Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pre-Screening: Motive/Sharpness (Contrail25)  
User currently offlineContrail25 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 159 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2828 times:

Just want some other eyes on this image, first is the original, then the sharpened. (click on images for larger size)


original:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2465/4041591370_c79bb16c90_o.jpg


sharpened (I'm still trying to get the a/c number on the nose gear to work out):

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3477/4043103809_1b686f8f3c_o.jpg

And compared to this shot, where you can see the canopy, which motive is 'better'?



11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAlevik From Canada, joined Mar 2009, 915 posts, RR: 8
Reply 1, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 2821 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD SCREENER

I like the last shot in landscape format better. The first two are still soft. - I don't think you have the depth of field to get everything sharp enough.


Improvise, adapt, overcome.
User currently offlineContrail25 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2805 times:

I'll play with that third one some.

As for the depth of field, had I shot these with f/11 vs f/8 (just for example) then I might have better sharpness in the image? I'm trying to understand the concept better. I've never taken a photography class in my life. Would like to, but haven't.

i.e.
smaller apertures = greater field of depth, more sharp
larger apertures = shallower field of depth, less sharp


User currently offlineDlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31
Reply 3, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2798 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Contrail25 (Thread starter):
Just want some other eyes on this image, first is the original, then the sharpened.

Yeah, second still soft, and I also agree the landscape format looks better.

Quoting Contrail25 (Reply 2):
As for the depth of field, had I shot these with f/11 vs f/8 (just for example) then I might have better sharpness in the image?

Might have helped a little, but there are various other factors that come into play when trying to figure out depth of field (and sharpness, which isn't related), including the focal length and distance to the subject. Generally the shorter the focal length (wider the angle of view) the more depth of field you get, and the closer to the subject you are, the less depth of field.

Quoting Contrail25 (Reply 2):
i.e.
smaller apertures = greater field of depth, more sharp
larger apertures = shallower field of depth, less sharp

To a certain extent, and depending on the lens. Most kit lens zooms that come with DSLRs these days do indeed have their 'sweet spot' around the f/8-11 range, but better and faster glass will hit that sweet spot much sooner. Once you've hit that sweet spot sharpness starts to decrease as the aperture gets smaller (higher f-number) because of diffraction, while depth of field increases. Diffraction isn't really noticeable until you're over ~f/11, so usually the balancing spot for least diffraction most depth of field is the recommended f/8-11 range.

...I hope that made sense. If not ask for clarification on any point, and I'll be glad to try.

Dana


User currently offlineContrail25 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2797 times:

Thanks for the help Dana, it makes sense to me...just need more experience and further my 'education.' I've learned a lot over the past few months, and most importantly that I have tons more to learn!

Here's the third image with some sharpening:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2636/4045044582_0e92d724ed_o.jpg

However, I looked at the other photos I took and found this one to be of better quality before any editing (other than resizing), unless I'm crazy, I'll work with this image instead of the previous one.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2487/4045182390_be11da4e7e_o.jpg

[Edited 2009-10-25 18:59:54 by contrail25]

User currently offlineDlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31
Reply 5, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2792 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Contrail25 (Reply 4):
Here's the third image with some sharpening:

Still a bit soft, and I'm guessing it's not really a DOF problem, as the background seems to be reasonably in focus as well.

If you want I can take a look at the original and let you know.


User currently offlineContrail25 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 2782 times:

Even the last one I posted? It's an entirely different image, and other than re-sizing, it's unedited.

Shoot me a PM and I can email the original to ya.

[Edited 2009-10-25 19:38:18 by contrail25]

User currently offlineDlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31
Reply 7, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 2775 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Contrail25 (Reply 6):
Even the last one I posted?

Ah... I see you added a 1200pix version. That one looks better, just a couple of spots needing sharpening. Other than a bit of a red/yellow color cast, it otherwise looks ok.


User currently offlineContrail25 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (4 years 5 months 4 weeks ago) and read 2762 times:

selective sharpening, reduced the red/yellow saturation...just ever so slightly.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2683/4045132859_d0f063ae4c_o.jpg


User currently offlinePsych From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 3043 posts, RR: 59
Reply 9, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2758 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi Contrail25.

There is still something wrong here - take a close look at the external tanks; they look actually blurry. Certainly not focussed properly. I don't think this photo would make it through the screeners.

Just whilst I am on, I am not able to contact you via your profile about this other thread. If you want any further help with that photo (which I am confident you can get accepted) then you can get hold of me via my profile. Also, in the original thread where you posted this photo, I felt this image had real potential, cropped slightly closer.

All the best.

Paul


User currently offlineDlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 31
Reply 10, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 2756 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Psych (Reply 9):
take a close look at the external tanks; they look actually blurry

Yeah, I noticed that too... wasn't quite sure what was going on there, thought the camo paint was maybe playing with my eyes... glad to see it wasn't just me. That whole wingtip seems to be blurry too (right side of the frame).

Contrail25 - this image isn't too far off from being acceptable, so keep at it (either with this one or another) and you'll get it right.


User currently offlineContrail25 From United States of America, joined Aug 2009, 159 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (4 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 2740 times:

I'm looking at those tanks right now, there's definitely something up with them. On the right side only the outboard portion looks out of focus, and maybe the last 2-3 feet of the wingtip. But then, to me, the reflection of the white pipe holding the gear in the tank looks to be sharp.

The left side is harder for me to figure out with all the shadows. Looking at some other shots of the droptanks (not this view) the paint has a fairly wide blending overlap, so I wonder if this play into the 'look' we are seeing. I will try some selective sharpening and see what happens.

Psych: I'll get a hold of ya about that T-28 pic. I've been playing with it some more and getting better results. Would that other one you like go under a 'nose shot' category? I liked it a lot, but didn't think it'd fit here.

Dlowwa: thanks for the late night advice and help! I'll keep at this one, since I think it's workable.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

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

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Pre Screening - Color, Sharpness (stevemchey) posted Thu Oct 22 2009 21:00:37 by Stevemchey
Pre Screening - Motive, Quality (cvervais) posted Sun Oct 18 2009 19:52:50 by Cvervais
Pre Screening - Motive (Astro777lover) posted Sun Oct 18 2009 09:26:15 by Astro777lover
Pre Screening - Motive, Quality (cvervais) posted Sat Oct 17 2009 18:45:48 by Cvervais
Pre Screening - Quality, Sharpness (cvervais) posted Thu Oct 15 2009 19:31:17 by Cvervais
Pre Screening - Motive & General (whales) posted Mon Oct 12 2009 12:25:05 by Whales
Pre Screening - Quality/sharpness (legoguy) posted Sun Oct 11 2009 08:57:54 by Legoguy
Pre Screening - Falloff, Sharpness(UnitedJumboJet) posted Thu Oct 1 2009 13:08:38 by UnitedJumboJet
Pre Screening - Motive, Quality (cvervais) posted Wed Sep 30 2009 19:50:15 by Cvervais
Pre Screening - Motive And General (whales) posted Wed Sep 30 2009 00:36:45 by Whales