Flyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2 Posted (9 years 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 2558 times:
I had a photo rejected today with the following rjection reason given:
"These photos appear to have been either overexposed (too bright) or underexposed (too dark). This could be a scanning problem or a
problem with the original photos. Check your original photo, if it appears to be correctly exposed then please change the settings
on your scanner or use a photo manipulating tool to adjust the brightness
of the photos."
I have the following photo still in raw format...here is the version that I submitted:
Edoca From Belgium, joined Mar 2005, 688 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (9 years 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2536 times:
what software have you used? I just tried a very quick autofix in Photoshop Elements and the exposure improved immediately. Especially if you have the raw file you could be able to get is sorted. Feel free to send me a mail if you want me to give it a try.
Just one note, I wouldn't call this a unique paint scheme really, as this isn't an airliner I guess.
Norfolkjohn From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 251 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (9 years 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 2535 times:
I've had a look at this shot but I think it will be difficult to fix to A.Net standards. The problem seems to be that the aircraft is back lit. There are a few things you could try playing with in combination to see if you can get a better result but I'm not sure how much of an improvement you will get.
1) You could try increasing the mid-tone adjustment in levels. (Enhance > Adjust Brightness / Contrast > Levels)
2) You could try a little bit of fill flash (Enhance > Adjust Lighting > Fill Flash)
3) You could try adjusting the backlighting (Enhance > Adjust Lighting > Adjust Backlighting)
4) You could simply lighten the entire image (Enhance > Adjust Brightness / Contrast > Brightness / Contrast)
Just trying these quickly I would say that playing with 1 and 2 is the best bet but the end result may still not be brilliant.
That's the best I can suggest - perhaps some of the more expert editors can offer better ideas.
All the best
One thorn of experience is worth a whole wilderness of warning.
I don't know if that function exists in CS2, I'm using Elements 3 instead. Mind you, it's just a "quick fix" thing, in many cases inefficient to reach A.Net quality, but I think it can give a good indication on whether or not a picture can be fixed.
If I can improve a backlit pic with it, I guess that means there may be a chance to fix it, especially if the raw is available. For example by using John's techniques.
Flyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 804 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (9 years 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2433 times:
Quoting Edoca (Reply 1): I just tried a very quick autofix in Photoshop Elements and the exposure improved immediately.
I tried this and it worked well. I think I need to calibrate my monitor, for it is playing tricks on my eyes. I could have sworn that this image was brighter when I uploaded it. Now that I've lightened the image I can't believe I ever subitted it the way it was. I'm going to start over with the raw file. Thanks for the tips...
Quoting C133 (Reply 5): If you still have access to the airplane why not just shoot it again on a better (sunny) day?
Unfortunately not an option.
It was the beginning of a sunny day...sunrise. I wanted to catch a little of the red/purple sky behind the plane. Unfortunately I trusted the screen on my 300D and forgot to check the histogram...
Jid From Barbados, joined Dec 2004, 972 posts, RR: 31
Reply 9, posted (9 years 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2384 times:
Indeed as said it is tricky one JD. You can have a play with the levels, contrast etc. Just to give you an idea of what you can do with a couple of minutes in CS.
I would not say its near DB standard but still an interesting one to process.
G7EPN is back after 15 years! Operating all Bands 80mtrs -> 70cms QRZ DX