Is This Badsoft/Badquality/Badanything? — Aviation Photography Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

Is This Badsoft/Badquality/Badanything?

FlyingZacko From Germany, joined May 2005, 583 posts, RR: 6
Posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1143 times:

Hi everyone,

I promise this one will be my last one for this week. I just wanted to hear your hones opinion about this shot of mine. It's nothing special just a regular 25R approach at FRA. Any comments will be highly appreciated.

Cheers,
Sebastian

Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX

11 replies: All unread, jump to last

TS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1134 times:

It looks blurred on the nose.

Thomas

Bubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1193 posts, RR: 52
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1131 times:

Hi Sebastian,

I think it's a great shot except the fact that the engine cowling appears a bit too bright, and somewhere (nose and tail) could be given a little bit more sharpening.

_Hongyin_

FlyingZacko From Germany, joined May 2005, 583 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1123 times:

Quoting TS (Reply 1):
It looks blurred on the nose.

Quoting Bubbles (Reply 2):
and somewhere (nose and tail) could be given a little bit more sharpening.

That's what I was thinking, for some reason I messed up on focusing right. Is there anything you can do about just the front of the plane? If so, how would that work?

Cheers,
Sebastian

Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX

IL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2235 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1110 times:

I'd say: Forget about it and try again another day. You'll probably get over 6 of those a day at FRA, so plenty of opportunities to get it right.
This one is blurry.

Cheers,
Eduard

Bubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1193 posts, RR: 52
Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1113 times:

Quoting FlyingZacko (Reply 3):
If so, how would that work?

Hi Sebastian,

You could use Sharpen Tool (its icon is a triangle in Tools list) wiping somewhere you want to further improve the sharpness, like nose and tail.

I also suggest you adjust bright level a little in order to make the exposure look right as I mentioned in my previous message - engine cowling a little too bright.

Hope it helps!

_Hongyin_

Bubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1193 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1105 times:

Quoting IL76 (Reply 4):
This one is blurry.

Oops, Eduard has drawn the conclusion. But before the 'full stop', may I ask one more question? Eduard, did you mean this one is suffering motion blurry?

Thanks,
_Hongyin_

FlyingZacko From Germany, joined May 2005, 583 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1100 times:

Quoting IL76 (Reply 4):
This one is blurry.

Thanks Eduard for being honest and straight forward. I will definitely try this week at FRA.

Quoting Bubbles (Reply 6):
Eduard, did you mean this one is suffering motion blurry?

I wish it was at least motion blur. But it's just my inability to take good shots. But I'll have plenty of opportunities this week though.

Thanks everyone for their opinions,

Cheers,
Sebastian

Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX

IL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2235 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1099 times:

Especially the nose section is blurry, the tail looks alright. It's either motion blur, or the nose section is simply out of focus. You can tell by the AerLingus.com and Airbus A320 titles. Sharpening it further will only bring out jaggies.
The editing is not bad, but I'm afraid the the original has some problems Sad

(that's a speculation from my side. I -of course- have not seen the original).

Eduard

FlyingZacko From Germany, joined May 2005, 583 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 1090 times:

Quoting IL76 (Reply 8):
(that's a speculation from my side. I -of course- have not seen the original).

That speculation is exactly right though, Eduard. The nose section is just out of focus.

Cheers,
Sebastian

Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX

DC10Tim From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 1405 posts, RR: 16
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1061 times:

I wonder why the nose is soft though and not the rear?

Normally on my shots I'd expect to see the wing or something closer to be out of focus, usually due to too low an f-number.

Tim.

Obviously missing something....

AviatorTJ From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1838 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1036 times:

Sometimes it is due to the relative motion of the airplane. I notice it especially during rotation when a wing moves with the camera along the x-axis and the nose and tail go along the y-axis resulting in a blurred nose. Since the tail is locked on in this case, I'd not say it is motion blur. Leaving this to be a mystery. boggled

We're the only way out.

Top Of Page

Forum Index

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

Printer friendly format

Similar topics: