspots and grain are best visible in the sky :wink:

I always try to add a personal comment along with this rejection. Something like: "Dustspot lower left" or "Grainy" which should
help you to find the problem in no time.

I'm finished now. Thanks for reading this megaposting.

If questions appear (i'm sure they will), just post them here so we
can discuss the whole rejection issue in an open way with all the
members and the screening team.

I hope i could contribute a bit to a better understanding between photographers and the screeners.

P.S.: If you find any typos, you can keep them. My english might
not be the best around, but well.. :wink: