Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New Plane For An Airline... This Shot Good Enough?  
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1746 posts, RR: 11
Posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks ago) and read 5125 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hey guys, figured I'd ask if I got it right on this one.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/n101hq.jpg

It's the first ERJ-175 for Republic (USAirExpress) and I was wondering if it had the quality for the DB. It was taken about an hour before sundown and I think the warm light gives it a nice touch but a screener might disagree.


From the Mind of Minolta
13 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3308 posts, RR: 13
Reply 1, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks ago) and read 5114 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Too sharp, and too grainy. Even if you bring down the sharpening, this one may get a quality rejection. Did you sharpen the sky? It looks like you may have.

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
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1746 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (7 years 8 months 2 weeks ago) and read 5102 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 1):
Too sharp, and too grainy. Even if you bring down the sharpening, this one may get a quality rejection. Did you sharpen the sky? It looks like you may have.

I did not in fact. I only did one pass of USM on the fuselage, 50% at 1.2 and I also transparent masked off the cheatlines and the USAir logo. I did not use any noise reduction on the sky. JPEG might be a factor here, I saved at the highest quality but even then it sometimes brings out otherwise hidden sky grain, comparing my TIFF file to the resultant JPEG at 500%. I may have to do some extra noise reduction on the sky to keep that from happening (I usually do very little since I shoot at ISO 100 or 200).

I use a tube monitor (LaCie Electronblue IV), so my "conservative" (at least, I thought it was!) sharpening probably might be too much for an LCD screen. I backed off of the sharpen layer a bit and did some noise reduction on the sky, here's the result.

http://homepage.mac.com/kefkafloyd/.Pictures/n101hq_2.jpg

Thanks for the look Antonis.

[Edited 2007-03-15 19:15:36]

[Edited 2007-03-15 19:18:29]


From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineTransIsland From Bahamas, joined Mar 2004, 2046 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 5016 times:

Sky looks fine here, but the plane is way oversharpened, especially - but not limited to - registration, tail logo and the transition from shadow to sunlight under the wing... major jaggies.


I'm an aviation expert. I have Sky Juice for breakfast.
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1746 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4996 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 681 File size: 318kb

(click for fullsize)

I reprocessed the image from scratch. I backed off sharpening almost completely and did some light spot softens, but the image is bordering on soft to me now on my LaCie. I'm looking at it on my laptop and I can kind of see where rev2 could be oversharp but if this is the line to tread it's pretty baffling. I do PS for a living for print and these lower resolution (by comparison) web files have a much smaller margin for error, apparently, especially across monitors.

Maybe a 1280 wide resolution would help? It seemed to make a difference for this shot in the DB of the same aircraft (but it had a test reg at the time) which I was using as a comparison target for sharpness on the color scheme.

Again, thanks for the input. It's much appreciated.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineSilver1SWA From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 4844 posts, RR: 26
Reply 5, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 4992 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Dvincent (Reply 2):
I only did one pass of USM on the fuselage, 50% at 1.2

I suggest trying .2 or .3.



ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
User currently offlineFlyingZacko From Germany, joined May 2005, 583 posts, RR: 6
Reply 6, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 4886 times:

Quoting Silver1SWA (Reply 5):
I suggest trying .2 or .3.

Yup, 1.2 is way too much.

Cheers,
Sebastian



Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1746 posts, RR: 11
Reply 7, posted (7 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 4838 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting FlyingZacko (Reply 6):

Yup, 1.2 is way too much.

That's the amount I was using on the high-res image which I then downsampled to upload. 1.2 on a 300DPI 7x6 isn't all that much. I sharpen and then downsample, perhaps I should do it the other way round? Saving downsamples for last is generally the way we do in prepress. I did that with the latest one and only used a tiny amount of USM. Maybe that's the way I'll go now. Thanks for the help.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1746 posts, RR: 11
Reply 8, posted (7 years 8 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4734 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hey guys, I wanted to say thanks for the help. It did get in. Big grin

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1191427/M



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineFlyingZacko From Germany, joined May 2005, 583 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (7 years 8 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 4723 times:

Quoting Dvincent (Reply 7):
I sharpen and then downsample, perhaps I should do it the other way round?

Sharpening should be done after resizing the image, usually as a last step of post-processing.
Congrats on getting the pic in man.

Cheers,
Sebastian

[Edited 2007-03-24 16:32:45]


Canon 40D + 24-70 f/2.8 L + 70-200 f/4 L + Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineAviator1990 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 82 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 8 months 4 days ago) and read 4622 times:

The link does not show the photo.

User currently offlineAlibo5NGN From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 773 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (7 years 8 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4586 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Aviator1990 (Reply 10):
The link does not show the photo

Yes it does.

Congrats Dan.



It takes knowledge to make a career. It takes wisdom to live a life.
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1746 posts, RR: 11
Reply 12, posted (7 years 8 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 4531 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Sure you guys are clicking the right link? The photos earlier in the thread have since been deleted.

Quoting Dvincent (Reply 8):
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1191427/M

That's the one you should be looking for. If that's not working, then I don't know what to say.

[Edited 2007-03-26 02:35:35]


From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineFly747 From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1497 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (7 years 8 months 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 4508 times:

And the proper way of linking photos...

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Dan Vincent



Ivan


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...
Is This Image Good Enough ... posted Wed Aug 16 2006 14:02:09 by AussieAviator
A Quick "is This Photo Good Enough" Question... posted Sat Aug 5 2006 18:35:32 by Chris78cpr
Panning Shot, Good Enough? posted Tue Jun 20 2006 08:29:14 by GertLOWG
Is This Photo Good Enough? posted Thu Apr 13 2006 08:37:37 by GertLOWG
Do You Think This Is Good Enough To Get Added? posted Thu Apr 6 2006 04:45:54 by Pavvyben
Is This One Good Enough? posted Thu Mar 9 2006 11:27:21 by MarkusB
Is This One Good Enough? posted Sat Aug 13 2005 13:06:47 by FlyingZacko
Is This Really Good Enough? posted Sat Jun 25 2005 19:47:31 by CanadianNorth
Is This One Good Enough? posted Sun Apr 24 2005 00:12:46 by AirKas1
Your Views Re Whether This Is Good Enough. posted Tue Nov 16 2004 22:42:42 by Psych