Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Help Needed Once Again  
User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 32
Posted (12 years 12 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1943 times:

About a month ago, the following pic was rejected:
http://www.diax.ch/users/dominguez/a332_ul_an01.jpg

Then I re-scanned it and tried different settings, the result was:
http://www.diax.ch/users/dominguez/a332_ul_an02.jpg

But this pic got rejected once again.

Now I definitely need help, how to improve that pic. Or is it obvious a bad picture, which can't be uploaded, no matter what I try?

Regards
Gerardo


dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineLewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3592 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (12 years 12 months 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1903 times:

There is too much contrast. Do you sharpen or do you apply Unsharp mask? If you do the 2nd, try not to overdo it as there will be loss of detail.

User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 32
Reply 2, posted (12 years 12 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1895 times:

This time I only used unsharp mask, but even less then adviced. I also reduced contrast on the second picture. So, you see, I am getting kinda desperate...

Regards
Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3122 posts, RR: 15
Reply 3, posted (12 years 12 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1896 times:

It seems to me that the photo is not very sharp, maybe you used a low shutter speed because it's possible to see some movement on the static objects in the runway and on the background.

Luis


User currently offlineLewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3592 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (12 years 12 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1896 times:

Tru not to use unsharp mask at all. Just use sharpen and maybe try NORMALIZE if it is possible with your software

User currently offlineEDIpic From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (12 years 12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1894 times:

Hmm..

I wouldn't suggest NOT using unsharp mask. It's essential to get the best detail out of a scanned shot, Straight sharpen is far too coarse.

Looking at the crane in the background, there is a slight "glow" around the edge. That is a sign of too much unsharp mask filtering.
Reduce the amount or increase the threshold slightly. Keep the radius low.
Also, still too constrasty (my personal view).
Have you tried scanning and uploading an aircraft static or taxying?
Although the shot is excellent in it's own right, get confidence by
taking simpler shots. (The FAQ states this)

Cheers

Gerry


User currently offlineAer Lingus From Ireland, joined May 2000, 1543 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (12 years 12 months 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1892 times:

Gerardo,
Quick question, what film did you use ? Some films have very high contrast levels

Martin


User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 32
Reply 7, posted (12 years 12 months 4 days ago) and read 1874 times:

The film I nused was a Fuji Reala. The lesn used was a Tamron 28-200. Aperture settings were (If I recall correctly) f 5.6 or 6.7 and aperture time 1/350.

For the unsharp mask in photoshop I used (more or less) 160%, radius 1.6 and threshold 10.

Regards
Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (12 years 12 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1866 times:

You are scanning the print, right? Your developer might have screwed up your prints - if you can, you should try scanning the negative. If you cannot scan the negative, take it to another developer and have it reprinted. Reala should give better results than this.

Charles


User currently offlineEGKK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (12 years 12 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1863 times:

HOw do you scan a neg? i tried it but it came out black.

EGKK


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (12 years 12 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1858 times:

Well, from your answer, you seem to be using a standard flatbed scanner, so scanning the negative is not an option. Try getting it reprinted at another shop, and tell the operator that you don't want any color balance or contrast adjustment at all. get a good, large print of that and you should be able to scan it.

Charles


User currently offlineGerardo From Spain, joined May 2000, 3481 posts, RR: 32
Reply 11, posted (12 years 12 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1849 times:

Charles, you're right. I use a flatbed scanner (UMAX 1220S). The local photo shop will give me phone call, when he recieves a new Minolta ScanDual II, which I most certainly will buy  Smile/happy/getting dizzy

Do you think, that another developper can make better prints with that neg?

Regards
Gerardo



dominguez(dash)online(dot)ch ... Pushing the limits of my equipment
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Rejection Help Needed Again posted Fri Oct 1 2004 23:20:59 by Derekf
Picture Help Needed Again. :( posted Wed Dec 24 2003 03:04:00 by Cancidas
Puzzling Rejection - Help Needed posted Sat Nov 18 2006 19:40:59 by Chukcha
Some Help Needed To Improve The Quality posted Tue Sep 26 2006 16:46:46 by Avro85
Motiv Rejection - Help Needed posted Sun Sep 24 2006 22:37:37 by Raptors
Help Needed Regarding A Rejection posted Tue Sep 12 2006 19:37:44 by Raptors
Military Info Help Needed posted Mon Sep 4 2006 06:03:50 by Olympus69
Has Anybody Seen This One? Help Needed With Info! posted Mon Jul 31 2006 09:16:39 by 757MDE
Spotting In AMS And DUS - Help Needed! posted Mon Jul 17 2006 21:33:26 by Airimages
Been A While, Pre-screening Help Needed posted Sun Jul 16 2006 19:02:24 by MarkJBeckwith