Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Rejection For Quality  
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 2604 times:

Had this one rejected for quality.

What is wrong with it, quality-wise?

Thanks in advance to all who respond.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...ns/big/20070308_060906hbiysv5s.jpg


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2238 posts, RR: 48
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2588 times:

How much did you crop? Looks like a major crop, and the quality (sharpness, sharpening artifacts) suffered from it.

User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2587 times:

Quoting IL76 (Reply 1):
How much did you crop?

Almost nothing - it's almost full-frame.

The shot was taken at ISO 100, 400m zoom, shutter speed 1/500/sec, aperture f/6.3.

[Edited 2007-03-08 13:54:04]


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineWalter2222 From Belgium, joined Sep 2005, 1302 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2579 times:

Hi Viv,

I like the motiv, but it is maybe better to re-edit it with a smaller size (e.g. 1200x800pix). It looks a bit over-sharpened in some areas (e.g. the door and the water-protection above it), maybe the original was not that pin-sharp? On a smaller size, these smaller quality items will be less visible or disappear completely.

Good luck with the re-edit!

Best regards,

Walter



canon 340d ;-) - EFS10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM - EFS18-55mm - EF28-105mm f3.5/4.5 - EF100-400mm f4.5-5.6l is usm - ...
User currently offlineThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2078 posts, RR: 51
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2570 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SUPPORT

Viv, why upload at 1600x1070 pixels!? For such a size you'll need a top-notch quality shot for A.net acceptance. Your photo, though ok does not have that quality. So as Walter said, resize it to 1025x... and it will look much better. I still fear for a motive rejection though as the crop is a little awkward (engines not fully included but much empty space at the top).

Thierry



"Go ahead...make my day"
User currently offlineIL76 From Netherlands, joined Jan 2004, 2238 posts, RR: 48
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2555 times:

Quoting Viv (Reply 2):
Almost nothing - it's almost full-frame.

Well... It would be handy if you told us what you did to edit it, instead of letting us guess...
But anyway... I see many things that have gone wrong, but they could have been caused by many different editing steps aswell... Looks like a blurry shot that has been oversharpened and blurred with some kind of blurring tool. With JPG-compression to top it up... Not saying that's what happened, but that's what it looks like.

Ed


User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2539 times:

Quoting IL76 (Reply 5):
what you did to edit it

A touch of contrast, sharpening 0.2/500, slight crop, resize to 1600 wide. That's it. No blurring tool.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2532 times:

Quoting Viv (Thread starter):
Thanks in advance to all who respond.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...s.jpg

 rotfl  I love that livery !!! Anyway Viv, like Ed said, it looks like the shots turned out blurry since from the beginning and you tried to improve the quality...I don't know if it could be saved...You could always post the original...Some screener will surely help (hopefully)  Wink.

Ciao



Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
User currently offlineAcontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 30
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2520 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi Viv,

The picture looks definitely like it was very slightly blurry originally, which of course is very apparent in such a motive. There is also a very slight chromatic problem, visible on the wheels and the cockpit frame (maybe part of the blurriness). On the underside of the fuselage, it looks like you tried too much grain reduction (look at the hatch below the second guy).
I don't know which lens you used, but maybe it all comes down to it not working anywhere near its sweet spot! Don't know if all this can be corrected without seeing the original, but looking at this edit I can see the quality rejection.



Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2499 times:

Thanks to all who replied - very helpful.

I think the original was slightly blurred, which is where all my trouble came from.

I will let it go - it's not one of my best efforts - and anyway I have these two:-


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vivion Mulcahy




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Vivion Mulcahy




Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 2495 times:

Quoting Viv (Reply 9):

 rotfl  What a funny livery !!! One of my favourite for sure !!

Ciao



Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
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...
Question For Quality/Blurry Rejection .... posted Sat Sep 16 2006 07:37:03 by TriStar501
Rejection For Bad Info And Quality posted Sun Sep 3 2006 19:50:06 by Coninpa
Rejection For Bad Quality posted Sun Apr 23 2006 12:48:02 by A388
Questions For A Quality Rejection! posted Sun Feb 19 2006 22:03:01 by Bubbles
Help Request For Quality Rejection? posted Sat Jan 21 2006 17:45:46 by Walter2222
Feedback On Rejection For Bad Quality posted Thu Mar 31 2005 15:47:20 by Fultod
Rejection For "Editing" posted Tue Feb 20 2007 00:23:03 by WERNAIR
Rjxn For Quality And Contrast posted Tue Jan 9 2007 00:52:03 by D L X
Risk Of Rejection For "motiv"? posted Sat Dec 30 2006 16:31:53 by Viv
Rejected For Quality posted Tue Nov 21 2006 16:54:07 by Acontador