SV777KiloAlpha From Saudi Arabia, joined Dec 2003, 266 posts, RR: 3 Posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3431 times:
I'm new to photography and just bought a Canon 450D and EF70-200 f/4L IS USM lens. I plan to go spotting soon. My question is do I need to get a photo editing software such as photoshop in order to get my photos approved? If yes, which is the best and easiest to use?
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7 Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3424 times:
If you want to upload successfully here you will always need to do at least a small amount of editing, regardless of how perfect your original image is. I've had a couple accepted where I haven't had to crop but generally you'll need to chop your picture down to size a bit (or a lot?) and centre the subject properly. You will also need to resize as A.net won't accept anything larger than 1mb.
You've got some nice kit there and that lens will go some way to reducing the amount of editing you'll need to do. But remember, the camera and lens are only as good as the person holding them, so make sure to learn about shooting techniques for aviation, which are often different to other branches of photography. Also, if you have the memory capacity, try to shoot in JPEG and RAW, at the very highest quality the camera will allow. Of course the less editing needed, the better you become.
Finally, if you're just getting prints done, editing isn't particularly necessary. I've always been a firm believer that a good image is made in-camera and not in Photoshop, and although I think it's an integral part of modern photography, I don't think the ability to superbly edit makes you a better photographer. It makes you a better manipulator!
Kukkudrill From Malta, joined Dec 2004, 1123 posts, RR: 5 Reply 3, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3411 times:
Yes you certainly do. Your best bet is Photoshop Elements. It's not the easiest to use but it's the best, unless you go for the full Photoshop which is much more expensive (and which is not necessary for a.net purposes). You do not need the latest versions of Elements - for a long time I got by perfectly well with Elements 2, which is ancient, so if you can get an older version at a lower cost go for it.
A couple more pieces of advice. Firstly, a.net has some pretty tight tolerances: for example, the line between sharp enough and oversharpened is very fine and easy to overstep. It will take you time to learn to edit a photo to a.net standards so don't be discouraged if you don't succeed quickly.
Secondly, always remember to take photos for fun not for a.net. Don't let a.net influence your shooting style too much.
Make the most of the available light ... a lesson of photography that applies to life
Contrail25 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 159 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (4 years 3 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3376 times:
Quoting Kukkudrill (Reply 3): Secondly, always remember to take photos for fun not for a.net. Don't let a.net influence your shooting style too much.
That's the key! If you take it too seriously you'll get all wound up and not enjoy the shooting/editing process as much.
Back to the primary subject:
I use a free photo editor, GIMP. Not as powerful as others out there, but I've been using it for years now and am very comfortable with it. I haven't tried to edit RAW images in it yet, but JPEGs and just about any other format else work just fine.
Dvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1730 posts, RR: 11 Reply 7, posted (4 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3235 times:
The only "editing" I do for a.net is manually downsampling images, sharpening with masks, and that's it. Everything else is done in Lightroom as part of the RAW conversion process (and is usually good enough to spool large amounts of images to photo hosting). That can be automated or batch operations performed, and people looking on my smugmug aren't going to care if the horizontal stab is slightly jagged because I didn't do selective sharpening on it.
Dairy From Germany, joined Nov 2003, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (4 years 2 months 4 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 3071 times:
I have taken many picture yet that all have been rejected - only just one pic got accepted on a.net and that was an unedited picture if I remeber correctly should been lucky after reading your comments here. of course I do think that editing is necessary. but the way to edit picture is not always clear to me, after reading the 'offical' a.net-statements about it.
and of course after regarding some picture here which show the same aircraft in the same position, on the same day, maybe in the same moment.
there are a lot of examples, here is just one example - the first A380 of Lufti (LH).
I like these two pics, but I cant understand how both could get accepted. they are quite different: light conditions, the colour-depth. the hangar in the background doesnt seem to be white like in the first pic, the other shows a complete other colour. I would like to know, why both are OK here?!
JakTrax From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 4936 posts, RR: 7 Reply 16, posted (4 years 2 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2996 times:
Quoting Dvincent (Reply 15): Look at the positions of the shadows. It's two different times of day. The first one was with a higher sun, the other one was with a lower one. That explains why the lighting looks different.
In the first image the hangar isn't reflecting as much light due to the height of the sun, whereas in the second the light is concentrated on the hangar doors.
Quoting Dairy (Reply 14): only just one pic got accepted on a.net and that was an unedited picture if I remeber correctly
I can't see this happening, unless you had a very tired screener on the day.....
ALL images as far as I'm aware need at least some kind of editing, no matter how small an amount. Obviously the less editing necessary the better the image when it came out of the camera.