Just want to learn what I need to work on for next time
I know the horizon isn't straight, I'd levelled the runway instead. easy fixed.
OK ready for the flaming on quality. Is this because is a bad shot or the sun has overexposed the tail a bit, or generally blurry or have I overcooked the Photoshop?
Having trouble with the USM at the moment, trying a few methods,
1. 50, 0.3,0 applied to everything but the sky
2. I downloaded an action from this site, a sharpen layer so you can brush the parts you want to sharpen, this is 500,0.2,0 I think.
2 or 3 lots of 1. seems to do the trick, haven't mastered the 2. yet seems to go a bit to far on the oversharpness. from reading this site and fergals pdf sounds like its pretty much whatever suits you and the pic at the time.
Linco22 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1380 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3226 times:
Nice shot, some nice light. I would say(without trying myself) it needs some CW rotation, maybe 0.3/4. It looks like you've overkilled on the 500% second time round with the USM. I'd like to see the original. I wouls usually sharpen little by little as I go through my layers, if thats the way I'm doing it. The image also carriage a little bit of grain....
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3069 posts, RR: 57
Reply 2, posted (9 years 4 months 3 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 3161 times:
I think the photo definitely needs some CW rotation to look right. That sloped background presents real problems for you, in terms of finding a decent reference. It is evident that it really is sloped, but as the photo is now all those telegraph poles in the background look like they are leaning slightly to the left.
In the absence of any decent vertical or horizontal reference (the poles themselves are too small to be very reliable) I used the general line of the treetops - tricky, but I drew a line that looked like it should be about right horizontally. That gave just over 1 degree CW rotation. With this the poles then look spot on too. I think that resolves that one.
As for quality, the light is nice but unfortunately the middle part (particularly) of the fuselage is overexposed and so the detail is burned out. In such cases this is difficult to rescue. It also looks slightly oversharpened to my eye - for example, the line between fuselage and tail and the nose area. I generally find that a USM setting of 500%, 0.2 and 0, together with some selective sharpening, gives a good overall result. Applying USM to selected areas is tricky for me, so generally I don't bother - it's the transition between selected and non-selected areas that can present a problem I find (and also too much like hassle!).
If you are interested, it may be possible to use a technique to slightly reduce the overexposure of the fuselage, even without a RAW original. Drop me a line if you would like to pursue this one.