Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Posted (2 years 10 months 1 day ago) and read 1470 times:
Have all these photos lined up but wanted to put them all out there for you to tell me what i need to do to make better or any comments. Thanks. (Click on photos to bring up full size)
Hopefully these will look good
Canon EOS 450D, Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS USM, Canon 580EX II
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 4883 posts, RR: 50 Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 23 hours ago) and read 1444 times:
Hi Astro777lover,
Here's my take on these pics:
1. Overcontrasted, dark undercarriage and soft
2. I don't think they like pictures like this.. In any case the plane should be the larger item and more dominating than the traffic lights.
3. Not too sure about what to say but the motiv isn't exactly there. You're shooting half of 4 planes and there's no exact subject, or at least one that could be used as the "plane" when you search it.
4. Sorry, I think it's instant motiv rejection for the stairs, because they aren't part of the plane itself.
5. A bit soft and grainy and the crop doesn't really suit me. I've never tried uploading a pic like this so I wouldn't have a clue.
6. A bit grainy.
7. IMO the best out of this selection. Still not sure about the crop and it could do with a tiny bit more sharpening, ie leading edge.
Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 23 hours ago) and read 1440 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 2): 1. Overcontrasted, dark undercarriage and soft
2. I don't think they like pictures like this.. In any case the plane should be the larger item and more dominating than the traffic lights.
3. Not too sure about what to say but the motiv isn't exactly there. You're shooting half of 4 planes and there's no exact subject, or at least one that could be used as the "plane" when you search it.
4. Sorry, I think it's instant motiv rejection for the stairs, because they aren't part of the plane itself.
5. A bit soft and grainy and the crop doesn't really suit me. I've never tried uploading a pic like this so I wouldn't have a clue.
6. A bit grainy.
7. IMO the best out of this selection. Still not sure about the crop and it could do with a tiny bit more sharpening, ie leading edge.
Thank You for the input, but are you able to show me what you would do to make the photos better in photoshop? I edit them and they look good to me and i would like maybe a side by side view to see what im doing wrong so i don't make the mistake in the future.
Thanks,
Austin
Canon EOS 450D, Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS USM, Canon 580EX II
Cpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4833 posts, RR: 49 Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 23 hours ago) and read 1439 times:
1. I think the light on this one is poor - strong light with dark shadows underneath (too much constrast). Not much you can do here. It also looks a little bit soft around the nose.
2. V. Atlantic and traffic lights: I don't know if that motive really works. The quality itself looks okay, but the motive probably won't be accepted. It'd need the plane closer. Distance rejection here I think as well.
3. Soft / blurry
4. NWA Airbus: Motive rejection for the stairs blocking the plane
5. Soft, maybe quality too - but I like the motive and I'm sure I've seen a similar photo accepted into the database before. This one here isn't sharp enough.
6. Not sure.
7. Needs a kick of sharpness to bring out the detail. Maybe use an alpha channel of the inverted photo on your sharpening layer to prevent excessive sharpening on the bits that don't need it.
Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (2 years 10 months 23 hours ago) and read 1431 times:
Quoting Cpd (Reply 4): 1. I think the light on this one is poor - strong light with dark shadows underneath (too much constrast). Not much you can do here. It also looks a little bit soft around the nose.
2. V. Atlantic and traffic lights: I don't know if that motive really works. The quality itself looks okay, but the motive probably won't be accepted. It'd need the plane closer. Distance rejection here I think as well.
3. Soft / blurry
4. NWA Airbus: Motive rejection for the stairs blocking the plane
5. Soft, maybe quality too - but I like the motive and I'm sure I've seen a similar photo accepted into the database before. This one here isn't sharp enough.
6. Not sure.
7. Needs a kick of sharpness to bring out the detail. Maybe use an alpha channel of the inverted photo on your sharpening layer to prevent excessive sharpening on the bits that don't need it.
Thank you for the advice. The Motive ones i know cant be fixed but the others can. Are you able to show me what you would do to the image if you were editing it, my photoshop skills are not the best and im trying to develop them.
Thanks,
Austin
Canon EOS 450D, Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS USM, Canon 580EX II
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 4883 posts, RR: 50 Reply 7, posted (2 years 10 months 23 hours ago) and read 1426 times:
Quoting Astro777lover (Reply 5): Thank you for the advice. The Motive ones i know cant be fixed but the others can.
Maybe post the original of the first image up here to see if it can be salvageable. I personally don't think it can however. Shooting in RAW gives much more flexibility if you have the hard drive capacity to do so. You could try running the sharpen tool over the main things (like I said, the leading edge of the wing and also the winglet, possibly more. Oh, and I see one more problem with this - level. See the horizon sloping away a little bit? Ideally, this is to be flat and you can probably take a look at the tutorials in the photographer's corner section (very useful) to see how to do this. Comparing your shots to similar ones in the database is another way to do it - look at everything, including the wingtips because they have to be sharp as well.
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 4883 posts, RR: 50 Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 21 hours ago) and read 1413 times:
Ok. First tip (on the BA 772 pic and others you may have from in air) - try out the manual functions on your camera. This way, you have much more control over how the pictures you are taking turn out. By setting it to even P, you are able to change the ISO setting on your camera, allowing the camera to adjust itself for that fact and you will be left with less noise in your pictures. The next step up is Av (apeture priority) - this means having control over your f-stops. The automatic settings set the apeture size to around optimal (depends on the lens) - f/8. Now if you have control over these two settings, the shutter speed will be compensated accordingly and you'll have a much less grainy pic. Take your camera out on an outing and challenge yourself to using the manual modes only. This way you will learn through trial and error what each function does and how to adjust/get good pictures out of the camera.
With the editing, it looks like the VS 744 (on the homepage) has been edited much better than the BA 772. Instead of resorting to the "auto-contrast" button (which gave a similar outcome to what you have posted above), figure out what looks nice with the brightness/contrast function and slide accordingly. The curves function could come in handy too. You should be able to try and match the true colour of the BA livery - not too dark, not too undercontrasted; and also keep an eye on the whiteness of the top of the fuselage at the same time. It's hard to tell if it is acceptable because it's so small. The use of the sharpen tool is necessary to run over the body and maybe again over the extremities of the aircraft.
Due to the original being so soft, it's extremely hard to try and edit but here's something to at least work towards; however it is no benchmark and basically a 2 minute job:
As you can see the titles can be sharpened up a lot. Contrasting could be better..
Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 16 hours ago) and read 1403 times:
Ok, Thank you, I took some of your tips in consideration when editing my next to air shots like that but reviewing them they were a little grainy on the underbelly where the shade was but other than that they looked pretty good. I will just need to practice some more. Yea I shot those air shots on sport mode i think because that was before i got into AV mode and TV mode and M. So now i always shoot usually in AV mode. Thanks again.
Thanks,
Austin
Canon EOS 450D, Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS USM, Canon 580EX II
1. Underside of fuselage is jagged - it has been slightly oversharpened. Also the noise in the shadow of engine #1.
2. No comment - unsure
3. Seems to me like it needs some CW rotation and is possibly slightly overexposed
4. Still low in the frame. Contrast is much better however. But the grain is still there in the shadowy areas. You are improving though, note the changes between the image you tried to upload and the one you have put up for this thread. Some might say a touch more contrast to get the sky looking a little nicer possibly but at least with the new edit, you can read the titles much clearer.
5. I think that window should either be in or out, not chopped down the middle. Nose could be a touch sharper too.
Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Reply 12, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1309 times:
I've seen a lot with CW rotation, and I have no idea what that is. I'm guessing to just level the photo out but not sure. I'll try to edit those photos again and correct what you stated what needed to be changed.
Thanks,
Austin
Canon EOS 450D, Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS USM, Canon 580EX II
Champfence From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 53 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1308 times:
A circular polarizer would deepen the blue of the sky and help with color. It would take some of the glare off of the windows on the blue taildragger. I use one almost always in strong daylight.
Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Reply 14, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1303 times:
Quoting Champfence (Reply 13): A circular polarizer would deepen the blue of the sky and help with color. It would take some of the glare off of the windows on the blue taildragger. I use one almost always in strong daylight.
I have one for this lens but i didn't use it on the day because it actually made the photos worse, i needed to clean in and make sure its working again. On my wide angle the polorizer is really really nice.
Thanks,
Austin
Canon EOS 450D, Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS USM, Canon 580EX II
Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1259 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 15): CW = clockwise rotation
CCW = counter-clockwise rotation. Using the arbitrary rotate canvas function in Photoshop is the way to go to correct this.
Thank you. What photoshop are you refering to with rotate canvas funciton? it on all of them?
Thanks,
Austin
Canon EOS 450D, Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS USM, Canon 580EX II
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 4883 posts, RR: 50 Reply 17, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1238 times:
Quoting Astro777lover (Reply 16): Thank you. What photoshop are you refering to with rotate canvas funciton? it on all of them?
It's a standard feature found under the "image" on the toolbar. I personally use CS2.. Remember that you'll have to recrop the picture once you've rotated it. I think there are some other guides in the tutorials under the photographer's corner which show other methods of leveling.
Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 1233 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 17): It's a standard feature found under the "image" on the toolbar. I personally use CS2.. Remember that you'll have to recrop the picture once you've rotated it. I think there are some other guides in the tutorials under the photographer's corner which show other methods of leveling.
Yea i use CS4 and that feature doesnt work on my system so i use crop function then rotate it to the horizon. I also have Elements 7 and I could go in there and use the leveling button on the side and will do same thing.
Thanks,
Austin
Canon EOS 450D, Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS USM, Canon 580EX II
Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Reply 19, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1133 times:
Good News!
I uploaded the jetblue A320 nose shot and it got accepted!!
Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Reply 21, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 1108 times:
Quoting NZ107 (Reply 20): Nice Job! Let's do it properly:
Thanks NZ107
I dont know how to do that.
Austin
Canon EOS 450D, Canon 70-200L 2.8 IS USM, Canon 580EX II
Stackhouse007 From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 345 posts, RR: 2 Reply 22, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day ago) and read 1101 times:
Astro777lover From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, RR: 1 Reply 23, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 1087 times:
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2008, 212 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 4883 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4833 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
