Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
New Photographer, This Phjoto Rejected.  
User currently offlineRidgerunner From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 7 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 2939 times:

I am new to airliners.net and I'm not having any luck with my photos. I would like to hear suggestions on this photo and any advise for dusk, dawn, and night photos. Thank You.

http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...o.main?filename=20071221_N815E.jpg

20 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineClickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9633 posts, RR: 68
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2928 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Hi Travis.

A couple of things

The crop is a little awkward, the missing wingtip on the left side takes away from the shot and the crop is a little loose on the right side.

But, the biggest hurdle you face is the overall quality, your shot is really grainy, soft, and lacking in contrast. A good place to start would be to shoot for a finished size of 1024 pixels wide.

Please browse the database to see the type of quality needed to be successful here.


User currently offlineRidgerunner From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2894 times:

I understand about the cropping, I was wondering if I should give up photos taken before sunrise. I don't know how to make it any sharper with such little light. That seems to elude me. I will keep working on better photos and will try some of my regular daylight shots first. Thanks.

User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3048 posts, RR: 58
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 2891 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hello Travis.

What equipment are you using here - to take the photo and also to edit? I ask because the points Royal raises are key - personally I like the motive you have tried out here with the low light and the moon, but the quality/sharpness etc are just not there.

I would be happy to help out with an edit if you would like - you can contact me via my profile shoudl you wish.

All the best.

Paul


User currently offlineSkydoll From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 34 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2862 times:

I'm new to Airliners.net, too, and this is my first time looking at the photography section, but I think your photo is nice. I like the pink sky and the moon. But I've got a lot to learn as well.

Heather


User currently offlineMichlis From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 737 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2852 times:



Quoting Ridgerunner (Reply 2):
I understand about the cropping, I was wondering if I should give up photos taken before sunrise.

I would suggest on working on getting more experience with taking photos with better lighting. Once you get the knack of proper exposure, then push the envelope.



If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
User currently offlineGuamVICE From Guam, joined Jun 2005, 151 posts, RR: 18
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2843 times:



Quoting Michlis (Reply 5):
I would suggest on working on getting more experience with taking photos with better lighting. Once you get the knack of proper exposure, then push the envelope.

 checkmark 

You will learn, as I have, that any photo worth uploading is a photo in good light. Once you have that apsect grasped, you can be a little more creative  Smile.



The two most engaging powers of a photographer are to make new things familiar and to make familiar things new. ~Thacker
User currently offlineScottieprecord From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1363 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2835 times:

I did a quick edit of your shot, and I don't think it's that far off. I'm with Paul in wondering what equipment you're using, because the lighting and the actual exposure don't seem that bad to me.

Mike


User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1744 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2834 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Scottieprecord (Reply 7):
I did a quick edit of your shot, and I don't think it's that far off. I'm with Paul in wondering what equipment you're using, because the lighting and the actual exposure don't seem that bad to me.

I don't think the blurriness can be saved... this is where some form of IS would have really saved the day. I also see some noise. Was this taken on an SLR or a point n shoot digicam?



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineCalgaryBill From Canada, joined May 2006, 686 posts, RR: 5
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2800 times:



Quoting Ridgerunner (Reply 2):
I don't know how to make it any sharper with such little light.

Did you use a tripod?

B


User currently offlineRidgerunner From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2776 times:

II took this with my digital Minolta, a 6 mega-pixel. I took this on the way out to get the plane ready, so I didn't have a tripod with me. I will say I'm much better at flying than taking pictures. I do take a lot of snap shots out the window, and never thought about sending any into this website until talking to a few friends (non-photographers, just aviation enthusiast) I do have a 35mm film camera too. That might help too and a lot of reading and looking at this site would go a long way to improving my pictures. Thanks to everyone for all the good information and I will be checking back in after the holidays. Travis.

User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2771 times:



Quoting GuamVICE (Reply 6):
any photo worth uploading is a photo in good light.

Nonsense. I have many uploads taken in bad light.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1744 posts, RR: 10
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 2762 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Ridgerunner (Reply 10):


II took this with my digital Minolta, a 6 mega-pixel. I took this on the way out to get the plane ready, so I didn't have a tripod with me. I will say I'm much better at flying than taking pictures. I do take a lot of snap shots out the window, and never thought about sending any into this website until talking to a few friends (non-photographers, just aviation enthusiast) I do have a 35mm film camera too. That might help too and a lot of reading and looking at this site would go a long way to improving my pictures. Thanks to everyone for all the good information and I will be checking back in after the holidays. Travis.

An SLR? Or was it one of the little Z cams? The 6mp Z3-5 have terrible noise response unfortunately, even with the help of antishake (which they had) at ISO 100. Definitely too may pixels on that one.

Remember to keep Antishake on in low light conditions and use as wide of an angle as you can - if you can keep the shutter speed around 1/50 to 1/8 you should be able to get something usable.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineRidgerunner From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 2736 times:

The camera is a Minolta Dimage Z-6. I'm sure my 35mm film would do much better. I carry the digital around for ease of use and just for snap shots out the window.

User currently offlineViv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 28
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 2698 times:



Quoting Ridgerunner (Reply 13):
I'm sure my 35mm film would do much better.

It would, but you would then have the problem of scanning the negatives into your PC. Flatbed scanners are not really able to do this with the required quality.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1744 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2678 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Ridgerunner (Reply 13):
The camera is a Minolta Dimage Z-6. I'm sure my 35mm film would do much better. I carry the digital around for ease of use and just for snap shots out the window.

For the love of god make sure you keep the antishake on!  Wink It'll really help you in these low light situations. But if your exposure time goes over a second, it won't help and you'll need a tripod.

Also try to keep it at ISO 50 or 100. You need to keep your noise down as much as possible.

What do you have for a 35mm? Canon? or Nikon?

Quoting Viv (Reply 14):
It would, but you would then have the problem of scanning the negatives into your PC. Flatbed scanners are not really able to do this with the required quality.

It's all in the scanner operator. And, well, a good scanner with digital ICE helps. I've scanned many a slide and neg on my Epson 4490. For an inexpensive scanner it produces really good scans.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineRidgerunner From United States of America, joined Dec 2007, 7 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 2674 times:

My 35 mm film is a Minolta. My scanner is a Epson V100, a flatbed scanner that can scan negatives too. I seem to have good luck with my digital camera in normal lighting. I think I will spend some time practicing with exposure in different light situations. I might have some time off to go practice soon, then I will try again. Thanks.

User currently offlineUSAir_757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 996 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2642 times:



Quoting Dvincent (Reply 15):
It's all in the scanner operator.

Not true with flatbeds. I've tried many, they are meant for prints are quite simply unable to produce high-quality scans of film. If you lay the slide film directly on the glass without using the "adapter" you get rainbow patterns all over the place, and if you use the "adapter" you get out-of-focus/doubled images.

Dedicated film scanners on the other hand still can produce as good of results as digital (if not better depending on the scanner, film and operator)



-Cullen Wassell @ MLI | Pentax K5 + DA18-55WR + Sigma 70-300 DL Macro Super
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1744 posts, RR: 10
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2640 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting USAir_757 (Reply 17):
Not true with flatbeds. I've tried many, they are meant for prints are quite simply unable to produce high-quality scans of film. If you lay the slide film directly on the glass without using the "adapter" you get rainbow patterns all over the place, and if you use the "adapter" you get out-of-focus/doubled images.

I've scanned dozens of negs on my flatbed Epson with little trouble, but I admit it's not the same as using the ole drum or a Minolta Dimage film scanner.

Digital ICE really helps, though.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlineUSAir_757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 996 posts, RR: 8
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2626 times:

Got some examples? I'm open to being proven wrong...


-Cullen Wassell @ MLI | Pentax K5 + DA18-55WR + Sigma 70-300 DL Macro Super
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1744 posts, RR: 10
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2619 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting USAir_757 (Reply 19):
Got some examples? I'm open to being proven wrong...

Nothing aviation related, I'm afraid, but here's a good example.



Scaled down a bit for the web, but it wasn't bad for an ISO 100 Fuji slide with my old manual focus Yashica. The worst problem is grain but today's software makes that negligible. It's not something I'd make a huge print of, but it's very serviceable.

I used to do film scans as part of the print I used to do. Now I'm out of that business, and I won't disagree with you about true film scanners being the best, but a good (read, not $100) flatbed with a good transparency handler (such as the Epson Perfection 4490) and Digital ICE can scan slides or film for good results.

[Edited 2007-12-22 14:44:07]


From the Mind of Minolta
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...
Would This Be Rejected For Motive? posted Thu Sep 21 2006 20:47:41 by San747
New Photographer List posted Mon Aug 7 2006 17:54:21 by Skidmarks
Congrats - New Photographer posted Tue May 23 2006 09:42:25 by TransIsland
New Photographer On A.net: Tim Lucas posted Thu May 11 2006 04:04:56 by DLX737200
Why Was This Photo Rejected? posted Mon Apr 3 2006 19:07:00 by Bravo45
New Photographer, Help With Rejects, And Questions posted Sun Oct 16 2005 17:40:33 by Cadet57
Which Lense To Go For? (New Photographer) posted Tue May 3 2005 03:22:40 by 9VSRH
Would This Be Rejected For Bad Personal.? posted Fri Mar 25 2005 06:08:12 by JumboJim747
Will This Be Rejected For Bad Motive? posted Sun Nov 14 2004 13:43:12 by Dahlgardo
New Photographer Upload Help posted Fri Nov 5 2004 04:12:59 by Mdl21483