Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Rejected For Soft : Seeking Opinions  
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 3364 times:

Hy all.
Have today received the following rejection for "soft"  Sad :

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0070419_muso_iberia_a_venezia2.jpg

I'm seeking opinions and possible ways to fix it.
Thanks very much for inputs.

Ciao


Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMonteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 29
Reply 1, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 3356 times:

Hey LIPH!

To me looks to be the back end of the Iberia titles and that centre section of the fuselage... On my shitty monitor I would say salvageable with more selective USM.

Carl



It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
User currently offlineEadster From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 2216 posts, RR: 14
Reply 2, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3326 times:

Quoting Monteycarlos (Reply 1):
salvageable with more selective USM.

Agreed.


User currently offlineLanas From Argentina, joined Aug 2006, 978 posts, RR: 13
Reply 3, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3307 times:

Giovanni

There are some little jaggies on the IB title and on the windows. Be careful there. As Carl said, you should do some selective sharpening, because the cockpit and the shape of the fuselage to the right are soft (if not a tad blurry).
The name 'Ciudad de Ceuta' and the nearby red/grey device (what´s the name for it??? sorry!) might get jagged if sharpened a little more.
Hope it helps.  Smile

Cheers!
Lanas.-



"Faithless is he that says farewell when the road darkens." J.R.R. Tolkien
User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 3278 times:

Ok then,
will try a bit more selective sharpening. Thanks for input by now. If anybody else wants to help is welcome to do it...

Ciao

[Edited 2007-04-19 20:24:40]


Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
User currently offlineBoeingfreak From Germany, joined May 2005, 398 posts, RR: 5
Reply 5, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3255 times:

Hi Giovanni,

Quoting LIPH (Reply 4):
If anybody else wants to help is welcome to do it...

*raises hand*
I'd be interested (contact me via my profile if you want), is the original a RAW or a JPG?

Cheers,
Florian  wave 


User currently offlineLIPH From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3240 times:

Quoting Boeingfreak (Reply 5):

Hey Florian,
what's up ?
I'd be grateful if you can give it a try. I'll contact you via your profile and give my "other" e-mail address.
Thanks a lot.

Ciao



Life sucks. Then you die. Live fast, die young.
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 7, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3218 times:

That's a great shot. Just shows how silly the sharpness rules on this site have become.


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineMonteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 29
Reply 8, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 3204 times:

Quoting Viv (Reply 7):
That's a great shot. Just shows how silly the sharpness rules on this site have become.

Agreed, I am basically having to fork out stacks of money now on a new monitor because on the two that I have I simply can't edit to the required standards without asking someone who has a cinema screen how it looks.

Its good from a photographic standards perspective but bad for the amount of shots that might miss out purely because they can't be edited up to that standard.



It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1976 posts, RR: 7
Reply 9, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3178 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Giovanni, it's a very nice shot, hope it makes it through in the end... A little soft around the cockpit windows which is strange because the nose looks sharp enough. Was it a case of selective sharpening gone a bit awry  Smile ?

I personally hadn't had a 'soft' rejection in a while, and then got two in one hit:

http://www.myaviation.net/search/pho..._search.php?id=01019219&size=large
http://www.myaviation.net/search/pho..._search.php?id=01019218&size=large

Any opinions, guys?

Giovanni, sorry for butting into your thread like this, but I just don't see any sense in opening another one on the same subject...

Cheers,
Andrei


User currently offlineMonteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 29
Reply 10, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3175 times:

Quoting Chukcha (Reply 9):
Giovanni, sorry for butting into your thread like this, but I just don't see any sense in opening another one on the same subject...

Makes the case stronger for a generic 'Opinions Please' thread...  Wink

Quoting Chukcha (Reply 9):
Any opinions, guys?

I think more hits of USM over the whole aircraft could be used here... Seems a little blown out but i think the USM should fix it. Did you already re-try submissions and re-edits?



It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
User currently offlineChukcha From Australia, joined Mar 2006, 1976 posts, RR: 7
Reply 11, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 3172 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

[b]Monteycarlos[b/], thanks for the reply!

Quoting Monteycarlos (Reply 10):
I think more hits of USM over the whole aircraft could be used here...

Which one? I agree, the Learjet could use some USM, but the Yak seems just one little step from 'oversharpened'.

I actually did just that - gave some USM to the Learjet and a little selective USM to the Yak and re-uploaded them a couple of days ago, but I'm just not sure about the results...


User currently offlineStil From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 345 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 3159 times:

Quoting Lanas (Reply 3):
what´s the name for it??? sorry

It's not about photography, but there will be no need to open a thread on Tech/ops. It's a Static Port. It measures static pressure of the air.

Stil



....... Gueropppa! ......
User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 13, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3136 times:

Quoting Monteycarlos (Reply 8):
Its good from a photographic standards perspective

Actually it's not. There isn't a magazine photo editor in the world who would insist on sharpness to the Anet extent. But when the Anet standards for photographic acceptance are being set by someone who is not a photographer, it is not surprising that some of those standards are rubbish.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineMonteycarlos From Australia, joined Mar 2005, 2107 posts, RR: 29
Reply 14, posted (7 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3106 times:

Quoting Viv (Reply 13):
There isn't a magazine photo editor in the world who would insist on sharpness to the Anet extent. But when the Anet standards for photographic acceptance are being set by someone who is not a photographer, it is not surprising that some of those standards are rubbish.

This is true, but I would argue that the standards set by this site are the reason why it is so successful. Most people know that if they go to a.net to check out some photos that they will be of excellent quality. And lets not forget the differences between print quality and web quality.



It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
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...
Rejected For Soft... Please Help! posted Tue Jan 31 2006 10:34:07 by PipoA380
Rejected For Crop; Opinions Needed posted Wed Apr 4 2007 22:52:08 by AC773
Rejected For Baddistance....opinions? posted Tue Sep 14 2004 04:11:24 by Sleekjet
Twice Rejected, First Soft Than Oversharpened posted Wed Mar 7 2007 15:48:40 by KLM772ER
Rejected For Personal? posted Wed Jan 17 2007 08:09:21 by LOCsta
Rejected For Motive? posted Wed Dec 27 2006 19:08:46 by LIPH
Rejected For 'People' posted Tue Dec 19 2006 22:38:32 by Chukcha
Rejected For Motive - Why? posted Sat Dec 16 2006 01:56:03 by Acontador
Rejected For Quality posted Tue Nov 21 2006 16:54:07 by Acontador
Rejected Photo - Soft posted Tue Sep 26 2006 21:26:00 by Lanpie