TriStar From Belgium, joined Oct 1999, 848 posts, RR: 1 Reply 2, posted (13 years 4 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1078 times:
Contradictory as it may seem, reflection might be the bad boy in this case. I've noticed A.N not to be too keen on reflections, even if they seem to be artistically just.
Of course I'm not talking about the reflection of the aircraft in the small pool of water - that's neat. Rather so, I'd say the guilty one is probably the reflection of/on the aircraft itself. Maybe "flare" would be a better way to put it.
Don't get me wrong though; I like the photo quite a bit. I'm merely trying to make sense of why it got rejected.
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 660 posts, RR: 17 Reply 5, posted (13 years 4 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1043 times:
Yes both too dark and too light - or put another way, too much contrast. Without seeing the original, I can't tell whether the fault lies in the original exposure or with subsequent processing ... but, all is not lost! You can manage the extremes between light and dark either (preferably) during the scan or post-scan in a package like Photo Paint or Photoshop.
I've taken the liberty of copying your pic and using the "curves" feature of Corel Photopaint to modify the extreme ends of your pic - ie. I "lowered" the curve at the highlight end and "raised" the curve at the shadow end and so reducing the contrast. This is a technique worth learning.
for the result. OK, the overall quality is poor (never a good idea to re-process .jpg files) but I think you'll get the idea.
Chris28_17 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 10 Reply 6, posted (13 years 4 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1043 times:
First of all, thanks to colin for that last post, it really does help seeing someone else take your own pic (one your more familiar with) and use it as an example.. i think it helped, as soon as i get a chance to go to my school i will mess around w/ that one...
Anyway, here is another rejected one, the reason was of course poor quality, but i think maybe its just an "un-interesting" picture... to me it was cool because it has some sentimental value to it, however i can see how it might not be real exciting.. im pretty sure the quality is fine, its just the artistic value might (to most people) be lacking... here it is, take a look!!
Ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 660 posts, RR: 17 Reply 7, posted (13 years 4 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1035 times:
I rather like that one - a bit different from most, and lots of reflected light showing up u/c details. The only criticism I would have with this one is that there is a distinct magenta cast to the image - this can be rectified by altering the colour balance by shifting the midtones to green (a little!). Also about .5 degree of clockwise rotation would straighten up those vertical pillars.
Scooter From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 848 posts, RR: 2 Reply 9, posted (13 years 4 months 20 hours ago) and read 1022 times:
Hmmm...I kinda like it. The angle and environment are unique, and the scan quality is good. The only thing that bugs me was that the tail was cut off...this would have been a GREAT pic if we could see the whole thing.
Chris28_17 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 1439 posts, RR: 10 Reply 10, posted (13 years 4 months 19 hours ago) and read 1023 times:
Yeah i thought about the thing with the tail, including when i took the pic, but at the time i was standing at the top of stairs about 25ft up and really was as close to the plane as it looks in order to get the tail in the picture, in my judgement at the time, would have put the entire plane at a poor angle and been even worse... but yeah, i know what you all mean; but eventually i will also try to get rid of the red haze, i didnt notice it till you mentioned it ...
Well heres yet another few pics that i have NOT tried to upload yet... should I?