Too much or too little contrast

[aceriana]

Dear spotters and screeners

Over the past months I have had 95% of my rejections attributed to "too much or too little contrast".
Sometimes I get the feeling this is like the much hated accounting account called "other expenses" - when you don't know where a cost goes use the generic other.
I find it nealry impossible that so many of my photos have been rejected because of this error. It drives me bananas because this motif means everything and means nothing.

I have use the JID WORKFLOW with great success over the past few years.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACOFhCfeCZI

I know well that many photos could be better. I also think that sometimes screeners have a "happy trigger finger".
The odd thing is that this error is attributed to such a wide variety of situations, it is beginning to make no sense at all.
Sunny days with no clouds, cloudy days, photos from window seats, etc - they all have the same issue. Seems very odd to me.

I have heavily invested in this hobby and know many of my past photos that have been accepted where not so good.
But now I have really tried to improve the quality of photos and surely some have real tangible errors (spots, horizon unlevel, backlit).
This too much or too little contrast error motif seems so out of place many of the times. Even when I appeal - no deal.

So I leave this issue to spotters who suffer (maybe I am the only one with this issue) and screeners who judge.

[brianw999]

A low contrast rejection will most often be associated with a luminosity histogram showing a baseline gap on the graph at each end.
An excessive contrast rejection will most often be associated with a luminosity histogram showing the graph climbing up the sides at each end.
Most contrast rejections on JP are due to low contrast.
Bad weather conditions often get a contrast rejection because of the lighting similarities in the sky and on the aircraft. In these conditions the graph may not show the gaps that I have referred to. They are the kind of conditions where I put the camera away and go to the pub !!

[dlowwa]

If I were to guess, 90% of contrast rejections were for not enough contrast. I don't see too many rejections for the contrast being too strong. In any case, I always leave a message with a contrast rejection indicating if it needs more or less, but unfortunately that's not the case for all of the other screeners. If you don't get a message and you're not sure whether it's not enough or too much contrast, like I said, it's a pretty safe bet it's not enough.

I just checked your recently rejected images, and yes they all have low contrast. In fact, I rejected one of them (OE-LBJ wing view) and if you check you will see I actually did leave a message indicating that it needed more contrast

If you look at some of the others, the image of OE-LBP being the best example, it is quite clear that the contrast is very low (the blacks/shadows are all washed out). If you still have doubts after future rejections, feel free to post here in the forum about whether more or less contrast is needed.

[aceriana]

Thank you for your answers. But let me reply to a few issues.
1. I live in Torino, Italy and we do not have a very exciting airport. That means I have to travel for good spotting and when I get there I have to make the best of what I get. Not go to to the pub (might do that later).
2. I have carefully read the Seahawk contrast guide and none of my photos have blank areas on the side of the histogram - a sign of little contrast (which is my plague) - because I have learned to use well the all powerful JID Workflow which has a step to completely eliminate histogram problems.
3. My photos taken over Albania might have an issue with the usual problem of dirty airplane windows which distort the quality of the photo. I would agree 100% with that. But again, when I travel I have to make the best of what I get. But this trip to Albania, the window was not that bad, but 90% of the photos I uploaded were rejected. Many rejections (more than 10) with the same motif (in my case too little contrast).

I agree that the Austrian retro aircraft in Vienna might have a problem with little contrast - it was a cloudy day and the photo was taken from a not perfectly clean aircraft window.
But the photos I took of Albania from the air were 95% OK in my opinion. I had a sunny day with the sun in my favour for good illumination.

Sorry for being a nuisance, but in the past 2 years, 90% of my rejections have been due to this issue and I want to understand how to solve it.

[brianw999]

On the subject of histograms, make sure that you use the luminosity histogram and not the default RGB histogram. You will be amazed at how different they can be. See here for assistance and a "How To Do It".... http://forums.jetphotos.net/showthre...-or-Luminosity

You may get a graph that has a small blob at one or both ends and a flat line gap to the main body of the graph. Ignore the small blob and adjust up to the main body of the graph.

[dlowwa]

Sorry for being a nuisance, but in the past 2 years, 90% of my rejections have been due to this issue and I want to understand how to solve it.

No problem, you're not being a nuisance.

Shooting through windows, especially dirty aircraft windows will certainly cause contrast problems.

As for being unlucky to get poor light on the days you go spotting, unfortunately there is not much we can do about that. Of your recent rejections for contrast, I only see one that looks like it wasn't shot through a window (Xtrairways). For that one and others like it, you'll just have to realize that shooting in those kind of conditions (subject in shadow but bright background) will always be difficult to get accepted, no matter what kind of editing you use.

For others shot in better light, a simple boost to the contrast should be enough to fix the problem.

[aceriana]

Once again I am back with the usual rejection which plagues me - histogram or not.
I think there is a problem with how photos are judged. Here are my rejections:

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=5193099

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=5193095

There are currently photos in the top 24/48 hours which are in MUCH more cloudy days with more contrast issues, yet they get the glory.
For oddball reasons these 2 which are spic and span, get the garbage dump.

Sorry fellas, I still do not understand - I must have a real hard head but it just does not make any sense (histogram or not)

[brianw999]

Both are a little low on contrast. The major problem is that both have a bright background while the aircraft do not have direct illumination. This is causing them to look rather bland.

[dlowwa]

There are currently photos in the top 24/48 hours which are in MUCH more cloudy days with more contrast issues, yet they get the glory.
For oddball reasons these 2 which are spic and span, get the garbage dump.

Sorry fellas, I still do not understand - I must have a real hard head but it just does not make any sense (histogram or not)

Checking the top of the last 48 hours, I only see one that was taken in cloudy conditions. It was accepted as a 'Hot' photo because of its newsworthy value. I would guess it would have been judged a little more harshly had it not been 'hot'. As Brian said, both of your images you cite as examples of being 'spic and span' are hardly that due to the lack of direct sunlight on the aircraft, combined with a brighter background. I don't see much to be surprised about once you come to accept the fact that for otherwise common aircraft, images taken in with dull light and backgrounds brighter than the subject will almost always have a difficult time getting accepted.

[aceriana]

Now I have NOTHING against Łukasz Stawiarz but his photo - which received a noteworthy mention via Twitter - certainly has issues concerning Too much or Too little contarst, far worse than many of my rejected photos.

http://www.jetphotos.net/photo/8233219

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Now I have NOTHING against Łukasz Stawiarz but his photo - which received a noteworthy mention via Twitter - certainly has issues concerning Too much or Too little contarst, far worse than many of my rejected photos.

http://www.jetphotos.net/photo/8233219

Alberto,
If you have any concerned about Łukasz Stawiarz's picture please contact him directly

It's really really rude to post somebody's else work here to comment, please don't do it.

Regards
Alex

[aceriana]

Fellas

I understand pointing fingers is not a nice approach, but the issue of this type of rejection continues to boggle me with no clear explanations and continuous doubts.
It would seem that cloudy days do not help, yet my photos are rejected with a much sharper situation and others are accepted.
It would seem that adjusting the histogram would partly solve the issue, but this makes the photo darker and will be rejected for other motifs.

I not looking for a cheap solution, I am looking for a clear solution that will solve the many rejections I have currently faced (and maybe other spotters have faced as well). A percentage far worse than when I started posting photos here. I know I am a nuisance but I try my best to follow the rules, which at the moment I do not understand.

[seahawk]

Adjust the histogram, if the result comes out too dark, it was not the best day for spotting and the shots are for your personal collection.

[brianw999]

Adjust the histogram, if the result comes out too dark, it was not the best day for spotting and the shots are for your personal collection.

However, you might be able to save it by brightening the luminosity histogram midtones and adding a little overall contrast. It will however require VERY careful handling and, as Stefan says it may still be one for your personal collection.

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Alberto,
You're not a nuisance but definitely, sometimes the weather isn't at its best and it's a clever idea to keep shots for your personal collection - We all went on spotting trips where unfortunately the weather sucks (5 times at LHR for me, 1h of sun in TOTAL) - What I think is good to remember is that we should not be shooting for JP but for our collection first - Then if you are more selective with what you upload, your portfolio looks much nicer too - And for the bad weather shots, if you really want to publish them, why not use Flickr where you can manage everything, without the damn screeners
I personally never upload a picture where there's no sun on the aircraft unless it's a very rare plane (but that's just me)

Regards
Alex