JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4735 posts, RR: 8 Posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 1429 times:
Hi all,
My last post about this shot didn't get much response as I couldn't get the image to work properly and I asked people to view it from my profile. Bit of a ball-ache!
Well here's a slight re-edit. I don't normally ask for opinions like this but I've had to do a lot of cropping (lens wasn't powerful enough to get as close as I'd have liked) and aren't sure on this crap monitor whether it's sharp enough.
Metroliner From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2007, 1058 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 1388 times:
Hey Karl,
It's not a bad shot, however there is a lot of general clutter in the image which detracts from it somewhat - the traffic bollards, the blast fence in the background and the shrubs at the bottom are examples. As you can also see by the jagged edges at areas of hgh-contrast (like the paint scheme curve on the nose, the white borders around the registration, and the 'crunchy' edge of the tail) it is also somewhat oversharpened.
The cure is not easy - and, though it might be salvageable, it might also take an awful lot of work. It's annoyingly in that boundary zone between being fine and just lacking that last kick of quality. However, as you say, it was rather speculatively taken with a long lens fro a substantial distance...
There are many tutorials on photo editing available. I suggest running through workflows and seeing what works for you. I am currently combining two separate ones, although I have yet to test them by submitting one, you can see my results in a contemporary thread...
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4735 posts, RR: 8 Reply 4, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 1384 times:
Yeah, the clutter was unavoidable but it'll be fine so long as it doesn't block any part of the aircraft. Just have a look at the many shots taken at MAD (in the DB) where the clutter is actually worse.
The nose indeed looks a touch oversharpened and maybe the tail has been blown out ever-so-slightly but on my screen it still looks sharp. With only one other pic in the DB taken at Barajas (from a totally different angle) I though this might have a chance.
Metroliner From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2007, 1058 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1365 times:
Quoting JakTrax (Reply 4): as it doesn't block any part of the aircraft
That's a fair point
Quoting JakTrax (Reply 4): With only one other pic in the DB taken at Barajas (from a totally different angle) I though this might have a chance.
Well, it's in the queue, so I guess we'll see - we both have photos in the queue around the same time, we can crack open a virtual bottle of champers if it all goes to plan...
It might still be worth re-editing to pre-empt an oversharpening rejection, especially since it obviously means a lot to you and is technically fine. Like I said, there's not much in it.
Either way, it's a decent image, so best of luck with it!
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4735 posts, RR: 8 Reply 6, posted (5 years 4 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 1362 times:
Thanks. It means a lot because I imagined getting an image of this aircraft from not so far away. We were driving from the 33 ends (after shooting the morning there) to the mound at Barajas and we just missed it taxiing right past by about two minutes. Of course, when it taxied out for departure it was much further away. Damn!!
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4735 posts, 
From Germany, joined May 2005, 398 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
