Another Image Quality Question? — Aviation Photography Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

Another Image Quality Question?

Spruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 2156 times:

Hi Folks,

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

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

Wietse From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3809 posts, RR: 57
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2126 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

Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2976 posts, RR: 60
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2114 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]

Spruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2114 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

Spruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2109 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

Spruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2099 times:

Okay,

Here's try No.2

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

Thanks folks, much appreciated.

Spru!

E=Mc2

FoxXray From France, joined May 2005, 359 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2091 times:

Your picture was originally blurry so it is now oversharpened Wink

!

bye

Spruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 2083 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?

Thanks again!

Spru!

E=Mc2

MarkJBeckwith From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 156 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2058 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...

Spruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2048 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

Spruit From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2005, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 2041 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

Wietse From Netherlands, joined Oct 2001, 3809 posts, RR: 57
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2018 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: