Rate this

[a1]

Rate from 1-10. 1 being the worst.

Just experimenting.

[Sytse]

6, both

[NDSP]

4 :-/ The Textures arent reflective,  It has jaggies. The engine that did reflect sorta annoys me when I look at it.


For the second .. 6- The weather was nice, the lighting was nice, but the plane still lacks detail

Nick

[ATI_7500]

1)
Negative: Image quality, angle, lens flare.
Positive: Weather.

Total: 3/10


2)
Negative: Image quality, angle, plane takes up too much of the image.
Positive: Weather.

Total: 3/10

[NDSP]

1)
Negative: Image quality, angle, lens flare.
Positive: Weather.

Total: 3/10


2)
Negative: Image quality, angle, plane takes up too much of the image.
Positive: Weather.

Total: 3/10

Isnt 3 a bit harsh? :-?

[Helms]

Isnt 3 a bit harsh? :-?

At least its better than a 1.

[NDSP]

Isnt 3 a bit harsh? :-?

At least its better than a 1.

I thought a one would be more like this

     

[Alonso]

1st: 6: The mountains don't look very nice, there's a not very nice lens flare.

2nd: 6: The textures don't look very reflective and the model looks a bit aliased.

[krigl]

I agree with the other guys... 5 or 6. Not bad by any means, and interesting angles, but the lighting and other small deficiencies mentioned above stop these from being stand-outs...

They look like in-flight shots where you work with what FS gives you, rather than posed shots where you deliberately try to set up something exceptional.... both are great in their own way, but often it's the extra information or just the set taken as a whole that makes in-flight shots interesting - the pics if viewed alone without the 'story' are often average.

[ATI_7500]

Isnt 3 a bit harsh? :-?

He wanted them rated, so what? *Shrugs*