Apache From Czech Republic, joined May 2006, 55 posts, RR: 1 Posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1650 times:
Hello there,
I just got two shots rejected and I want to appeal, but I thought I'd ask for your thoughts first.
1. Reject reason: quality, oversharpened. Personally, I do not see a significant marks of being oversharpened and can't imagine what the quality issue is.
2. Reject reason: category, distance. Regarding distance I have to say that I did try to crop the shot bit more already but it looked so ugly that I kept it as you can see. Category I chose for this one is PROP as IMO this is single engine propeller aircraft although it has not fixed wings. I also searched DB for this type before upload and most of shots are PROP category.
Dvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1719 posts, RR: 12 Reply 1, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1638 times:
Pavel,
on your first one the quality issue may come from chromatic aberrations (fringing) at high contrast areas such as the nose of the aircraft which has a visible magenta aberration. Also the cockpit windows. As far as oversharpen... check the logo on the tail. Also where the stabilizer joins the tail.
What software do you use, out of curiosity? There are easy ways to eliminate these with the right package.
I can't help on the last one, that's for screeners to clear. ÂÂ
Ketko2 From Slovakia, joined Sep 2006, 103 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1632 times:
The first one, I agree with Dvincent, you can see overhsharpening marks on the nose, and also the sky seems to be grainy to me... As for the second one, I think, it is too high in the frame, therefore there is a lot of space around...
Acontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1392 posts, RR: 33 Reply 3, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1624 times:
Hi Pavel,
On the first one, Dan is pot on.
On the second one, you need to get rid of all that empty space front/back of the...hhmm...aircraft (?), and you need to select HELICOPTER instead of PROP, and additionally PRIVATE.
Hope it helps .
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
Apache From Czech Republic, joined May 2006, 55 posts, RR: 1 Reply 4, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1601 times:
Hi Dan,
you're right with chromatic aberration. I really missed it as the shot was made with older lens . Hopefully there is no need to correct chromatic aberration for shots I made with new one . So that means no-go for appeal to it. I did rework this one from a scratch; you can see the outcome here:
Dvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1719 posts, RR: 12 Reply 5, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1597 times:
Quoting Apache (Reply 4): It should be OK by now I hope.
I still see the sharpening problems, though the CA is gone. You might want to try selective sharpening. What are you using to process your photos?
Apache From Czech Republic, joined May 2006, 55 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1590 times:
Hello Andres,
On the second one, I can try to crop it more but as I wrote before I personally like it more this way.
Quoting Acontador (Reply 3): On the second one, you need to get rid of all that empty space front/back of the...hhmm...aircraft (?), and you need to select HELICOPTER instead of PROP, and additionally PRIVATE.
If selecting HELICOPTER category is the way to make it accepted I will do so but this machine definitely is not a helicopter. Autogyro is a type of rotorcraft (a category of heavier-than-air flying machines) so helicopter is. Huge difference between these two types of rotorcraft is that autogyro is characterized by a free-spinning rotor in contrast to helicopter. That is the reason why I would not ever describe autogyro as helicopter.
Regards,
Pavel
I live the way I type - fast and with a lot of msitaeks.
Apache From Czech Republic, joined May 2006, 55 posts, RR: 1 Reply 7, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1589 times:
Quoting Dvincent (Reply 5): I still see the sharpening problems, though the CA is gone. You might want to try selective sharpening. What are you using to process your photos?
Primary I use Adobe Lightroom and Neat Image. Where you think it is still oversharpened, pls? Maybe I need new display as I really can't find it now (or I am blind ). Thanks
Regards,
Pavel
I live the way I type - fast and with a lot of msitaeks.
Dvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1719 posts, RR: 12 Reply 8, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1588 times:
Quoting Apache (Reply 7): Primary I use Adobe Lightroom and Neat Image. Where you think it is still oversharpened, pls? Maybe I need new display as I really can't find it now (or I am blind ). Thanks
You're getting edge artifacts when exporting out of lightroom. It's most evident in high contrast borders, such as the border of the stabilizer to the wing. Notice there's extra dark halos surrounding the edges. It's because Lightroom's resize on export stinks (trust me, I dealt with this same issue). If you export full size from Lightroom and resize down in another application such as Photoshop CS3, you will get a much cleaner output. Here's an example of the problem. Complete with zoomed in samples.
Or compare these two images, one was downsized on export from Lightroom, the other was exported at full size, then downsampled in Photoshop and saved out.
Specifically, look at the horizontal stabilizer and the border between the tail and the sky. Or look at the engine nacelles. Or the titles. Anywhere that there is a high contrast border you will see strange doubling artifacts.
You will get a much cleaner result by exporting full size from Lightroom, downsampling to the final size, and then selective sharpening in Photoshop by using layers to scrub out over sharpened areas by erasing or using layer masks. Adobe has yet to fix this or at least give us an option to turn it off, which is highly irritating.
Acontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1392 posts, RR: 33 Reply 9, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1583 times:
Hi Pavel,
Unfortunately, we don't have (yet) a special category for autogyroes, so for the time being they are categorized under the HELICOPTER umbrella, which kind of makes sense as they do not produce lift with wings but with a rotor, just like a helicopter, irrespectively if the rotor is motorized or not.
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
Apache From Czech Republic, joined May 2006, 55 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1578 times:
Dan,
Thank you a lot for such a comprehensive suggestion. As I read what you wrote and as I look at shots you posted I am more and more confident that I can’t see the problem on the display I use. I have 19” CRT @ 1280x1024 and those pics of Lufthansa’s A340 seems pretty same to me.
Regards,
Pavel
[Edited 2008-01-02 14:08:09]
I live the way I type - fast and with a lot of msitaeks.
Apache From Czech Republic, joined May 2006, 55 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1574 times:
Hi Andres,
Quoting Acontador (Reply 9): Unfortunately, we don't have (yet) a special category for autogyroes, so for the time being they are categorized under the HELICOPTER umbrella, which kind of makes sense as they do not produce lift with wings but with a rotor, just like a helicopter, irrespectively if the rotor is motorized or not.
I do understand it perfectly and have to respect it for sure. Please understand my previous post just as explanation why I did not use that category before. Please apologize me if it sound too offensive. BTW I already reworked it as you recommended and upload it to the queue. Thank you.
Dvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1719 posts, RR: 12 Reply 12, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1573 times:
Quoting Apache (Reply 10): Thank you a lot for such a comprehensive suggestion. As I read what you wrote and as I look at shots you posted I am more and more confident that I can’t see the problem on the display I use. I have 19” CRT @ 1280x1024 and those pics of Lufthansa’s A340 seems pretty same to me.
Open them up in something that can zoom in to about 400% and you'll see the difference. It's less eminent on a CRT monitor than an LCD (my editing monitor is a CRT) but it's there. Here's my Lufthansa. Look at the edge between the tailfin and the background, or the horizontal stabilizer. You'll see the extra artifacts.
It gives it a ragged appearance that only gets exacerbated when you do your normal sharpening routines in PS. I had a lot of oversharps until I figured this out. Resizing algorithms play a big key in keeping detail preserved and LR's falls short. Which makes no sense since it's an adobe product.
Acontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1392 posts, RR: 33 Reply 15, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1477 times:
Hi Pavel,
It wasn't me this time ! This one has a bit too much contrast (look at the wheels, they are fully black as much as you cannot distinguish any detail, or the too white nose), and it needs a touch more sharpening in some areas (but watch out wing trailing edges and stabs leading edges, they are just about to become oversharpened).
Hope it helps .
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
Apache From Czech Republic, joined May 2006, 55 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1449 times:
Hi Andres,
may I kindly ask you to take a look at the re-edited shot, please?
I did apply bit more sharpening and bit less contrast as you recommended. This shot was taken under very specific light conditions and you are definitely right about too white nose. But even less contrast will make picture IMO dull and no outstanding details will be visible on the landing gear after all (as it's overshadowed by wings). This is one of my most favorite shots I made during my stay at Lanzarote so any advice how to make it accepted would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Pavel
I live the way I type - fast and with a lot of msitaeks.
Acontador From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1392 posts, RR: 33 Reply 17, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 1438 times:
Hi Pavel,
Contrast is better, but it's still soft. I'd say a 100-200% 0.2 USM pass, and some careful erasing and then selective sharpening should do it. Just apply that and upload with a comment to then screeners on what you did to improve your first edit.
Good luck!
Just sit back, relax and have a glass of Merlot...enjoy your life!
Apache From Czech Republic, joined May 2006, 55 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (5 years 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1404 times:
Hi all,
I just want to render thanks to all of you who take patience with less experienced photo editors like me as your aid, advices and opinions help me to take a step forward in my post-processing skills. Specifically my thanks belongs to Andres Contador and Dan Vincent. And because one of the shots we were discussing in this thread before was just accepted I can celebrate achievement of 50th shot in the DB.
Sponsor Message: 
From Czech Republic, joined May 2006, 55 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1719 posts, 
From Slovakia, joined Sep 2006, 103 posts, 
From Chile, joined Jul 2005, 1392 posts, 
. Hopefully there is no need to correct chromatic aberration for shots I made with new one 
). Thanks
! This one has a bit too much contrast (look at the wheels, they are fully black as much as you cannot distinguish any detail, or the too white nose), and it needs a touch more sharpening in some areas (but watch out wing trailing edges and stabs leading edges, they are just about to become oversharpened).
(as it's overshadowed by wings). This is one of my most favorite shots I made during my stay at Lanzarote so any advice how to make it accepted would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance.
From Italy, joined May 2004, 848 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
