Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Bad Quality...where?  
User currently offlineCallMeCapt From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 496 posts, RR: 7
Posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2317 times:

Just got this one rejected for badquality.
I can't see it. Worth appealing?
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/VH-VOIGoranTaxi.jpg


Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2313 times:

Shot looks just a touch oversharpened. I'd re-edit it and maybe lay off on the USM by about 25-50%.

User currently offlineWork4bmi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2304 times:

Yep. the rear of the aircraft, that area seems very grainy of an otherwise ok shot.

User currently offlineJeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 51
Reply 3, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2295 times:

I'd get rid of the CA on the starboard wingtip and the halos around the gear in addition to the above mentioned suggestions.

User currently offlineCallMeCapt From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2295 times:

*sigh*
Ok
 banghead 



Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
User currently offlineSenorcarnival From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2291 times:

I see a very slight "jaggieness" on the tail and plenty of noise around the rear tires (could be my crappy Dell LCD.) Pretty crisp otherwise.

User currently offlineCallMeCapt From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2287 times:

The noise behind the rear tyres is the exhaust fumes coming out of the engine.


Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
User currently offlineFly747 From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1497 posts, RR: 9
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2284 times:

Hi Goran,

it also seems as if you sharpened the whole image. Try sharpening just the airplane. Also the hot fumes look much better unsharpened.

Ivan



Contrails Aviation Photography
User currently offlineSenorcarnival From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2277 times:

Quoting CallMeCapt (Reply 6):
The noise behind the rear tyres is the exhaust fumes coming out of the engine.

I was referring to the inside set of tires, under the "M3 Power" logo.


User currently offlineCallMeCapt From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2275 times:

Thanks people.
I'll rework it and see what i come up with.

SC..I see where you're at now. Damn, I missed that one.

[Edited 2005-06-02 00:13:47]


Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
User currently offlineDLKAPA From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2265 times:

Quoting Fly747 (Reply 7):
it also seems as if you sharpened the whole image. Try sharpening just the airplane. Also the hot fumes look much better unsharpened.

Here is a common misconception about Photoshop. The way Unsharp Mask works, is that it finds the edges and then adjusts the contrast on either side of that edge, by brightening up the lighter side and darkening the darker side. In Photoshop's Unsharp Mask, there is a function called "Threshold." This function effectively tells photoshop what is an edge and what isn't. By raising the threshold, it will take more contrast between pixels to begin with to sharpen those pixels, and by lowering it, it will take less contrast between pixels at the start to sharpen those pixels. If you have a sky that is relatively noise-free and you set the threshold to about 3 or so levels, you don't have to select only the aircraft, you'd just be wasting your time.


User currently offlineFly747 From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1497 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2257 times:

Eric,

thanks for the explanation, I was under a different impression but I stand corrected.
Edit: So what if you use 0 for threshold, then you are sharpening the whole image?

Ivan

[Edited 2005-06-02 00:49:12]


Contrails Aviation Photography
User currently offlineUA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2242 times:

If you cold, crop less on the left. It almost looks as though you've cut off a wee bit of the winglet.

Thanks,

Matt



"It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark."
User currently offlineCallMeCapt From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 13, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2186 times:

I was thinking of cropping out the whole winglet.
Had reservations about keeping it in the shot as it is.



Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
User currently offlineDendrobatid From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1667 posts, RR: 62
Reply 14, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 2161 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

Quoting Fly747 (Reply 11):
thanks for the explanation, I was under a different impression but I stand corrected.
Edit: So what if you use 0 for threshold, then you are sharpening the whole image?

Ivan
Most people seem to leave the threshold at 0 all of the time and I wonder why Adobe included it at all if it wasn't to be used. Every pixel, including noise, becomes a candidate for sharpening if you leave it at 0. I leave it at 1 for digital and 6 for scanning from slides.
If you can avoid sharpening the sky at all by using the magic wand, that is the best option though.
Mick Bajcar


User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 15, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2138 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi all

The threshold setting work well for non aviation stuff.

Goran, follow my guidelines (think I gave you them) for processing and all should be well. Crop out the winglet. Don't use the magic wand in the sky but try to sharpen the image as a whole.

Regards

Gary


User currently offlineSulman From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 2035 posts, RR: 32
Reply 16, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2127 times:

A method I use for sharpening now:

1) Create a duplicate layer.

2) Draw around the object you want to sharpen using the lasoo tool. You don't have to be particularly neat.

3) Press the 'quickmask' button on toolbar. This creates a salmon-pink area around your selection.

4) Use a brush tool to 'paint in' more of the selection, or switch to 'background colour' (small square above big square on toolbar) to subtract from selection.

5) Press quickmask button and your new selection will be shown. Sharpen as desired.

6) Use eraser tool to subtract sharpening from sensitive areas.

I may illustrate this technique later, using MSpaint.

Cheerrs

James



It takes a big man to admit they are wrong, and I am not a big man.
User currently offlineCallMeCapt From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 17, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2109 times:

That photo was a bit of a problem for me to begin with and thought I could make good on it. Aperture only goes to F8 so I had some blurring in the background. So, I did selective sharpening. Might need a bit more practise, I think.
Gary, I tried sharpening the whole image but I was getting noticeable grain in the sky.
Ocassionally, I neat image the crap out of the sky if it goes too grainy. Getting a new camera very soon though. My new 300D arrives in 5 days. FujiFilm S7000 is ok and it has gotten me a couple of photos in the DB but I have no doubt picture quality will drastically improve with the 300D.



Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
User currently offlineVIR380 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2002, 621 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2091 times:

Plus im not sure whether im right but it looks to have some cloning around the image...

between the 2 centre wheels ?

i do apologise if im wrong ... but it does look like it
also a little on the tarmac strip inder the left hand winglet ?


but on the whole ... yes a little over sharp

regards


User currently offlineCallMeCapt From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 496 posts, RR: 7
Reply 19, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2072 times:

No problem. To answer the question about cloning, there is no cloning in the image. I saw that spot as well and I think it's just blurred from the starboard engine exhaust.


Without struggle, there is no progress. (Frederick Douglass)
User currently offlineVIR380 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2002, 621 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (9 years 3 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 2072 times:

Quoting CallMeCapt (Reply 19):
No problem. To answer the question about cloning, there is no cloning in the image. I saw that spot as well and I think it's just blurred from the starboard engine exhaust

Thats fine i accept that  Smile


i really do like the image .... great scheme , reduce the sharness a touch and its a winner in my opinion

regards


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...
Bad Quality? Where? posted Sat Nov 27 2004 22:02:52 by Dlx737200
Where's The (bad)quality? posted Thu Nov 3 2005 09:30:46 by AirKas1
Are This Pictures Really Bad Quality? posted Tue Nov 28 2006 04:27:29 by XAAPB
Bad Quality Or Not .......? posted Thu Aug 17 2006 18:41:06 by Avro85
Bad Quality/common Rejection, Need Help posted Fri May 12 2006 00:23:05 by A388
Rejection - Bad Quality, Can It Be Saved posted Wed May 10 2006 02:34:17 by Aviamil
Will You Accept If This Is Bad Quality And Color? posted Fri Apr 28 2006 14:43:41 by VasanthD
Can Someone Tell Me Why This Is Bad Quality? posted Mon Apr 24 2006 21:59:34 by AIRBUSRIDER
Rejection For Bad Quality posted Sun Apr 23 2006 12:48:02 by A388
Screeners Help On Bad Quality posted Fri Apr 14 2006 14:06:57 by NIKV69