OK Quality again...I've stood back and looked at this in hope of self improvement and heres what I think I could change, I am on a different monitor than when I edited but theres no much difference as I checked early on my editing monitor.
: Overall brightness needs increasing
: I think the tail maybe suffering as its a close colour to the sky?
: colours need a little saturation?
Not such what else , I don't want to look for things that are not there.
Look forward to some constructive advice.
Many thanks
Ian
Glapira From Spain, joined Feb 2005, 186 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4087 times:
Hello! Well I like the shot even if I still find some very bad jaggies that make the photo bad quality: look at the tail bottom, the tail edge that "connects" with the fuse, all the logos, doors, stabilizers, flaps, ...
I would start from scratch with a very selective Unsharp mask... try 500/0.2 initially, remove jaggies, and if needed apply another 50/0.3.
I would also load a selective color adjustement layer in order to give a little more of saturation to the blue, as you said in your post.
Good luck with it and keep working..
Linco22 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1379 posts, RR: 18 Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4087 times:
Morning Ian,
Nice capture as usual, even better its an A332! Anyway, first thing that struck me was it carries a bit of overall softness, especially on the wing. Exposure wise, the white fuselage is a little over. Maybe a kick of contrast will help and selective sharpening. Apart from that it seems fine, cant see a colour issue like you've stated......Hope this helps
Manc From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 339 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4082 times:
Cheers guys!
haha I know I asked for opinions so soft or sharp? I think thats probably the main reason for the rejection. I used 1 hit of 500, 0.2 , 0 on this.
I'll wait for more comments see which side of the fence the soft / jag lands then take them on board and post an update tonight.
C133 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 225 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4037 times:
My recent uploads have been alternating between rejects for jagged and soft, just terrible. Yesterday I printed out Fergul McClean's PDF on workflow from the upload page and see an immediate improvement in results. There is no limit to post processing techniques, but ones that work for A.net are few. Try Fergul's. You have nothing to lose, and I bet you'll like what you see.
Terry
Edit: Content; I didn't maximise the image before commenting on it. But, try Fergul's sharpening method. It works.
[Edited 2006-03-21 16:20:16]
Fine: Tax for doing wrong. Tax: Fine for doing well.
Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9444 posts, RR: 72 Reply 5, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4036 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
I'd love to see the RAW version of this image and have a chance of doing the post-processing...
Manc From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 339 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4008 times:
I do follow a general work flow but I think the sharpening part still catches me out! I'll check the updated versions, noticed a lot of updates to various workflows recently so need to study them.
Click...My org is shot in L .jpg sorry otherwise I'd send you a copy, u can still have it if you want?
However I feel with the advice I have been given I can make it work, I'll post another later tonight.
Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9444 posts, RR: 72 Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3996 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Sure, send it over, my contact info is in my profile.
Manc From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 339 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3936 times:
Las
The JAL is taken from RAW so I can edit. The PIA was dropped by 2/3 the sun just caught side on, I have a shot at a similar angleto Tims which has darker under wings however I went for the shot to get the full "Colours of the Desert" titles in. I thought I'd lightened it in CS but I just checked and I haven't so it the true colour out of the can with -2/3 http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/JA732J_190306_LHRD.jpg
G-CIVP From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1209 posts, RR: 10 Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3924 times:
Alot of rejects get posted here for critique. The obvious candidate to blame is workflow. However, alot of the time it boils down to the photographer not fully understanding the functionality of their kit; some photographers I've met don't take their cameras off programme - truly shocking.
Lasham From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 225 posts, RR: 19 Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3924 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Hi
Yes much better. Might need a tad of yellow in as JAL aircraft are not white but cream. You can only see it when on the ramp and the JALs parked next to a normal aircraft then it stands out a mile.
Manc From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 339 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3918 times:
Cheers for that Tony, yeah I had a few goes at editing the JAL from RAW, this edit was taken from LJPG as I shot RAW+JPG so maybe this more like what came out of the camera. I was playing with modes, I usually shoot Shutter Pri, however I was trying Ap Pri around F8 on Sunday to see what the differences are. Still learning the camera but I understand the photo basics.
G-CIVP I think its my workflow on this one, had a change of monitor aswell which hasn't helped, still getting used to it!
G-CIVP From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2001, 1209 posts, RR: 10 Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3913 times:
Manc - My point about workflow was actually a general one. I think it easy to think that certain adjustments in Photoshop is necessary or it is necessary to religiously follow the prescribed opinion on the Forum.
My own opinion is that each photographer has to find what is suitable for themselves by experimenting with their camera and software. Alternatively listen to those in the know, like user 'Lasham' with his advice as he has worked in the photo industry and knows a decent photograph when it bites him on the arse!
BTW, personally I think the JAL B777 is too light but at the end of day, it depends if you are happy with it. It's all a question of taste.
Manc From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 339 posts, RR: 0 Reply 17, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3910 times:
I've only had a DSLR and done photo editing since xmas. however I have been taking photos for a long time. So I am concentrating on learning how to use the new camera functions. Using Photoshop is a new art for me so I have to use the workflows to be able to achieve a standard that this website requires, ie sharpening, dust spots etc. I agree you have to experiment but people on this forum who taken their own time to help me out have certainly speeded up my learning process not only with a DSLR but with Photoshop. I think theres a balance to be struck to optimise your learning
My acceptance rate since going digital is very good, my old photos were scanned prints hence naff quality and not good for this site. I don't post every rejection I have in here, but when I do I look for constructive help so I can learn for next time and hopefully highlight my mistakes to enable others not to make the same one.
At the end of the day its all a question of personal feelings, I can live with that
So any comments on the updated Egyptair further up the link?
Linco22 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1379 posts, RR: 18 Reply 18, posted (7 years 2 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3903 times:
Quoting Manc (Reply 17): So any comments on the updated Egyptair further up the link?
Much better Ian. It looks good on screen here at home. And you seem to be getting along great with your new gear. I'm on the same boat, almost 1 year now since getting my 350D and just had my new 'L' glass a few months. All I can recommend is practice practice practice! Even in the rain!
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2005, 339 posts, 
From Spain, joined Feb 2005, 186 posts, 
so soft or sharp? I think thats probably the main reason for the rejection. I used 1 hit of 500, 0.2 , 0 on this. 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 225 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
){kind=link}
){kind=link}