Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Panning Shot Editing Help  
User currently offlineJavibi From Spain, joined Oct 2004, 1371 posts, RR: 41
Posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3805 times:

Just got this one rejected (quality, blurry, distance):

Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 695 File size: 226kb
Quality, blurry, distance


The tech details: EOS 20D RAW file, focal length 600mm, 1/10 seconds, f4, ISO 400, shot just before sunrise.

I wonder if any of the "PS gurus" out there find it interesting enough to give a go at editing it to try to make it fit into the A.net criteria.

Thanks

j


"Be prepared to engage in constructive debate". Are YOU prepared?
49 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKukkudrill From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 4
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3798 times:

Audacious attempt and all credit to you for trying it but it does look a touch blurry I have to say (as well as jagged in places). Problem is, to deal with the distance rejection you'd have to crop to enlarge the aircraft in the frame and that would only accentuate the blur. I'm no Photoshop guru but I doubt if it can be saved.


Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3787 times:

Quoting Javibi (Thread starter):
Just got this one rejected (quality, blurry, distance):

IMHO, I'd add "level" to this. IMO it was right rejected. It IS blurry, it IS far away, it IS grainy, and looks here a little pixelated, and of course leaning to the right too.

One for the personal collection IMO, it's nice nevertheless, but not up to A.net's standards.


User currently offlineJumboJim747 From Australia, joined Oct 2004, 2465 posts, RR: 44
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3778 times:

J I'm at work so i cant comment on quality here.
But your panning shots are always top notch one of my all time favourites is the emirates at Sydney.
But for distance it does need to be cropped closer.
Cheers



On a wing and a prayer
User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2081 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3766 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

I doubt the salvageability of this one Javier due to the above mentionned reasons. You'd definitely have to crop in closer and that would make it even harder, if not impossible, to correct the blurry and quality issues (for A.net standards).
Gutsy attempt though with 600mm and 1/10s exposure and pretty good result for that combination anyway! Just do some more workout and next time you'll be able to keep the camera perfectly steady. duck 

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3767 posts, RR: 60
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3762 times:

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 2):
It IS blurry, it IS far away, it IS grainy, and looks here a little pixelated, and of course leaning to the right too.

Yes Javier. It's almost side-on. Not only that this is boring, but you should also learn to get sharp photos. And add levels please.

David just read and learn. I think you're not experienced enough to teach photographers like J here...  eyebrow 

Have a try at these pannings, then keep us posted please.



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3762 times:

Deleted because of Tim's beautiful post.




 sarcastic 

[Edited 2006-09-16 12:35:22]

User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 18
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3756 times:

Quoting INNflight (Reply 5):
Have a try at these pannings, then keep us posted please.

Here you go then:
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © David Alfred Eliasson - Reykjavik Spotters



[Edited 2006-09-16 12:17:30]

User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3767 posts, RR: 60
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3747 times:

Comparing a daylight ISO 100 shot to an early morning one at ISO 400 and a 300mm to a 600mm with 1/100th compared to 1/10th isn't the same league, don't you think?

Sorry if this sounds harsh, but you seem to have the need of contributing just about anything.

How valuable is this to tell somebody else the settings for a pan? Another airport, longer distances ( 600mm for an A340 not even full frame, the distance for a light aircraft? Go figure. ), less light, different intentions.

Just my 2c's of course.



Jet Visuals
User currently offline747 4-ever From Sweden, joined Feb 2001, 604 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3739 times:

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 7):
Here you go then:

Just a slight difference in shutter speed...
Honestly, getting sharp results at 1/100 of a plane still on the ground is fairly easy. Shooting landing aircrafts for 1/10 is not.

edit: Guess Florian beat me to it..

[Edited 2006-09-16 12:28:09]

User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 18
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3739 times:

Quoting INNflight (Reply 8):
but you seem to have the need of contributing just about anything.

Can't you stop? You said me to show a pan, that one is the best I've got. What do you think I am? Javier Guerrero 2? I'm me, and I haven't got the experience as Javier has got, but when I give opinions, you are bashing like I don't know what...

xxx


Yeh, because you've got a much better panning shot than I, that means that you may say everything bad about me as you want?


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Florian Trojer Photography



[Edited 2006-09-16 12:34:24]

User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 18
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3739 times:

Quoting 747 4-ever (Reply 9):
Honestly, getting sharp results at 1/100 of a plane still on the ground is fairly easy.

What's wrong with you guys? I haven't got a better shot than this, whats the matter??


User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 12, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3725 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

1/100th is panning now? Wink

I do think Aero145 is entitled to give his opinion on the issues with the shot, no need to shoot him down because he comes off like a goof in his own posts, he is right here.. But the advice about trying it ona different aircraft at 1/60th is hardly helpful.


J, you heard my opinions on the shot. It probably was rejected as a bordercase.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3767 posts, RR: 60
Reply 13, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3714 times:

No need to feel personally attacked there.

I said have a go at these pannings. It's not that easy as you might be able to imagine.

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 10):
What do you think I am? Javier Guerrero 2?

I assume you mean who. And no, definitely not.

Again, how valuable is this regarding the topic of THIS thread?

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 6):
Javier, I'd try 500mm 1/60th with a light aircraft


Anyway... there's a life outside that's calling. Have fun.

[Edited 2006-09-16 12:38:58]


Jet Visuals
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 18
Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3714 times:

Quoting INNflight (Reply 13):
No need to feel personally attacked there.

No need to bash me like crazy then!!!

Quoting INNflight (Reply 13):
I assume you mean who. And no, definitely not.

I mean who? I mean that I'm not an other Javier Guerrero, I'm not able to do as he does, he has been practising longer than I've had a Canon camera!

Quoting INNflight (Reply 13):
Again, how valuable is this regarding the topic of THIS thread?

THIS is not a part of the thread!


User currently offlineINNflight From Switzerland, joined Apr 2004, 3767 posts, RR: 60
Reply 15, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3706 times:

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 14):
Quoting INNflight (Reply 13):
Again, how valuable is this regarding the topic of THIS thread?

THIS is not a part of the thread!

Start a new one then. Suggestion for pannings.

Cya  Smile



Jet Visuals
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2239 posts, RR: 48
Reply 16, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3698 times:

J....
I can give it a go, you have my email address, so send me the RAW file if you want. Although I have to agree, it IS blurry. But lets see what we can do.  Smile
600mm? Did you buy a new lens there?!

Ed


User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 18
Reply 17, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3698 times:

Quoting INNflight (Reply 15):
Start a new one then. Suggestion for pannings.

Florian. I said that this is not a part of the thread:

"Javier, I'd try 500mm 1/60th with a light aircraft"

Where is that post, show me!

Quoting IL76 (Reply 16):
600mm? Did you buy a new lens there?!

OK guys, don't bash me: Ed., I think he added the Extender on the 100-400L and used manual focus.

-Aero145

PS: Gone out, NOT panning, trying out "The Magic Drainpipe", Canon EF 80-200mm f/2.8L.

[Edited 2006-09-16 12:45:44]

EDIT: Sorry Eduard, he couldn't have used the 100-400L+1.4x for that shot, as it was taken at f/4, 600mm.  ashamed 

[Edited 2006-09-16 12:47:21]

User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 18, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 3688 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 17):
Where is that post, show me!

Guess you deleted that, covering your tracks eh Wink

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 19, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3677 times:

Welcome to the kindergarten  Wink


-
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 18
Reply 20, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3666 times:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 18):

Guess you deleted that, covering your tracks eh

Thanks to you.

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 19):
Welcome to the kindergarten

What are you doing here, I thought you were in France.  duck 

[Edited 2006-09-16 13:24:55]

User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4163 posts, RR: 54
Reply 21, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3655 times:

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 20):
What are you doing here, I thought you were in France.

Bienvenue dans la maternelle  Wink



-
User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3064 posts, RR: 58
Reply 22, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3642 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi J.

No Guru here, but I would be more than happy to try my best.

Cheers.

Paul


User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 18
Reply 23, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3629 times:

Quoting PUnmuth@VIE (Reply 21):
Bienvenue dans la maternelle

Why are you welcoming me to the nursery school  confused 


User currently offlineJavibi From Spain, joined Oct 2004, 1371 posts, RR: 41
Reply 24, posted (8 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 3600 times:

Thanks for the help offers to you all, just what I wanted, some e-mails have been sent  Smile

Quoting JumboJim747 (Reply 3):
But your panning shots are always top notch one of my all time favourites is the emirates at Sydney.

Thanks!  blush 

Quoting ThierryD (Reply 4):
Just do some more workout and next time you'll be able to keep the camera perfectly steady

Just for the record, this is not handheld, no way I could do that with the EF 600 f4!  Smile

Quoting IL76 (Reply 16):
600mm? Did you buy a new lens there?!

Nope, I just borrowed a friend's! I plan to get myself an EF 500 f4 in the near future, though  Smile

@David: you had it coming, because (first of all) it seems you did not even read my post. I did not complain about the rejection in any way, I did not even ask for opinions on the shot, I know very well why it was rejected; I just asked for help editing it for A.net. Anyway you jumped in here to criticise my shot (I did have a laugh with your first post). Well, Tim is right when he says

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 12):
I do think Aero145 is entitled to give his opinion on the issues with the shot

but I think you usually come a bit too "aggressive" in many of your posts before you have earned the respect of the forum (if you wish to be like that, cool, but do not complain if people come at you because of it; learn from JeffM  Wink ) It could be a cultural thing though, I know for a fact that Icelanders do not have exactly the same character as Spaniards...

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 14):
I'm not able to do as he does

Maybe you are, just try!  Smile

Regards

j



"Be prepared to engage in constructive debate". Are YOU prepared?
25 Post contains images ThierryD : Oh, well then you've no excuse for messing it up! Thierry
26 Post contains images Aero145 : I'll keep that in mind. And Florian and Tim, please don't bash me for this, I've heard what i have heard, and no need to say more, as I will not be a
27 StealthZ : Keep trying David, whilst IS is a nice tool it is still only that.. There were many outstanding panning shots taken of many subjects before IS was in
28 Post contains images Aero145 : I hope so. Not easy to pan here @ RKV, believe me.
29 Post contains images IL76 : OK, that was difficult, and I'm not sure if mine is actually better than yours. I'm not too satisfied about how the engines and wingroot turned out, s
30 Post contains images Javibi : Well, I think in most aspects it is better, thanks!!! In my experience, at these shutter speeds, you just can't get sharp wings and engines, I blame
31 Timdegroot : I think the sharpening on Ed's version is better. The overall image quality though is not as good. Tim
32 Post contains links Javibi : Is this an improvement? http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...eady/20060908MAD0012ECICFanet6.jpg Thanks j
33 Post contains images IL76 : That's pretty good! I'd accept it. The of difficulty of taking a shot like this outweighs the slight blurriness in my opinion. But don't quote me on t
34 Post contains images Aero145 : Because you, J., have uploaded it and are asking for comments, this time, I may comment. IMO it's too high in the frame, and lacks contrast. It's also
35 Ander : You might be right David, but I believe I'm right if I say I haven't seen a single shot like this in the database. Whether you like it or not it is a
36 Post contains images IL76 :         This coming from someone who needs help calibrating his monitor, can't use a 20D properly, thinks the 70-200 f2.8 LIS is bad and only sho
37 Post contains images Aero145 : I'm amazed that you don't see that! There's less space in the top than in the bottom. Contrast... An other screen here, looks much better. Yeh, it's
38 Post contains images INNflight : " target=_blank>http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...6.jpg Is this my edit? Not sure anymore The upper part shows bare sky, the bottom lights and a
39 Post contains links and images Aviopic : No I was Dumbo, for the very last time "read before.......... " Reaching ignition point Eduard Let's ignore the plook, tried to get some reason in th
40 McG1967 : Whether it gets accepted or not that is one stunning shot Javier.
41 Post contains images Javibi : I'll pass on the easy joke as minorities are easily offended these days. They are gonna find out we are close friends one of these days, Ander Nope!
42 Post contains images Aviopic : Yes...... you never gave me a full size version
43 Psych : I have already spoken to Javier about this, but I think he has done an excellent job editing this shot. He was kind enough to allow me to have a go wi
44 Post contains images Psych : Just for the sake of interest, Javier was kind enough to allow me to play with his image, and this was the best that I could produce - taking account
45 Timdegroot : Your edit is a bit soft Paul. Tim
46 Post contains images Javibi : It was rejected Thank you for your help, everyone! j
47 IL76 : J, Which version did you upload? I remember seeing a version I had not seen in this tread... E
48 Post contains links Javibi : http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0924_20060908MAD0012ECICFanet6.jpg j
49 Acontador : Hi Javier, This is an amazing shot considering how you took it. Would be nice to have it in A.net, but irrespectively if it is or not accepted, the fa
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...
Help With This Panning Shot posted Sat Sep 23 2006 01:59:01 by Flamedude707
Quality Rejection - Panning Shot posted Thu Sep 14 2006 23:59:16 by McG1967
An Acceptable Panning Shot? posted Fri Aug 11 2006 01:44:30 by Bubbles
Photo Editing Help posted Thu Jun 29 2006 09:25:36 by Franzloew
Panning Shot, Good Enough? posted Tue Jun 20 2006 08:29:14 by GertLOWG
Editing Help: Full Size posted Tue Mar 28 2006 18:43:40 by 9VSPO
Panning Shot posted Sun Jan 29 2006 22:56:38 by Tom3
Night Action Shot Rejection Help posted Mon Dec 19 2005 10:12:28 by Javibi
Cabin Photo Editing Help Please! posted Sun Oct 30 2005 13:29:43 by AIHTOURS
Editing Help Please... posted Wed Jul 20 2005 02:00:48 by San747