EGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1700 posts, RR: 14 Posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 2556 times:
Third time lucky, with advised proper thread title, and ask for your advice on editing the following shots...
1) Red Arrows at EGTE. Levelled using wings and was told about a red colour cast...? I'm still fairly new to editing so what is colour casting and how can I improve the shot enough to stick it in the queue?
2) Concorde at MAN... Told leading edge of wing was oversharpened...? Which wing?
3) BA 747 at SYD
4) Qantas 747 at SYD
5) Trident at MAN
6) BA 757 at MAN
7) Same BA 757 at MAN
Your help and advice on editing these shots to an acceptable standard would be greatly appreciated, and I hope the mods see fit to keep this thread live. Thank you.
Yes, there seems to be a pretty severe color cast. See below for my partial attempt it from the right side.
As for level, I suggest using any horizontal/vertical lines in the background. In this case, they would suggest you need a little CW rotation (especially the verticals). You can always just leave it as is and see what the screeners think (but fix the color).
Quoting EGTESkyGod (Thread starter): Concorde at MAN... Told leading edge of wing was oversharpened
Both.. especially the right wing. Jaggies visible along the nose too.
Best of the lot quality-wise, just needs a little brightening, and seems to suffer from compression too, but that could just be how you're saving it/uploading it. Motive probably is ok, but can't say for sure.
Also better with the quality, but the lighting conditions make for hard work in the editing. If it were me, I'd go with the first one. There are a few things that need fixing up (color, CA, etc..), and it looks like it's suffering from some compression again, but it's probably fixable.
It seems that the case with your earlier shots is that they were taken with a camera that unfortunately wasn't up to the task. I see that you switched to a K10D recently, and that the quality of your shots correspondingly went up. Nearly all of my shots on a.net were taken with a K10D, so the camera is certainly capable enough. If you need help editing, let me know, as I've obviously had plenty of experience working with your camera. If you have the original files (raw/.pef/.dng preferable) I'd be happy to take a look and help you through the process.
EGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1700 posts, RR: 14 Reply 2, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 2538 times:
Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 1): I see that you switched to a K10D recently
Not quite... I borrowed my Dad's for the day at Manchester. Last week I bought a Canon 500D so will be using that in future, just using some old shots to practice editing. The earlier shots you mentioned (No's 1, 3 and 4) were taken with a bog standard Konica Minolta Dimage Z6 and is probably the reason for the lower quality.
I have to admit, of the ones above I'd most like to see No 5 uploaded (front on shot of 757)...
Are you sure you didn't accidentally post the picture you showed in your first post? they look very much alike, but in any case there is still a huge red color cast.
I just played a bit with the levels, both as a whole and then just the red... messed around a little bit until I came up with the above... what do you think I should do?
Conoramoia From Ireland, joined Oct 2007, 498 posts, RR: 2 Reply 7, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 2501 times:
Set a black point on the wheels and as stupid as it may sound I'd set a white point on the line on the nose.
I don't think levels will do the trick...You can add more blue which should neutralise it...but you should work it and compare to dlowwa's edit if your not sure.
AirKas1 From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 3853 posts, RR: 57 Reply 8, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 2494 times:
I just tried to fix your color cast in PS, but it didn't work. If you had a RAW file it might be possible to fix it, but otherwise I don't think this particluar photo can be salvaged.
Cvervais From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 602 posts, RR: 3 Reply 9, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2486 times:
Charlie,
Regarding your colour casts, have you calibrated your display lately? If it's not properly calibrated you might not see a colour case but, when those of us with calibrated displays looks at it there's a very clear colour cast.
EGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1700 posts, RR: 14 Reply 11, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 2464 times:
Quoting AirKas1 (Reply 8): I don't think this particluar photo can be salvaged.
Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 10): I'd have to agree. It'll be pretty difficult to fix with just the Jpeg.
That's fine, no worries... like I say, I am just playing around and editing what photos I do have before going and using my new camera to get the better photos. I guess what I'm really asking is "How's my editing?"
I don't really mind if the Red Arrows doesn't make it to be honest... but the 757 at MAN...
Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 10): The BA 757 looks better, but still has a few issues, most notably the color is still off.
OK, how can I improve the colours? And with a bit of play, do you think I could potentially get this picture uploaded?
Thank you all for your advice, I appreciate it and will even more so if I can add to my solitary picture in the database!
Charlie.
PS, Yes my monitor is calibrated, I just clearly didnt take enough of the colour cast away!
Don't worry too much about colours... when I first started uploading last year, I had a horrible time with colour casts with my first dozen or so shots. Once you get an eye for it, it gets easier. You'll just need to play around with them and compare your shots to others... no easy/instant fix really...
Quoting EGTESkyGod (Reply 11): do you think I could potentially get this picture uploaded?
The only way I could give you a more definite answer would be to see the original, and as myself and others have mentioned, a RAW file would be preferable. You can contact me through my profile if you want to send me the original, and I'll have a look and see if it's worth trying to come up with a better edit.
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2975 posts, RR: 60 Reply 13, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2457 times:
Charlie.
My feeling is that the BA 757 head on shot is a pretty good edit overall - the problem you have, as I mentioned in the other thread - is the direction of the lighting. You just have too much contrast in this photo, because of the backlighting, and I think that means the screeners will not be satisfied come what may. Backlighting is not necessarily an automatic rejection, but it has to add to the photo somehow. In this example of a common aircraft on the database, it simply presents too many issues - very dark shadows in too big areas and highlights that are almost burned out on the fuselage.
Now your Trident tail is very nicely exposed and the lighting is right for you there - I think you should easily be able to get that one accepted. If you want any help just ask. The difference in quality in the photos above due to the different cameras is really evident - not your fault.
Cheers.
Paul
P.S. The Concorde problems is the wing on the left as we look - notable jaggies - easily resolved. Also I agree something went badly worng with your Reds photo and it has had it, I am afraid. The colour temperature/white balance is wrong in the original.
EGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1700 posts, RR: 14 Reply 14, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2454 times:
Quoting Psych (Reply 13): My feeling is that the BA 757 head on shot is a pretty good edit overall
Thank you.
Quoting Psych (Reply 13): the problem you have, as I mentioned in the other thread - is the direction of the lighting. You just have too much contrast in this photo, because of the backlighting, and I think that means the screeners will not be satisfied come what may. Backlighting is not necessarily an automatic rejection, but it has to add to the photo somehow. In this example of a common aircraft on the database, it simply presents too many issues - very dark shadows in too big areas and highlights that are almost burned out on the fuselage.
Based on this, (and the original I will post below) is it still worth tinkering with in an effort to please the mods?
Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 12): The only way I could give you a more definite answer would be to see the original, and as myself and others have mentioned, a RAW file would be preferable.
Original Image...
Quoting Psych (Reply 13): Now your Trident tail is very nicely exposed and the lighting is right for you there - I think you should easily be able to get that one accepted. If you want any help just ask. The difference in quality in the photos above due to the different cameras is really evident - not your fault.
I thought the Trident tail was the best, but I think there are already quite a few tail shots in the database and didn't want it to be rejected for that reason.
Quoting Psych (Reply 13): The Concorde problems is the wing on the left as we look - notable jaggies - easily resolved
Easily resolved? If I start again with the edit and don't sharpen the nose and wings so much, this would make it in?
EGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1700 posts, RR: 14 Reply 15, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2425 times:
Wish me luck... have included the Trident in the upload queue...
Psych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 2975 posts, RR: 60 Reply 16, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2422 times:
Charlie.
I have re-read my post and should have added a few key words - I think the Trident is a good shot with a little reworking of the edit. The lighting is excellent, but I think it can look even better if you address a few elements of oversharpening (jaggies where the blue of the tail meets the white of the fuselage and also the top of the engine cowling) and slight softness in other areas (frustrating I know, but there it is - e.g. the lettering of 'Trident Three'). The red of the tail logo looks slightly oversaturated, and I would be interested to see if this is in the original or due to editing. At the square on angle that you have taken the image, I would also be tempted to crop it closer, beyond the registration, but that is a personal thing.
I would be happy to do an edit for you from the original if you wish.
EGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1700 posts, RR: 14 Reply 17, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 2417 times:
Quoting Psych (Reply 16): I would be happy to do an edit for you from the original if you wish.
... I don't think that's the original image... from the K10, the file should be 3800+ pix across... this is a re-sized version, no? And I assume that means you don't have a RAW version... the reason I asked for the RAW version (file ending in .pef or .dng) is that it's a lot easier to fix color/exposure problems.
There aren't many free hosting sites that will host a full-size image, so if you do want me to take a look you'll have to contact me and send it by email.
EGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1700 posts, RR: 14 Reply 19, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 2411 times:
Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 18): There aren't many free hosting sites that will host a full-size image, so if you do want me to take a look you'll have to contact me and send it by email.
In that case if you PM me your email, I'll send you the original... No I don't have it in RAW format, just JPG I'm afraid. I have adjusted my new camera to use RAW so when I get chance to use it, hopefully the results will be clearer for all to see.
Dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7317 posts, RR: 31 Reply 20, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2404 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
The Thomas Cook looks much better than the BA, though it still needs the contrast and colour adjusted slightly, and is a bit soft. Should be relatively easy to fix with editing.
Got your mail with the BA 757 btw, and I'll have a go at editing it when I get home, although doesn't look too promising (the colour/lighting/etc...) at this point.
EGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1700 posts, RR: 14 Reply 21, posted (3 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2403 times:
Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 20): The Thomas Cook looks much better than the BA, though it still needs the contrast and colour adjusted slightly, and is a bit soft. Should be relatively easy to fix with editing.
Ideal! I will get on with it now and see what I can come up with.
Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 20): Got your mail with the BA 757 btw, and I'll have a go at editing it when I get home, although doesn't look too promising (the colour/lighting/etc...) at this point.
OK no worries... Thank you so much for looking for me. Just email me back when you've had a play.
Edit... after having had a play with the Thomas Cook 757, hows this?
EGTESkyGod From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1700 posts, RR: 14 Reply 23, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2328 times:
Quoting Dlowwa (Reply 22): no, going in the wrong direction. Now too dark. still has a bit of a yellow cast too, and some jaggies in some areas.
Sorry, had a couple of days away... Have had another play, attempted to smooth the leading edge of the fin, have hopefully got rid of the yellow cast and have played with the contrast and brightness a bit. How's this? I need to keep practising my editing, I know, but eventually I'll get it right, I promise!!!
Whisperjet From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 552 posts, RR: 9 Reply 24, posted (3 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 2319 times:
Not too far off, apply a tad more sharpness, contrast and noise reduction.
Stefan
Nobody is perfect - not even a perfect fool.
25 EGTESkyGod: Thank you, Whisperjet... Sharpness to which bits, and how do I go about noise reduction? How's this? [Edited 2009-09-02 15:09:05]
26 Whisperjet: Looks quite ok for me, there are some jaggies visible, so be more careful with sharpening. For the noise reduction you'll have to get a special softwa
27 EGTESkyGod: Roger and Wilco... I went to play with my new camera this morning for the first time with planes... How's this for a good old Flybe Dash 8 on the mor
Sponsor Message: 
From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1700 posts, 
From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7317 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Dec 2003, 3853 posts, 
From Ireland, joined Oct 2007, 498 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 602 posts, 
From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 552 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
){kind=link}