Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Night Arrival, Acceptable?  
User currently offlineKLM772ER From Germany, joined May 2006, 615 posts, RR: 18
Posted (7 years 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 2009 times:

Hello!

I just browsed through some old shots again and found this one:

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/OO-DLVenghaus1.jpg

I know, I tried to upload it in summer but it was rejected for grainy, soft and oversharpened, but now with enhanced editing technics I got a lot better result!

The shot was taken when it was almost complete dark, but this way creating a nice effect with the tail and the engine illuminated.
What do you think does the current version stand a chance or is it still to grainy/soft/oversharpened or anything else?

Cheers
Bjorn

16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineBubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1196 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1997 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi Bjorn

This image is actually blurry, I think. It will be quite hard to make it acceptable.

_Hongyin_


User currently offlineKLM772ER From Germany, joined May 2006, 615 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1918 times:



Quoting Bubbles (Reply 1):
This image is actually blurry, I think. It will be quite hard to make it acceptable.

Thanks Hongyin,

but I think it is probably a result of using noise reduction in this case as the original is not blurry..
I will remove it from the queue, but probably give it another try and post the result here if I find time today, as I see it as a challenge making this one acceptable  Wink
and I think it is possible, and if not, at least I had fun in trying  Wink

Cheers
bjorn


User currently offlineAcontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1421 posts, RR: 30
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1884 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi Bjorn,

Nice one! I think you're right with

Quoting KLM772ER (Reply 2):
it is probably a result of using noise reduction

When overdone, it makes pictures look blurry and soft, as it tends to remove too many pixels from the 'edges' of high contrast areas (for example, around the fuselage of a silhouette shot), thus leaving that impression. If the original is not blurry, maybe you can try another edit and post it here for discussion?



Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
User currently offlineAirbus340 From Spain, joined Dec 2000, 130 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1838 times:

In my opinion...for dusk/night shots either you use ISO 800/1600 (Very grainy) or you'll have a blurred photo...any help on how to take a fast action at night or dusk?

Airbus340


User currently offlineKLM772ER From Germany, joined May 2006, 615 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1830 times:

Quoting Airbus340 (Reply 4):
In my opinion...for dusk/night shots either you use ISO 800/1600 (Very grainy) or you'll have a blurred photo...any help on how to take a fast action at night or dusk?

Have a very staid hand and do some good panning


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Bjoern Venghaus



shots of moving planes at complete night are probably "almost" impossible...

cheers
bjorn

[Edited 2007-11-29 11:07:13]

User currently offlineAirbus340 From Spain, joined Dec 2000, 130 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 1823 times:



Quoting KLM772ER (Reply 5):
Have a very staid hand and do some good panning Wink


What a great shot! What ISO did you use?


User currently offlineKLM772ER From Germany, joined May 2006, 615 posts, RR: 18
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1795 times:

Here is the new version.. I think it is a bit sharper regarding the fuselage but thus for maybe a little more grainy at the DHL logo and the engine.. don't know if it is acceptable...
What do you think?
Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 683 File size: 313kb

BTW What Reg. should I upload it as I was not able to get it in the dark??
I know that it is OO-DL* would this be ok?

Airbus340, the LH MD11 was taken at ISO250  Wink

Cheers
Bjorn


User currently offlineBubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1196 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1790 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER



Quoting KLM772ER (Reply 7):
What do you think?

I still think it's soft.

Quoting KLM772ER (Reply 7):
I know that it is OO-DL* would this be ok?

Yes.

_Hongyin_


User currently offlineKLM772ER From Germany, joined May 2006, 615 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1784 times:



Quoting Bubbles (Reply 8):
I still think it's soft.

Which part exactly do you mean, as I am careful with sharpening these kind of pictures as I most time got a oversharpened rejection for them..  Wink
But what about the grain, would this still be ok or?

thanks
Bjorn


User currently offlineBubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1196 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 1782 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi Bjorn

Would you mind sending me the original shot? I would like to take a look.

Email address: bubbles@airliners.net.

_Hongyin_


User currently offlineKLM772ER From Germany, joined May 2006, 615 posts, RR: 18
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 1772 times:

you have got mail Hongyin  Wink

Bjorn


User currently offlineBubbles From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 1196 posts, RR: 51
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 1748 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi Bjorn

Just like I said previously, the plane is blurry (out of focus). I attach the 100% crop plane's nose and tailfin in this message.

Big version: Width: 693 Height: 462 File size: 160kb
Blurry Nose
Big version: Width: 450 Height: 600 File size: 164kb
Blurry Tailfin


There seems no way to fix blurry problem like this.

Regards
_Hongyin_


User currently offlineKLM772ER From Germany, joined May 2006, 615 posts, RR: 18
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 1723 times:

Ok, I ll keep it for me than!

I thought that maybe for not so common shots the standards are bit lower and thought the result I got wasn't that bad  Wink

Trying to get it sharper next time!  Wink

Thanks all!
Bjorn


User currently offlineJavibi From Spain, joined Oct 2004, 1371 posts, RR: 41
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 1684 times:



Quoting KLM772ER (Reply 5):
shots of moving planes at complete night are probably "almost" impossible...

Impossible is nothing  Smile

Check this out, for example:
http://homepage2.nifty.com/k-yagix/photos_2007/photos_2007.html

Regards.

j



"Be prepared to engage in constructive debate". Are YOU prepared?
User currently offlineAirbus340 From Spain, joined Dec 2000, 130 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 1632 times:



Quoting Javibi (Reply 14):
Quoting KLM772ER (Reply 5):
shots of moving planes at complete night are probably "almost" impossible...

Impossible is nothing Smile

Check this out, for example:
http://homepage2.nifty.com/k-yagix/photos_2007/photos_2007.html

Regards.

Well...looking at those photos I can finish saying..."practice makes perfect". Of course, the bigger the diameter of the lens, the better light will go in, shortening the exposure time, making the plane not "shake". An image stabilizer is an other help but these lens cost $$$$$$$!
Airbus340


User currently offlineKLM772ER From Germany, joined May 2006, 615 posts, RR: 18
Reply 16, posted (7 years 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1591 times:



Quoting Javibi (Reply 14):
Impossible is nothing Smile

I know:
Big version: Width: 1024 Height: 683 File size: 342kb


But I have to admit, that the quality isn't as good as I would love it to be  Wink

Cheers
Bjorn


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...
Are These Acceptable? posted Tue Nov 27 2007 14:08:40 by Airbus340
Two Shots From City - Acceptable? posted Fri Nov 16 2007 12:48:00 by Metroliner
Amateur At Night Photography (LAX) posted Mon Nov 5 2007 16:19:05 by Crashxn2me
My First Night Shots, Are They A.net Worthy posted Fri Nov 2 2007 14:51:30 by Ehvk
Night/Dawn/Dusk Cat On A Rejection posted Thu Nov 1 2007 12:10:24 by BO__einG
Acceptable? posted Sun Oct 14 2007 19:53:32 by CYEGsTankers
Airport Night-Shot Help posted Fri Oct 12 2007 20:33:20 by Ordwaw
Night Shot - Worth A Try posted Thu Oct 11 2007 10:54:36 by Stefan171288
Acceptable "motive"? posted Mon Oct 8 2007 05:48:11 by MarkusB
More Night Catagory Clarification... posted Thu Sep 20 2007 02:52:22 by LOCsta