Derstatic From Sweden, joined Aug 2007, 49 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 6 months 1 day ago) and read 2037 times:
Another week, two more rejections. I'm determined to make it here but need some help from better photographers than me to make it to the next level.
I had this one rejected for blurry. With this picture I have done levels and some selective sharpening on parts of the body, mainly on the tail section, but also on the logos and windows. I can't see the blurryness myself so I ask people with better trained eyes. http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...20071124_Kastrup071031_036_JB5.jpg
This one has been up before, it was rejected for borders, which I fixed after having it explained to me on this forum. Then it passed #1 screening and I got my hopes up only to have it rejected for contrast and quality in #2 screening. What can I do about it? If anything... And what is a quality rejection? Is it just the picture is just not attractive enough but there's no more obvious flaw too it like blurry or jagged. Of all rejections the Q one annoys me the most because it doesn't say WHAT is wrong, just that something possibly minor is.
Some help please. I try to learn and atleast I think my work improves all the time, just not enough yet.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2968 posts, RR: 60 Reply 4, posted (5 years 6 months 18 hours ago) and read 1951 times:
Hello Joakim.
I think the problem with the Star Alliance MD is less a depth of field issue - f/8 will be fine - and more that you have a slight blur in the image. This is pretty common when you take a photo of an aircraft either coming towards you or - as in this case - going away from you. In these cases there can be small differences in the relative speeds of the subject - it all is a bit complicated but I remember IL76 giving a technical explanation once in the Forum. Though minor it can be enough to create slight blur that will not get past the screeners - and cannot be compensated for by sharpening. You can end up with two rejection reasons - oversharpened and blurred, which can confuse some. I think this is apparent in much of the rear half of this aircraft. My guess is your focusing point was towards the front of the plane.
So the whole of the tail area or empennage is very slightly blurred. As regards the others, it is best to post them at full size to give the best clarity. But both looks very tightly cropped on the right and the SAS looks very slightly low in the frame too.
Regarding the BA shot - I think the quality here is a combination of relatively small problems - slight sharpening deficit; lighting not great; contrast a little off; again maybe a slight blur in places. It can be a 'bucket' category for small imperfections that may not in themselves warrant a 'full' rejection on their own.
But I think you are getting close. Keep up the good work.
Cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, RR: 44 Reply 5, posted (5 years 6 months 8 hours ago) and read 1909 times:
What you could try in those cases where some parts are in focus, and others are not is to selectively unsharp mask the blurred areas, or even try reduce noise in Photoshop CS3.
Derstatic From Sweden, joined Aug 2007, 49 posts, RR: 0 Reply 6, posted (5 years 6 months 1 hour ago) and read 1877 times:
Thank you Cpd and thanks for the extensive answer Psych.
I will try some more selective usm, I do it already but it perhaps can do with some more. If I'm careful with the jaggies and erase the grain it causes there might be a chance.
I only have an upload limit of 2 so which one should accompany the updated Spanair? The SAS or the Malev?
Sponsor Message: 
From Sweden, joined Aug 2007, 49 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 626 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2968 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4879 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
