Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Quality Blurry Soft Oversharpened?  
User currently offlineAndrei From Russia, joined Jan 2001, 70 posts, RR: 2
Posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3363 times:

Hi!
Excuse, but I understand nothing, how can be photos very sharp and soft simultaneously. What for delirium?! The photo is not pleasant, write simply - QUALITY and all all problems are solved. What for in such a way to show the not competence. What you screnners if cannot define a sharp photo or soft Wink Double standards turn out. It is ridiculous  Smile
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r.../20061203_Ural154_app14L_85374.jpg
Well and how to me to correct this photo? I do not know what to do in such cases... Because, that I have not made, it only will make quality worse. If you cannot define a sharp photo or not then do not peep delirium and do not show the nonprofessionalism.Excuse for my sharp tone, but I am amazed by such characteristic of this photo Wink


Good luck!
24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3358 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

No seems a bit blurry to me and oversharpened to compensate.

Might be a good idea to change your agressive tone as well, we don't appreciate that much around here.

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2237 posts, RR: 49
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3358 times:

Your shot is blurry, which you tried to compensate by oversharpening. However the picture still looks soft, with jaggies in some areas (cockpit and fuselage) and softness in other areas (the titles for example). The oversharpening also created grain and the picture is covered in purple fringing.

BTW, you might want to change your tone. You should be lucky I even reply here, I'm sure that after reading your post most other screeners won't even bother.

greetings...
E

edit: Tim beat me to it...

[Edited 2006-12-04 12:08:20]

User currently offlineGranite From UK - Scotland, joined May 1999, 5568 posts, RR: 64
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3335 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi

Quoting Andrei (Thread starter):
Well and how to me to correct this photo? I do not know what to do in such cases

Get the image in focus to start with and there will be no need for sharpening to overcompensate for the blurryness. Make sure your lens is set for automatic focussing. That should do the trick.

Regards

Gary


User currently offlineCosec59 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3332 times:

Well well. The first 3 replies from 3 different screeners.
I guess the moral is, if you want a response from the screening team, take an aggressive tone.  Wink  mischievous 


User currently offlineLanas From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 978 posts, RR: 13
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3306 times:

Quoting Andrei (Thread starter):
The photo is not pleasant, write simply - QUALITY and all all problems are solved

I don´t agree with this particular statement. The 'quality' rejection is so vague, that I think it´s better when you get pointed out where your photo has gone wrong.
In this case, yes, the pic was blurry (out of focus, actually) and you tried to compensate that with the sharpening. It happens. Practise your shots better and you´ll soon get them into the DB. It´s a nice picture, despite all. A nice aircraft in a nice environment.  yes 
I agree with everyone: keep the tone down. You´ll receive friendlier replies and also more people willing to help. It´s also a question of respect, in this case for the screeners. This line comes to me now: "Take the high road and others will follow".  optimist 

Cheers!
Lanas.-



"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens." J.R.R. Tolkien
User currently offlineKukkudrill From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3269 times:

Quoting Lanas (Reply 5):
The 'quality' rejection is so vague, that I think it´s better when you get pointed out where your photo has gone wrong.

Indeed kudos to the screener for checking the other rejection reasons instead of just ticking quality and moving on to the next photo.

Quoting Lanas (Reply 5):
"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens." J.R.R. Tolkien

"But let him not vow to walk in the dark, who has never seen the nightfall."

That man could write.



Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
User currently offlineAndrei From Russia, joined Jan 2001, 70 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3240 times:

Unfortunately I can not correct my the first topic, I do not have button EDIT. Therefore I apologize everyone whom has offended. Simply me shocked the formulation to rejected photos. First time at me is rejected with photos for absolutely opposite reasons. More my 10 photos are published in commercial aviation magazines Airliner World and Air Way. And not to time nobody has rejected I wash photos on quality. Will agree there editors professionals who understand as is much better, than here. It is commercial magazine and photos only the first-rate quality are necessary to them. Therefore to me always was strange, that here on an ordinary site of aviation photos such fanatical attitude to quality, WHAT FOR YOU SUCH SUPER QUALITY. Well for WHAT??? For me always was first of all the photo, an interesting foreshortening, the rare plane or the airport, and then quality is interesting. Still time excuse for rough tone  

[Edited 2006-12-04 19:55:54]


Good luck!
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 21
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3218 times:

Andrei, sorry, but your tone hasn't really changed.  sarcastic 

User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3213 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 8):
Andrei, sorry, but your tone hasn't really changed.

Indeed. Don't expect a reply next time from the screeners, who you insult in both posts. The hard truth is that your shots is technically poor. Accept it and don't blame others.

Tim

btw, our standards are much higher than the aviation magazines, so we do know what we're talking about.



Alderman Exit
User currently onlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2069 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3195 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 4):
I guess the moral is, if you want a response from the screening team, take an aggressive tone.

Exactly what I thought when I read the thread!  Wink

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineAndrei From Russia, joined Jan 2001, 70 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3164 times:

I certainly badly speak on English, but... I HAVE apologized. But nobody wishes it to see. To you is insulting to hear it, I understand you, but... I have written the truth. I began to discuss a situation which anybody up to me here did not discuss. That quality which you demand on a free-of-charge site simply is not necessary. What for, answer me, you need such quality? Can you sell these photos? No, then what for? I cannot distinguish quality of photos which you have rejected also what you have published. On this site there are photos of frankly bad quality, but you publish them. WHY? And that that at you here the quality standards yours than in commercial magazines... Excuse, but it is ridiculous. Everything, I shall not answer any more in it topic. If you do not like criticism, can remove this theme.


Good luck!
User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3162 times:

Quoting Cosec59 (Reply 4):
I guess the moral is, if you want a response from the screening team, take an aggressive tone.

Exactly!! I was just thinking that. Next time I require help, I know how to go about it!

Andrei, Just because your pics were in magazines, doesn't mean they automatically get accepted here. Magazines and the world of Anet are two totally different things. Your shot was rejected and rightly so. It's not on par with anything that gets accepted today and no matter how much editing one does to it, its not going to ever come up to scratch. Just take it on the chin. And have a better go at getting the shot in focus next time.

Secondly, I can't understand why screeners reply to bogans like this when there are genuine people in the forums with genuine questions that go unanswered.


User currently offlineCosec59 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3161 times:

Quoting Eadster (Reply 12):
Secondly, I can't understand why screeners reply to bogans like this when there are genuine people in the forums with genuine questions that go unanswered.

Those people are polite too.


User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 14, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3151 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

As far as I know Eduard, Gary and me have always been very active on the forum answering questions, so these comments aren't very fair. I

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineCosec59 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3146 times:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 14):
As far as I know Eduard, Gary and me have always been very active on the forum answering questions,

Can't deny that Tim and it's appreciated.
However, to see the first 3 replies in the thread coming from the screeners, is unusual.


User currently offlineAndrei From Russia, joined Jan 2001, 70 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3132 times:

I have become angry, because at me have rejected photos for absolutely incompatible reason soft and oversharpened... As so can be? These are the opposite reasons. It is good, if you professionals, instead of talkers, make this photo so that it have accepted. Prove, that it can be corrected. Because to speak always it is easier, than to make.
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r.../20061203_Ural154_app14L_85374.jpg



Good luck!
User currently offlineCosec59 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3130 times:

Quoting Andrei (Reply 16):
if you professionals, instead of talkers, make this photo so that it have accepted.

The impossible we can do immediately. Miracles may take a little longer


User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 18, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3125 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Of course a shot can be soft and oversharpened at the same time! Ever heard of selective sharpening?

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3121 times:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 14):
As far as I know Eduard, Gary and me have always been very active on the forum answering questions, so these comments aren't very fair.

I take it that you were referring to what I said here?

I know that you and Gary are active in the forums and have helped me many times. What I'm trying to say is that its take you and Gary 2 goes to say to this guy that it ain't gonna make it and each time, he's basically said that no is not an option.

My point I was trying to make is that others are willing to listen, take notes and improve. Maybe spend the time with them instead of pushing crap uphill with people than won't help themselves.

Please don't take it the wrong way. Your help is appreciated by those that do listen

[Edited 2006-12-04 23:48:41]

User currently offlineTimdeGroot From Netherlands, joined Apr 2002, 3674 posts, RR: 64
Reply 20, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3121 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Eadster (Reply 19):
My point I was trying to make is that others are willing to listen, take notes and improve. Maybe spend the time with them instead of pushing crap uphill with people than won't help themselves.

I agree, but every time I read threads like this my hands start burning Smile

Tim



Alderman Exit
User currently offlineAero145 From Iceland, joined Jan 2005, 3071 posts, RR: 21
Reply 21, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3109 times:

Quoting Andrei (Reply 16):
because at me have rejected photos for absolutely incompatible reason soft and oversharpened...

Look pal. If your photo is soft and a little blurry, you sharpen it, so it becomes oversharpened, it's soft in places, and oversharpened caused by blurriness. It's that simple. I had problems with that once, now I just know how it works.

Maybe not the best explanation, but I hope you understood.

If mistaken, please correct me, 'experts'. But please no bashing. flamed 


User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 22, posted (7 years 8 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3102 times:

Quoting TimdeGroot (Reply 20):
I agree, but every time I read threads like this my hands start burning

As do mine mate, but seriously, if they don't get it the first time I guess they never will...


User currently offlineAndrei From Russia, joined Jan 2001, 70 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (7 years 8 months 10 hours ago) and read 3044 times:

It is very a pity to me, that I so have led myself at this forum Sad I was malicious on a deviation of my photo for the ridiculous reason. Forgive me, I in the further shall be always very correct in the estimations and expressions Sad Excuse me for roughness Sad If it is possible, a moderator, remove this theme. And still, thanks everyone who, even on my rough tone, tried to help me. I am very grateful to you Smile


Good luck!
User currently offlineAndrei From Russia, joined Jan 2001, 70 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 2976 times:

Well here and result  Smile From 10 photos have accepted no one!  Smile If so then excuse, but it is last photos which I have sent you.
It is more on this site you will not see my new photos. I wish you all good, super-experts  Smile



Good luck!
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...
The Soft/Oversharpened Dilemma... Again posted Tue May 30 2006 13:24:56 by Edoca
Quality And Soft? posted Sun May 21 2006 13:18:22 by Interpaul
Quality Blurry Rejection - Advice Please posted Mon Mar 20 2006 09:37:20 by UA935
Quality Soft/Oversharpened? posted Thu Nov 30 2006 16:38:08 by Alibo5NGN
Quality Motiv Editing Soft Dark? posted Thu Oct 12 2006 17:11:33 by Mario340
Oversharpened And Soft? posted Wed Oct 4 2006 18:37:36 by AIRBUSRIDER
Soft And Oversharpened? posted Wed Aug 23 2006 22:26:07 by CRAviation
Help - Oversharpened Versus Soft? posted Sun May 21 2006 12:11:38 by Frippe
Soft/Quality Rejection Help Pls posted Sat Mar 11 2006 18:40:32 by Muchswatch
Rejection Post-mortem: Quality And Blurry? posted Sat Feb 18 2006 16:55:01 by D L X