Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/aviation_photography/read.main/330063/

Topic: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Cvervais
Posted 2009-03-27 20:29:17 and read 2491 times.

Greetings,

This photo was correctly rejected for being soft.


http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...606961.5653cvervais-n706sw_319.jpg

I've gone and spent some more time with it in Aperture and this is the result...


http://homepage.mac.com/cvervais/airliners/cvervais-N706SW_319.jpg

What says the hive mind, should I resubmit? And, if not pointers are much appreciated.

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Dlowwa
Posted 2009-03-27 20:38:56 and read 2484 times.

Looks better, but still a bit soft (especially around the gear and engine).

Dana

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Cvervais
Posted 2009-03-27 20:50:02 and read 2483 times.

Thank you, I'll see if I can clean that up a bit.

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Cvervais
Posted 2009-03-27 21:02:40 and read 2482 times.

Sharpened it up a bit more....

http://homepage.mac.com/cvervais/airliners/cvervais-N706SW_319-2.jpg

This is probably as far as I can go without ruining it.

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Brasila684
Posted 2009-03-27 21:10:17 and read 2478 times.

Hey that last one is much better.



Brasila684

SkyWest Baby!!!

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Koryo
Posted 2009-03-27 22:32:55 and read 2466 times.

Yet again it may get rejected for motive for the slight cutting off of the horizontal stabilizer. Crervais, if you email me a larger version of the pic or post a larger version here I will be able to give you much more advice on it.

Cheers,

Koryo

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Aussie18
Posted 2009-03-27 23:28:26 and read 2456 times.

The final edit still looks soft on the nose,Id use some selective sharpening in that area to sharpen it up abit more.

Cheers Mark.

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Dlowwa
Posted 2009-03-27 23:59:29 and read 2453 times.



Quoting Aussie18 (Reply 6):
The final edit still looks soft...

Agree... It looks like the original picture you're working with is not of good enough quality. Either that, or your workflow isn't giving you the best results. Either way, you're right, you can't do any more without making it worse, but it's not looking good enough to get in now.

Dana

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Cvervais
Posted 2009-03-28 01:15:20 and read 2447 times.

Yeah, I think where I'm running into a wall is with the workflow I'm using and unfamiliarity with it. I am using Aperture 2 from Apple and am currently reading two books on this product.

Koryo, you can find the RAW file here and I appreciate any tips you can give.

http://homepage.mac.com/cvervais/airliners/cvervais-N706SW.CR2

But, based on tips I've received from Mark I think I may have had the aperture just a little off using F/7.1. Mark has recommended 8 or 9 in another thread.

Regarding motive as you can see there's not anything I can do with this image from that standpoint ergo it's not a candidate for the DB however, it is proving to be useful in my education.  Smile

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Silver1SWA
Posted 2009-03-28 02:39:24 and read 2440 times.

I'm not on my usual monitor but he image looks a tad blurry to me. The final edit shows a little too much sharpening being applied and unfortunately blurriness cannot be overcome by more sharpening.

Quoting Cvervais (Reply 8):
But, based on tips I've received from Mark I think I may have had the aperture just a little off using F/7.1. Mark has recommended 8 or 9 in another thread.

F8 is thrown around a lot here, but I don't think it's a must as far as shooting airplanes. I often shoot at f7.1 with no problem. I seriously doubt that has anything to do with the soft problem.

I'm not familiar with your editing program but have you considered giving Photoshop a try? I recommend Photoshop Elements...it's actually quite resonable in price. Download a trial and give it a try. It might help the workflow a bit, especially since I think most around here are more familiar with it and can offer tips specific to PS.

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Cvervais
Posted 2009-03-28 08:11:55 and read 2427 times.

Yes, I'm beginning to realize that using Aperture 2 might be a problem because it's not widely used and folks like yourself, are very familiar with Photoshop.

Elements I can pick up easily enough but, what about Lightroom 2? It sounds like it's more advanced than Elements but, does not have all the bells and whistles as Photoshop.

Or, is Lightroom so dissimilar from Elements and Photoshop that people aren't going to be familiar with it?

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Cvervais
Posted 2009-03-28 09:04:33 and read 2418 times.

Well, I'm in luck. My wife reminded me that we do in fact have Elements 6. So, I've loaded it up on my computer and it's ready to go. Are there any must read books out there on Elements?

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Dlowwa
Posted 2009-03-28 09:17:10 and read 2415 times.

Ok, I took a look at the RAW file you linked to, and the answer is pretty obvious. I don't think the problem necessarily lies with your processing - the original image is really soft to begin with. If it were my image, I wouldn't even bother trying to edit it for submission.

That having been said, if you are really intent on submitting this one, let me know, and I'll do my best to edit it to a.net standards, which may or not be possible, but I'd be willing to give it a try.

Obviously, for next time, if you start with a higher-quality image, that will make editing a lot easier. And btw, I'm on a Mac too, and I doubt that using aperture vs. photoshop has anything to do with the results of your editing. Like I said, I think you should concentrate more on getting better results out of the camera first.

Dana

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Cvervais
Posted 2009-03-28 09:22:33 and read 2414 times.

Thanks Dana, No, I agree, I'm not going to push it to get this submitted but, I learned a lot in this process about what it takes to get one on here.

And yes, you're right, I need to work on getting the best quality image I can from the camera first. Which means going out to the airport more and who could complain about that?  

Oh, also, what do you use on the Mac for your workflow?

[Edited 2009-03-28 09:23:30]

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Dlowwa
Posted 2009-03-28 09:47:01 and read 2412 times.

Currently I'm using CS4 (and use Adobe Camera Raw to convert RAW files to jpegs). I have used Lightroom in the past, and it does give you a lot more control/options than ACR, but I went back to ACR just for the simplicity of it (workflow, importing to photoshop, etc...)

I did try aperture back in 2005 when apple first released it, but i think the fact that it was still maturing and I had been using photoshop for 6-7 years before that led me to stick with photoshop. I'm sure aperture 2.0 has improved on the first release, so if that's what you're comfortable with, learn with that, as I'm not sure elements will give you everything you need, and CS4 is pricey...

But like you said, get better images out of the camera first, and the software/processing will become secondary (probably as it should be).

oh, and about the (camera) aperture setting... f/8-11 is just a general guide to get the sharpest picture, as it's in the middle ground of depth-of-field vs. diffraction, and most lenses tend to perform better stopped down a bit. But it is just a guide. I almost never shoot above f/8, and am usually in the f/5.6-f/6.7 range, but I do have some shots here on a.net taken at f/4 and below - it all depends on the lighting situation, and the glass you are using (good glass is much more forgiving at wider aperture)

Dana

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Silver1SWA
Posted 2009-03-28 15:18:19 and read 2388 times.

Hey Chris,

Couple of questions... What lens were you using? I saw in your other thread you have the 100-400L. Do you have any in-camera sharpening applied? I'm guessing no. One thing I have had to do to get around my softness issue with that lens is bump in-camera sharpening to about +3 at least. I used to have it off completely and did all sharpening in post-processing, but like I said I started having the camera give the original some sharpening right off the bat to bring sharpness to the level I was used to with my other lens.

Since you have a RAW file of this image, you can apply the "in-camera" sharpening to the file after the fact using your Canon software. Give that a try, and then send the file to PS and give it some sharpening using USM. I'd give it a try, but I am out of town with no access to my editing computer. It might help...something to consider.

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Cvervais
Posted 2009-03-28 17:12:29 and read 2380 times.

I'm going to have to read my manual about the in camera sharpening. This is available on the 5D MKI right?

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Cvervais
Posted 2009-03-28 18:15:54 and read 2371 times.

I found the setting and it was already set to 3 for standard which is what I shoot at.

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Dlowwa
Posted 2009-03-28 21:44:12 and read 2360 times.

I assume in-camera sharpening is only applied to JPEGs, but I don't shoot Canon, so don't quote me... If you usually shoot RAW, then I'm not sure that advice would apply.

Anyway, just to give you an idea what kind of sharpness you should expect, I put together this comparison of a similar angle/type - your shot vs. one of mine at about the same focal length. You should be able to see the difference - both were processed straight from RAW, with NO sharpening applied after the fact. Hope it helps give you an idea what to expect.

http://img14.imageshack.us/img14/5742/cvervaiscompar.jpg

Dana

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Cvervais
Posted 2009-03-28 23:13:46 and read 2348 times.

That's a pretty big difference. Nothing a lot of practice can't fix.

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Silver1SWA
Posted 2009-03-29 00:04:35 and read 2344 times.



Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 18):
I assume in-camera sharpening is only applied to JPEGs, but I don't shoot Canon, so don't quote me... If you usually shoot RAW, then I'm not sure that advice would apply.

In-camera sharpening will be applied to all images, regardless of file type. The only difference is with RAW, you can change the level of "in-camera" sharpening after the fact. So for instance, if you set sharpening to +3 in the camera, with a RAW you could remove that sharpening on the original, or add more. It's adjustable just like anything else with a RAW. It's a feature of Canon's "Picture Styles" adjustments. With JPEG, whatever "Picture Styles" setting you have set will leave a permanent change on the original. For example, white balance, landscape or portrait and sharpening etc, etc...

Topic: RE: Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (cvervais)
Username: Dlowwa
Posted 2009-03-29 01:25:57 and read 2337 times.



Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 20):

ah... I see. I plead ignorance as a non-Canon shooter, but what you said makes sense. My RAW files go directly into ACR, which applies my default settings for sharpness/noise reduction/etc., so any in-camera settings would be useless for me anyway. Never used the RAW conversion software that came with the camera, so no idea what its default settings would be.

As for jpegs, 14,000 actuations on my camera so far, and not one jpeg produced!  Wink

Dana


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/