Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4538 posts, RR: 26 Posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2242 times:
How does it look? Also, does the fact that the flaps were being set causing motion blur during the long exposure eliminate any possibility of acceptance?
Thanks.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4538 posts, RR: 26 Reply 2, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2184 times:
Hmm...thanks. I'll wait for more input.
Anyone else??
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
LIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2175 times:
Quoting Silver1SWA (Thread starter): Also, does the fact that the flaps were being set causing motion blur during the long exposure eliminate any possibility of acceptance?
ThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2021 posts, RR: 52 Reply 4, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2173 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SUPPORT
Mark's right; the picture looks overall soft, especially the engine nacelle and nose area. Might be saveable depending on the original. I'd be very interested in knowing your camera settings for this shot.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2968 posts, RR: 60 Reply 5, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 2149 times:
Hello again Ryan.
That is an excellent photo you have there - lovely colours and overall quality.
I would agree that the blur of the flaps isn't an issue at all for me - rather, it actually enhances the image, giving a visual description of the 'activity' of the moment. But I do feel the edit does have areas of slight softness which may focus the screeners' eye. Key areas are the engine cowling, cabin windows, flightdeck area and the forward thin yellow stripe.
I would hope that can be improved in editing - if you would like me to have a go with the original feel free to get in touch.
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4538 posts, RR: 26 Reply 6, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 2132 times:
Quoting ThierryD (Reply 4): Mark's right; the picture looks overall soft, especially the engine nacelle and nose area.
Quoting Psych (Reply 5): But I do feel the edit does have areas of slight softness which may focus the screeners' eye. Key areas are the engine cowling, cabin windows, flightdeck area and the forward thin yellow stripe.
How does this edit look? I just gave an extra punch of sharpening to the same file. Thought I would try that before doing a completely new edit. Any better?
Quoting LIPH (Reply 3): but it looks a bit blurry to me...
Well, I didn't use a tripod. I just propped it up on a belt-loader. LOL This was the sharpest of the series of 3 that I took, so I thought I'd give it a try here.
Quoting ThierryD (Reply 4): I'd be very interested in knowing your camera settings for this shot.
10.0 sec, f/8, ISO 100.
[Edited 2007-03-12 10:22:48]
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
Aussie18 From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1611 posts, RR: 10 Reply 7, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2119 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW PHOTO SCREENER
Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 6): How does this edit look? I just gave an extra punch of sharpening to the same file. Thought I would try that before doing a completely new edit. Any better?
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4538 posts, RR: 26 Reply 8, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2115 times:
Thanks. However, I decided to do another edit anyway, this time I tried for a larger size. I want to say it came out a little better as a larger picture. Am I mistaken?
ThierryD From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2021 posts, RR: 52 Reply 9, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2095 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SUPPORT
Larger one (last edit) looks quite ok; a little more selective sharpening along the passenger windows and nose section and you should be ok.
Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 6): Quoting ThierryD (Reply 4):
I'd be very interested in knowing your camera settings for this shot.
10.0 sec, f/8, ISO 100
Your settings confirm my suspicion of a high aperture; next time try f/11 or even higher if you have the necessary time as this will render the light sources much nicer.
Taken at f/20:
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4538 posts, RR: 26 Reply 10, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2067 times:
Quoting ThierryD (Reply 9): Your settings confirm my suspicion of a high aperture; next time try f/11 or even higher if you have the necessary time as this will render the light sources much nicer.
Thank you. I'll give it a try tonight.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4538 posts, RR: 26 Reply 11, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 2053 times:
Alrighty, here is my new uploaded version. Final thoughts before I leave it in the hands of the screeners? Thanks.
UnattendedBag From United States of America, joined Oct 2003, 2240 posts, RR: 1 Reply 13, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 2021 times:
Silver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4538 posts, RR: 26 Reply 14, posted (6 years 2 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 2008 times:
Quoting EK20 (Reply 12): It's too grainy. Why don't you at least reduce the image size to 1024 pixels?
1. after trying 1024 (see my first two edits), I thought it came out well as a larger picture. Sometimes, when reducing all the way down to 1024, jaggies appear before sharpening is applied. This makes it difficult to sharpen the image enough without getting jaggies. I felt it was a reason why my first try was so soft.
and,
2. I took this as an indication the larger size would be ok...
Quoting ThierryD (Reply 9): Larger one (last edit) looks quite ok; a little more selective sharpening along the passenger windows and nose section and you should be ok.
Anyway, I have about 3 edits in this thread already. Can I get a poll indicating which one I should upload?? lol
Thanks.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4538 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1611 posts, 
From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, 
From Luxembourg, joined Dec 2005, 2021 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2968 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3771 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
![_](javascript:compressPost('271930','2','1','7','Aussie18','" target=_blank>http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b3...b.jpg 2nd one looks better.','')){kind=link}
){kind=link}