Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Another Image Quality Question?  
User currently offlineSpruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3722 times:

Hi Folks,

Not posted any images for a while, but wanted your comments on this one?

Big version: Width: 897 Height: 567 File size: 247kb


I'm just asking about the general quality and my post processing attempts, it's not going for upload! As some of you know I'm only a beginner at this so go easy on me  Smile

And one more thing, if anyone knows the reg of this aircraft, I took it at East Midlands and it was Don Air 09 but I missed the reg and haven't been back since?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts and comments.

Spru!


E=Mc2
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineWietse From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3809 posts, RR: 55
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3692 times:

Well there are a couple of things wrong here at the moment:

- Size; Crop it further around the aircraft.
- It is rather soft, sharpen some more.
- There is a huge dustspot visible, clone it out  Smile



Wietse de Graaf
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3064 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3680 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hello Spru.

It is not ideal to comment on the quality when we are not looking at the image at uploading size. Obviously the photo you have here is a bit small.

But I certainly agree with Wietse that it currently looks a bit soft. The full sized version (I would recommend 1024 wide) will need to be cropped a lot closer to the aircraft itself - as it stands it would attract a distance rejection, because there is too much dead space around the aircraft. The dust spot is easy to see with the eye - directly above the pilots.

Lighting-wise things look okay, so this may be a goer. If you would like any further help with the edit just say the word.

Cheers.

Paul

[Edited 2006-09-03 15:50:12]

User currently offlineSpruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3680 times:

Quoting Wietse (Reply 1):
- There is a huge dustspot visible, clone it out

Funny you should mention that as I only noticed that once I'd uploaded it to here? I've cloned it out!

Thanks for the comments, will give it a whirl!

Spru!



E=Mc2
User currently offlineSpruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3675 times:

Quoting Psych (Reply 2):
It is not ideal to comment on the quality when we are not looking at the image at uploading size

What would you recommend on size for this type of image?



E=Mc2
User currently offlineSpruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3665 times:

Okay,

Here's try No.2

Big version: Width: 1200 Height: 589 File size: 558kb


So, dust spot removed, sharpened more, size changed!

Thanks folks, much appreciated.

Spru!



E=Mc2
User currently offlineFoxXray From France, joined May 2005, 398 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 3657 times:

Your picture was originally blurry so it is now oversharpened  Wink !

bye


User currently offlineSpruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 3649 times:

Okay,

Taking FoxXray's comments in mind, where do you see this? (I'm not doubting you, just wondering as I only see a bit of blur on the tail?)

Here's try 3

Comments?

Big version: Width: 692 Height: 416 File size: 214kb


Thanks again!

Spru!



E=Mc2
User currently offlineMarkJBeckwith From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 156 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3624 times:

Quoting Spruit (Reply 7):
Comments?

As Paul said in reply 2;

Quoting Psych (Reply 2):
It is not ideal to comment on the quality when we are not looking at the image at uploading size.

So, sorry, but all this is paractically worthless unless you show us the full size version.

Quoting Spruit (Reply 4):
What would you recommend on size for this type of image?



Quoting Psych (Reply 2):
(I would recommend 1024 wide)

Mark.



One day, I might be good at this...
User currently offlineSpruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3614 times:

Sorry folks, I really appreciate your patience whilst I stumble around in the dark!

The images I've uploaded in 2 and 3 are 1024 wide but when I upload them they only display in the 694 range??

Unfortuantely I have no where else to upload them too!

Thanks for your comments on this one, I'm off to source some webspace.

Spru!



E=Mc2
User currently offlineSpruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3607 times:

Hi Folks,

I'm going to give up on this one, I've finally started to see what your all on about!  Smile

I know it's taken it's time!

Next one I take that I think is worthy of your input, I'll upload as usual!

Thanks again for everyones help and advice, as always I appreciate you all taking the time to look!

Cheers,

Spru!



E=Mc2
User currently offlineWietse From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3809 posts, RR: 55
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 3584 times:

Good luck with the next image  Wink


Wietse de Graaf
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Another Photo Request Question posted Sat Nov 11 2006 09:53:23 by Dazed767
Quality Question posted Fri Mar 3 2006 20:25:23 by B076
Another Bad Quality Rejection posted Thu Feb 9 2006 09:09:02 by Viv
Another Badinfo Reject Question - I'm Mystified! posted Tue Aug 23 2005 20:14:42 by MarkJbeckwith
Another Bad Quality Help Post! posted Fri Jul 22 2005 22:00:57 by Rampkontroler
Canon 75-300 Image Stabilizer Question. posted Tue May 24 2005 09:00:27 by Cwaterwo
Yet Another Rejection -badcameraangle Question posted Sun May 8 2005 09:01:03 by StealthZ
Quality Question, Advice... posted Thu Apr 21 2005 02:46:57 by StealthZ
Yet Another Bad Boarders Question posted Sun Apr 17 2005 02:41:05 by Lairyliam
Is (image Stabilisator) Question posted Thu Mar 24 2005 20:33:42 by Gust