Flyfisher1976 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 802 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (6 years 6 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1392 times:
Looks oversharpened now....was the original blurry?
The original might have been a touch soft on the winglets and underside, but I don't think it was blurry? Was close to sunset so settings were pretty slow. I thought it was acceptedable per those conditions, but obviously not quite.
The first one was 1 pass at 120,.03, 0 of USM, the 2nd edit had one additional pass of the same and then a 50% oppacity pass at 90%, .02, 0 USM.
Linco22 From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1379 posts, RR: 18 Reply 5, posted (6 years 6 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1355 times:
Hi Kevin,
I think the second shot is better but the tail front edge is a little jaggie and the wings/winglets slightly but I think its fine otherwise. Cracking scheme on that 738 though
Eadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2214 posts, RR: 16 Reply 8, posted (6 years 6 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1326 times:
Quoting Garri767 (Reply 7): i must be the odd one out, but i agree with eadster, looks fine to me
Yeah, I can't see any jaggies that would cause issues. It's a great shot and great colours. If it were me I'd have a good feeling about that shot if it was in the Q.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 306 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2214 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1379 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
