Da fwog From United Kingdom, joined Aug 1999, 867 posts, RR: 9 Reply 5, posted (12 years 1 month 10 hours ago) and read 2169 times:
I think one of two things would make this pic work. Either if the wingtip was completely in silhouette, so you were just looking at shapes, or else if there was sunlight falling on the wingtip so we could clearly see the logo. This pic is halfway in between, so doesn't work for me. (But it DOES make me want to fly Air Berlin, just to photograph the wingtips! )
Oh, and definitely remove your logo from the corner of the pic - it totally kills it!
Da fwog From United Kingdom, joined Aug 1999, 867 posts, RR: 9 Reply 10, posted (12 years 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2085 times:
there's something not quite right with your contrast and colours. The whites are so bright they make my teeth hurt, but they don't seem really WHITE, and the colours seem dark and muddy. Perhaps this could be improved by toning down the colour saturation some, reducing the contrast a little, and then tweaking the overall colour balance to either reduce the red a little or increase the blue. If the original is too yellow, this can also be fixed by a boost to the blue element.
looks to me like the problem is a slight lack of crispness. There's already a little grain there, so sharpening is only going to worsen it. I just tried running it through the sharpen filter, and this improves the aircraft, while making the sky too grainy, so perhaps you could mask the sky and just gently sharpen the plane, enough to crisp it up a little, without adding jaggies.
KingWide From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2001, 838 posts, RR: 20 Reply 14, posted (12 years 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 2035 times:
I'm guessing but I think it was rejected for a combination of being too far away and the point of sharp focus being in the wrong place. The plane isn't really pin sharp. If you look at the tarmac in the foreground, it's sharp but you seem to lose sharpness towards the back [unfortunately where your subject is because it's not close enough] of the frame.
I'd expect in those conditions for you to be able to set a really small aperture and get really big depth of field so this wouldn;t be a problem.