ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2032 times:
Hey, guys!
Wanted to ask for some advice on a few shots. A couple of them have already been asked about here, but I looked at them all again recently, and re-edited quite a bunch.
I have four shots to share with you.
Let me know if you think they are of a.net standards, and if not, what I can do improve them.
Also, here's the link to the homepage those shots came from, if anyone's interested in seeing some of my other aviation shots and quite a few non-aviation shots. My Website!
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
JeffM From United States of America, joined May 2005, 3266 posts, RR: 53 Reply 1, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2028 times:
AirMalta From Malta, joined Mar 2006, 394 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2022 times:
No1
looks like Jeff said 'soft'however pay attention since you might jag the titles by overharp it but need slight sharpness also I would try to use the curves to darken a little bit.Need around .6 CW rotation
Eadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2214 posts, RR: 16 Reply 3, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2019 times:
3 and 4 forget - too much in the way of much of the aircraft.
1 & 2 don't totally write off. Might be some chance there, although the 767 has a "boxed in" feel with those buildings in the foreground and 2 will get motive because you've cut the wing tip off for no real reason. Will have to rework if possible.
Quoting AirMalta (Reply 2): however pay attention since you might jag the titles by overharp it
AviatorG From St. Lucia, joined Apr 2005, 263 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (6 years 6 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1946 times:
1st shot would have been excellent to pan. Nice way to try blur out the buildings in the foreground. I would also have included the winglet on #2 (BA).
ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1885 times:
Thanks, guys. I have scrapped those four photos by taking into account a combination of everyone's advice.
Here's another shot. For some reason I am unable to upload to my profile, so I have already put this one in the queue. I am quite confident that it will be accepted since it was taken with identical settings as the other GVA shot from the same day.
Is there anything blatantly wrong with it?
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
Acontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1392 posts, RR: 33 Reply 7, posted (6 years 6 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1868 times:
Hi Antonis,
Don't want to be pessimistic, but I think your picture as shown will not be accepted. There are already 46 pics of this particular reg/aircraft in the DB, and your picture (besides any motive problems) looks slightly blurry/soft Just have a look at the engine cowlings and the wording below the ".com" and you will see what I mean. Additionally, the upper nose section looks overexpossed (but this could be addressed), and along the upper fuselage (the spine?) of the plane you can see a slim light blue line which doesn't belong there. Finally (and strangely enough), look at the base of the fin (where orange meets white) and where the gate meets the aircraft, I see some slight jaggies.
Sorry for that, but I think it is better for you to get the details so that you can work on these on your next pic!
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Reply 8, posted (6 years 6 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1863 times:
Thanks for the advice guys. I will pull the picture and post another edit attempt later tonight. I have to run right now.
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Reply 9, posted (6 years 6 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1828 times:
Hey guys. I have pulled the EasyJet shot.
I have submitted another edit of it, plus another shot. There are things in each one I'm still worried about, but here they are.
This one is the one I asked about earlier. I re-cropped it to include the entire aircraft. Things that concern me are: centering, level, exposure.
This is a new image. The things that worry me here are: centering, level, exposure. The taxyways and runways are GVA are naturally slanted, and I used the verticals in the buildings in the background to level this one. I'm just afraid it doesn't "look" level and that it may hurt me for that reason.
Thanks for any advice you can give me.
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1788 times:
Sorry to seem picky. I normally don't bump threads (especially my own) but I would like to get some feedback so as not to further hurt my acceptance ratio and so that I don't submit shots that can be approved in ways I have not thought of.
Thanks a million!
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
Forget about acceptance ratios - thats not what photography is all about. Who cares if the ratio is great or not - doesn't make you a bad photographer does it? Of course not.
The aircraft at the gate, I don't know. Even though you have included everything there, its very lopsided. It's an un-easy crop to me.
The other looks ok. Maybe a little soft but seems ok at a quick glance.
ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Reply 13, posted (6 years 6 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1778 times:
Thanks, guys. Consensus seems to be that the first one will die the centering death, so I'll pull it.
Garri, do you think the overblown whites are a major enough problem to warrant a re-edit? Some more Shadow/Highlight? Also, is the shot level? The taxyway seems to give a different horizontal than the buildings do, but it might just be my eye. What do you recommend?
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, 
From Malta, joined Mar 2006, 394 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2214 posts, 
From St. Lucia, joined Apr 2005, 263 posts, 
From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1392 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
