Norfolkjohn From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 251 posts, RR: 8 Reply 1, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 1950 times:
Some of the more experienced guys might be able to offer some suggestions but If they were my shots I would not try to get them accepted onto the ANet DB. They are nice enough pics but I think they would be difficult to get up to standard IMHO.
The first one looks slightly out of focus, the second one the tail looks out of focus, the third is not level with the horizon (probably fixable but not much room left on the crop) but the fence is also a bit obtrusive, the fourth just might have a chance but the lighting is not too good and the last one, for me, is no good because of the fence.
One thorn of experience is worth a whole wilderness of warning.
Norfolkjohn From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 251 posts, RR: 8 Reply 7, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1846 times:
I've had a quick look at your other shots and I think there are quite a few in the nearly but not quite category in terms of getting them up to ANet acceptance standard. I like the fact that you are trying different angles and some close-ups this help to make shots a bit different which can help with acceptance.
I see two basic problems across all of the shots. Firstly they are a bit dark due to the fact it was obviously a dull day. I realize there is nothing you can do about the local weather (I grew up in SW Scotland) but IF the sun is out that really is the time to get down to the airport.
The second problem is a lack of sharpness. I suspect that many of the shots are either fractionally out of focus or suffering from slight camera shake and if this is the case no amount of editing will get them up to ANet standard although you can probably make significant improvements to a lot of them which would be good practice. (I still try and salvage a lot of my own duds just to see what I can and can't manage to fix but I don't try to get these onto A.Net)
I don't know a lot about the camera you use but I think it is a Minolta DiMAGE Z1 ? If so a quick Google Search tells me it is a 3.2 mega-pixel camera with a 10X optical zoom and a further x4 digital magnification. Apologies if I've got this wrong but if this is the case you are at the bottom end of the equipment likely to be needed to get acceptable shots - especially in bad light with a moving subject. This is probably what is driving the lack of sharpness problem. Short of changing equipment I would say try to shoot in bright weather when ever possible and avoid anything that is moving fast (taxing should be OK). I would also say do not use the digital zoom as this always degrades quality (optical zoom should not be too bad).
Getting back to the pics I would also suggest you always check the DB and look for aircraft that are not too well represented (only a few shots already in DB) as this again tends to help with acceptance but the shots will still need to be high quality regardless of subject. With this in mind the first shot of the German Learjet D-CAPO is a possibility as there only 5 shots in the DB and none in the UK. The Ryanair 737-800 EI-DAS only has a bout a page full and none at PIK so again an outside chance. However the Learjet definitely looks a little blurry and you are clipping the tail on the 737-800. I would try working on these two and see what you can produce. If you are happy with the results you can have a go at submitting them but don't build your hopes up too much. The other one you might have a play with is the Virgin A-340 on short finals. You will need to crop it in a fair bit which will probably affect the quality but you can see how it looks.
Hope this is of some help - keep practicing and have fun !
All the best
One thorn of experience is worth a whole wilderness of warning.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2975 posts, RR: 60 Reply 8, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1837 times:
John - I have to congratulate you on that post. This is what the Forum should be all about - helpful, considered replies that move things forward. Well done to you for taking the time to do that.
You also summarise many of the points that I think apply to Dave's shots. There is definitely a quality issue with the camera Dave is using, in terms of reaching A.net standards. The one thing I would add to your comments is that there is more chance of success getting as close as possible to the subject, thus reducing the reliance on the zoom. Definitely using the digital zoom is a no-no.
Dave - I forgot to ask you in my email - what editing software do you have access to?
GPHOTO From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 819 posts, RR: 27 Reply 12, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1751 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW DATABASE EDITOR
They now look a bit plasticky, but the grain has gone. One problem gone, another one arrives. The grass has suffered too. I used to have this problem with my noise removal techniques as well, so don't worry, it isn't easy. Is it possible with your set up to try these steps?:
1. Reduce the level of noise removal to prevent "plastickyness". If using Neatimage, you can play with the sliders, both luminance and chrominance channels may need adjusting differentlt for different photos and try not to go above 40% on the luminance channel. Chrominance channel doesn't often get moved by people (it's 100% by default), but you may need to lower this as well if you are struggling.
Also make sure you use the Auto Fine Tune and Suto Complete buttons after the Rough Noise Analysis step. Sometimes helps, sometimes makes things worse.
You could also try moving the Rough Noise Analysis box to a different part of the photo. The one that is chosen by default is not always the best. Depends on the photo.
The trouble with this is you can spend ages messing with NeatImage, whereas it is mostly commonly used as a quick noise removal filter. But the results can be worth it.
2. What would really help is to be able to apply noise removal only to the airframe. Does PS7 have noise removal? Can you draw around the edges of the aircraft and then apply noise removal only to the airframe? (Yes it takes b****y ages). Same applies to the sky - is there a magic wand function that lets you select the sky areas and then noise reduce them seperately from the other parts of the image?
3. Just a check - always apply noise reduction before resizing the image. This way less fine detail will be lost.
Aihtours From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 13, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1739 times:
I'll have a go at editing them for you, I can do that without harming the grass. When I see you around i'll teach you how to reduce the noise without harming other features of the Picture. It would be easier on msn because you can ask questions etc...
Norfolkjohn From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 251 posts, RR: 8 Reply 15, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1723 times:
Hi again Dave,
I see you are getting good advice on the editing front - thanks to GPHOTO and AIHTOURS for their time and effort.
I have just a few other more general comments that may, or may not, help.
First on grain - I think you can alter the ISO / ASA setting on the Z1 and from what I've seen of the specifications quoted on the web the range is 50-400. I don't know what you are using normally but I would strongly recommend you keep it set to ISO 100 (or even 50 if the light is good) as this should minimize grain / noise as far as possible.
On equipment I fully understand your budget restrictions and I am not suggesting that you rush out and get a different camera at the moment but I would suggest you start thinking about what realistically you might be able to afford in the foreseeable future. Ideally the best thing is to get a digital SLR and while the price of new kit is probably going to be prohibitive for you for quite some time, second hand MAY be a practical proposition if you are able to save up over a year or so. For example you can pick up a mint condition EOS 300D with an EFS 18-55 lens for about £400 and prices may drop as more people upgrade to newer digital SLR's. I realize this probably sounds an awful lot of money but if you could save £7.50 a week you would have the money in a year. Just a thought.
The only other suggestion I can make about trying to get shots on the ANet DB is consider your photographic opportunities for aircraft other than airliners at major airports. I know that there are limited opportunities up in Scotland but if you have the chance to visit a local flying club see if they would let you photograph their aircraft - a relatively easy static subject and quite possibly a registration ot two not on the DB ? Similarly any possibility of visits to museums, fly-ins, air displays (static shots probably best bet) take the camera and see what you can get.
Once again all the best, good luck and keep plugging away !
One thorn of experience is worth a whole wilderness of warning.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2975 posts, RR: 60 Reply 16, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1708 times:
Hi again David,
I'm afraid to say that I would think the Cargolux is a non-starter. Two key factors for A.net before even a close look are the fact that the white of the fuselage is already a bit overexposed - very little you will be able to do about that. Also that fencing is not flattering for the photo and does obstruct the main gear - many have been known to get badmotive rejections for such a thing.
Once again, John has given some great additional advice. Another extra thing from me - I wouldn't recommend editing a shot that has already been edited - the quality is bound to suffer from being saved twice. Best to do all the editing in one go and thus only save once. I shall have a look at that original you emailed.
Gladave From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 194 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 1681 times:
again to you both thank you very much for the help and the comments.
It is very nice to be told the pictures are getting closer to the quality.
I have checked the pictures and i was using ISO 50, so have changed it to 100.
I will prob nip out and see if I can get any shots tomorrow. Today it is raining again *sigh*
The fence is the problem in alot of the shots, numberous factors really.
I can only stay on tip toes for so long, and i dont have any ladders.
WHen i take the jeep i can get higher up due to it being a 4x4 so...
AIHTOURS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 24, posted (7 years 11 months 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 1578 times:
Quoting Gladave (Reply 22): ryan, that looks a bit grainy, or is that just my eyes?
it does look much better though
woudl that make the cut?
It is still grainy, I cannot do anything with that kind of grain I'm afraid. Whever it will make the cut of not, I am not sure on this one. My advice is to maybe just leave it, and when you get some Photos with good weather, edit them. I know you are short on time and things, but I can see you getting at least one nice day this Summer.
If you see a Virgin A340 one day, its going to happen again.
25 Gofly: Will a photoshop work flow do? http://rockymountainavphotos.com/Eric/workflow.html -Gofly
26 Norfolkjohn: Dave, Me again - First ISO settings - If the light is good then using 50 if fine as this will be minimum possible grain. I just suggest you don't go a
27 Gladave: john thank you for the words again i will have a shot on the a330, on a side note the virgin got accepted to JP.net (search photographer as pikteam).
28 Psych: Hello again David, Well done on getting your photo accepted. I don't wish to pour cold water on your success, but I have to say that I am surprised it
29 Norfolkjohn: Dave, Congratulations on the A340 making it on JP - proof that you are making progress ! Unfortunately I can't get the links to the other three pictur
30 Gladave: i am surprized as well, after what has been said in the forum, however The weather is not too bright today, so i think i will just go to PIK to see if
31 Gladave: Ok instead of opening a new thread, ill reply to here. do any of these shots stand a chance? Tri-Star at PIK Full Size Full Size Grumman Full Size Ful
32 Norfolkjohn: Hi Dave, From the top : There are 99 shots of CS-TMX already in the DB. Your first one is too far away and you don't have enough resolution to crop it
33 Gladave: what do you think norfolkjohn? [Edited 2005-07-26 21:26:42]
34 AIHTOURS: David, The Photos is great, but there is one problem with it what will cause it to be rejected as far as I know. The Grass, and Tree's have been smudg
35 Gladave: i was using a different work flow, one for photoshop cs any better, no grass in there :p
36 AIHTOURS: Did you use Neat Image? It looks as though you have. You'll know when its a better Photo when your trees don't look like a painting That's O.K, but ho
37 Norfolkjohn: Hi Dave, I tend to agree with AIHTOURS comments with regard to Neat Image. I don't use it on my digital shots but I do use it when I scan negatives fr
38 Psych: Hi David, I see you have had some more excellent advice here. I have just had a look at the images and agree with many of the comments. The Hercules l