Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (2H4) — Aviation Photography Forum

Sponsor Message:


My Starred Topics \| Profile \| New Topic \| Forum Index \| Help \| Search

Photo Acceptance - Post Screening (2H4)

2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, RR: 62
Posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3666 times:

AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR

Well, these were all rejected for being soft. Not an uncommon rejection for me, but due to the rarity of these shots, I'd love to be able to fix them (if possible).

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20090827_e1250694216.4518trainyard8-17-2009064retouchedcropfinaljjm.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20090827_s1250693949.9827trainyard8-17-2009039retouchedcropfinaljjm2.jpg

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/rejections/big/20090827_b1250715857.2314m1250693316.4527trainyard8-17-2009116retouchedcropfinaljjm3.jpg

I suspect they might be beyond repair, but welcome any tips or advice. Thanks in advance for any help.

2H4

Intentionally Left Blank

12 replies: All unread, jump to last

Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9463 posts, RR: 72
Reply 1, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3646 times:

AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

They look almost OOF. What were the technical details of the shots?

2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, RR: 62
Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3637 times:

AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 1):
They look almost OOF. What were the technical details of the shots?

First shot:
1/800
f7.1
200mm

Second shot:
1/1600
f5.6
200mm

Third shot:
1/1250
f5.6
105mm

All taken with a D50 and the Nikon 18-200 VR lens.

2H4

Intentionally Left Blank

Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9463 posts, RR: 72
Reply 3, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3631 times:

AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

There is no need to shoot with a shutter speed so high, especially with marginal glass like the 18-200. You should be shooting in Aperture priority, with the Ap set to f/8. This will solve your constant 'soft' problem.

2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, RR: 62
Reply 4, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3629 times:

AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 3):
There is no need to shoot with a shutter speed so high, especially with marginal glass like the 18-200. You should be shooting in Aperture priority, with the Ap set to f/8. This will solve your constant 'soft' problem.

Good tip, thank you. I'm (obviously) still learning...

2H4

Intentionally Left Blank

Clickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9463 posts, RR: 72
Reply 5, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3620 times:

AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

It is a common mistake - and one I learned the hard way (lots of poor shots).

MHO From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 209 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3609 times:

I would suggest moving the f-stop to 8 or 9. That should give you more depth of field and help out with focus and soft spots.

Interesting photos - what's the story here?

It's better to be a little behind than a big ass

2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3577 times:

AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting MHO (Reply 6):
Interesting photos - what's the story here?

I found some fuselages on their way to final assembly at Renton.

2H4

Intentionally Left Blank

Cvervais From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 602 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3548 times:

Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yeah, I also fell victim to the the higher the shutter speed the better mentality when I started. It seemed to make sense, the faster the shutter the less motion would affect the shot so it should be tack sharp right? Well, not so much.

I don't know if it's because the longer shutter speeds let more light in and therefore more detail but, when I slowed things down to 1/800 or below my images started coming alive.

Now, if I could just edit them worth a damn maybe I'd have more on here Big grin

Ruudb From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 163 posts, RR: 6
Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3540 times:

I am not really sure if your problem will be solved by using f8, I have tried an 18-200 and it isn't the sharpest lens Nikon ever produced, especially loads of vignetting in the low end and sharpness is ok till 135mm, so using 200mm on this lens is one of the main causes I think.
You could have better opted for your 180mm lens Wink

2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, RR: 62
Reply 10, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3431 times:

AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Ruudb (Reply 9):
You could have better opted for your 180mm lens

Yes, I considered doing so, but I didn't think I'd be able to hold it steady enough. I didn't have my tripod and also wasn't able to use the ground, as I was standing among thorn bushes. Smile

2H4

Intentionally Left Blank

Ruudb From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 163 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3428 times:

I think the 180 at 2.8 is sharper as the 18-200 on 180 at 5.6 and as I see the shuttertimes you used it would have been not to difficult to do it without VR (kind of understatement Big grin

2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8950 posts, RR: 62
Reply 12, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 3418 times:

AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR

Quoting Ruudb (Reply 11):

Well, I'll chalk this up to having learned the hard way. ashamed

Thanks for the advice, though.

2H4

Intentionally Left Blank

Top Of Page

Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics: