Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Softness In Photos  
User currently offlineCJMoeser From United States of America, joined Jun 2013, 115 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3542 times:

Hi,
My photos are being rejected because they are too soft, and I understand how to fix it, but when does the sharpness look right so it's not too sharp, and also to soft?

Thanks!

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2887 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3527 times:

Quoting CJMoeser (Thread starter):
and I understand how to fix it

Are you trying to fix something that isn't fixable though? How soft is soft? It's difficult to comment without seeing examples. You get a feel of what is required for sharpness on this site, which is probably sharper than you would normally want your photos, but that's the way this site wants them. For uploading here, photos need to be sharp enough that all the details are visible without being looking soft or jaggied. The best way is to compare photos you've taken with ones already added to the database so you can compare them and get a feel for what is required.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 904 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3512 times:

Airliners.net likes photos to be over sharpened and it is the one thing that most of us have struggled with as it is very subjective and dependent on your monitor. As screeners apparently all have different monitors there is bound to be some inconsistency.


Whatever.......
User currently offlinesouthwest9 From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 63 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3483 times:

Quoting derekf (Reply 2):

Airliners.net likes photos to be over sharpened and it is the one thing that most of us have struggled with as it is very subjective and dependent on your monitor. As screeners apparently all have different monitors there is bound to be some inconsistency.

Nope, you could not be more wrong, if the screeners wanted "over sharpened' images why would they put this in the rejection guide?

"Over-sharpened
Your photo(s) were sharpened too much.
In most cases this problem is due to over-sharpening of the photo during post-processing in image editing software. Try sharpening the picture less aggressively to get rid of the jagged edges. These jagged edges are usually very visible on titles, cheatlines, registrations, or other straight lines. Selective use of masks to avoid excessive sharpening or areas where jagged lines may occur is a difficult but very effective method to avoid jagged edges. A good Airliners.Net image should be sharpened to just before the point where the titles and edges of the aircraft start to turn jagged.
This rejection can also occur when an image is well sharpened overall but one or more parts of the image showed jagged lines. This problem is generally most evident on solid lines such as wing leading edges, particularly if several lines are close together, such as gaps between the wing and flaps, cheat lines spaced closely together, or the aircraft titles and registration."

As you can see, the specifically state that over-sharpening is a totally valid reason for rejection.

Considering you didn't know this, you probably didn't know that a rejection guide existed so here you go (take a few minutes to look at before you make false statements)

http://www.airliners.net/faq/rejection_reasons.php

Quoting derekf (Reply 2):
it is the one thing that most of us have struggled with as it is very subjective and dependent on your monitor

Also, if you read the rejection guide, it is not subjective at all, allow me to re-quote a section of the guide,
"A good Airliners.Net image should be sharpened to just before the point where the titles and edges of the aircraft start to turn jagged."
So, if you are sharpening however much you feel like and not following the acceptance criteria, of course your pictures will be rejected.


User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 904 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3466 times:

Oh good. Another anonymous expert. How many photos do you have on airliners.net and how long have been uploading here?
A simple question.



Whatever.......
User currently offlinesouthwest9 From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 63 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 3453 times:

Quoting derekf (Reply 4):

Oh good. Another anonymous expert. How many photos do you have on airliners.net and how long have been uploading here?
A simple question.

I'm not trying to start an argument with you, but I will answer your questions:
I was quoting the guide that was posted, not claiming to be an expert.

But, just because you have pictures uploaded, does not make you a screener, so, saying what screeners look for, is only for screeners to say. Again, I am simply quoting what the screnners look for via their rejection guide.

Being bitter does not make you correct, sir.

I have zero photos uploaded here, regardless, you are wrong.


User currently offlinederekf From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 904 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3441 times:

What I suggest you do southwest9 is go away and read through some of the rejection reasons and some of the screener comments. It is generally accepted that airliners.net requires images to be sharpened more than might be thought normal.
Also , when you have at least ONE photo on here then I might listen to what you have to say. Until then I suggest that you don't accuse experienced photographers of not understanding the rejection reasons.



Whatever.......
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2887 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 3436 times:

Quoting southwest9 (Reply 3):
Nope, you could not be more wrong, if the screeners wanted "over sharpened' images why would they put this in the rejection guide?

I think you are missing Derek's point. The site is well known for wanting sharp photos, refer to my post above.

Quoting southwest9 (Reply 3):
Considering you didn't know this, you probably didn't know that a rejection guide existed so here you go (take a few minutes to look at before you make false statements)

Derek is more than aware of the acceptance criteria and rejection guide.

Quoting southwest9 (Reply 3):
Also, if you read the rejection guide, it is not subjective at all

Unless you've missed all the topics on the forum relating to the acceptance criteria and quality standards required for here, you'll find it very much is, to a degree. There is no black or white with sharpening, it's a subtle shade of grey in between requiring judgement.

Quoting southwest9 (Reply 3):
"A good Airliners.Net image should be sharpened to just before the point where the titles and edges of the aircraft start to turn jagged."
So, if you are sharpening however much you feel like and not following the acceptance criteria, of course your pictures will be rejected.

With nearly 6,000 photo in the database and an acceptance ration >90% (not just a handful), I'm well aware of the requirements thank you.

Quoting southwest9 (Reply 5):
saying what screeners look for, is only for screeners to say

We all have an opinion, rightly or wrongly based upon our experiences here. Screeners aren't always right!

Darren



[Edited 2013-07-13 16:45:55]


Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 8, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 3420 times:

IMHO, both Derek and SouthWest are correct.

Yes, there are rules which clearly explain what is "sharp", and yes I think this criteria results in oversharpened images by most non anet standards.

The problem is there is no one "correct" level of sharpness - depends on how the image is going to be viewed, nature of the subject and personal preference.

The Anet view seems to be, essentially, make it as sharp as you can without creating jaggies. This does have the advantage of providing a criteria by which images can be objectively assessed, and I guess that is important on a site where screening criteria are such an important and contentious issue.

But it does, to my eye, result in pictures which can look a bit unnatural or aggressive.

However as a simple answer to the OP's question - sharpen to the point where jaggies appear, then back off a bit and you won't be far off A.net requirements. Of course there are more subtle and complex variations to that answer!

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineEGCC777LR From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 162 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3389 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting CJMoeser (Thread starter):
because they are too soft, and I understand how to fix it

Hi Coln, post some examples here

http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/photography_feedback/

There are many guys both in the crew and not who are great at helping you understand the criteria here and using your own shots in the above forum is the best way to learn, that and look at your images next to others from the same airport or of the same aircraft, it won't guarantee anything but it will get you on your way

Regards
Jason

  



Flown On B704,722,732/3/4/7/8/9,744,752,762/3/4,772,77W,A319,A320,A321,A330,A388,L1011,F-50,BAE146,CRJ100, Dash-8. Left
User currently offlineviv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 10, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3266 times:

One pass of Smart Sharpen at 75 per cent, radius 0.3.

Job done.



Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
User currently offlinetrvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1369 posts, RR: 10
Reply 11, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3263 times:

Quoting southwest9 (Reply 5):
I'm not trying to start an argument with you, but I will answer your questions:
I was quoting the guide that was posted, not claiming to be an expert.

But, just because you have pictures uploaded, does not make you a screener, so, saying what screeners look for, is only for screeners to say. Again, I am simply quoting what the screnners look for via their rejection guide.

Being bitter does not make you correct, sir.

I have zero photos uploaded here, regardless, you are wrong.

You have zero credibility, people here express their opinion based on their years of experience with this site with lots of photos accepted and rejected. the posters above are correct in saying, that photos accepted here should be sharper than normal, but not extremely sharp.

[Edited 2013-07-16 07:33:33]

User currently offlineCJMoeser From United States of America, joined Jun 2013, 115 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3256 times:

Thank you for all the replies that have helped me. I didn't want an argument to start on this page, thats for a different time and place.

User currently offlinesouthwest9 From United States of America, joined Nov 2012, 63 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3228 times:

Quoting trvyyz (Reply 11):
You have zero credibility, people here express their opinion based on their years of experience with this site with lots of photos accepted and rejected. the posters above are correct in saying, that photos accepted here should be sharper than normal, but not extremely sharp.

No one else was continuing to argue this until you brought it up again. I think Colin addressed this already. Thanks for your opinion anyways.

Quoting ckw (Reply 8):
IMHO, both Derek and SouthWest are correct.

Yes, there are rules which clearly explain what is "sharp", and yes I think this criteria results in oversharpened images by most non anet standards.

The problem is there is no one "correct" level of sharpness - depends on how the image is going to be viewed, nature of the subject and personal preference.

The Anet view seems to be, essentially, make it as sharp as you can without creating jaggies. This does have the advantage of providing a criteria by which images can be objectively assessed, and I guess that is important on a site where screening criteria are such an important and contentious issue.

But it does, to my eye, result in pictures which can look a bit unnatural or aggressive.

However as a simple answer to the OP's question - sharpen to the point where jaggies appear, then back off a bit and you won't be far off A.net requirements. Of course there are more subtle and complex variations to that answer!

Cheers,

Colin


User currently offlinetrvyyz From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1369 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3222 times:

Quoting southwest9 (Reply 13):
No one else was continuing to argue this until you brought it up again. I think Colin addressed this already. Thanks for your opinion anyways.

Sorry that I brought it up again, but I couldn't help but write when I saw your comments just writing off photographers who have over 2000 photos in the DB. Even the jaggies change from monitor to monitor, depending on it's quality and the resolution of the screen at which it is set. There is a very narrow margin on anet between soft and oversharpned, especially if one is not constantly uploading to this site. Anyway these mean nothing in real world photography IMO outside anet.

[Edited 2013-07-16 14:58:59]

User currently offlineptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3906 posts, RR: 19
Reply 15, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3219 times:

Quoting viv (Reply 10):

Viv and others,

With Smart Sharpening, do you still manually deselect the background even if it's only sky? Or isn't that helpful?

Thanks,

Peter 



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 730 posts, RR: 16
Reply 16, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3210 times:

Quoting ptrjong (Reply 15):
With Smart Sharpening, do you still manually deselect the background even if it's only sky? Or isn't that helpful?

The whole point of Smart Sharpening is that it is supposed to be able to detect what is detail and what isn't. Advanced options also let you control strength in shadows and highlight.

Normally I'm pretty disparaging with tools labeled "smart" or "auto", but actually I think Smart Sharpen works really well most of the time. The new cloud release of PS has an improved version, but I haven't tried it yet.

Whether Smart Sharpen is suitable for A.net sharpen is another matter - I do think it can be a bit prone to halos when pushed too hard.

Quoting viv (Reply 10):
One pass of Smart Sharpen at 75 per cent, radius 0.3.

In my experience the apropriate amount of sharpening varies from lens to lens, and sensor to sensor. Viv's suggestion is a reasonable starting point - and may be ideal with a given setup - but I think some experimentation will be required for optimum results with your own camera and lenses.

Cheers,

Colin



Colin K. Work, Pixstel
User currently offlineptrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3906 posts, RR: 19
Reply 17, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 3209 times:

Thanks as always Colin. Time to get rid of my old laborious technique I suppose.


The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineviv From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3142 posts, RR: 29
Reply 18, posted (1 year 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 3193 times:

Quoting ptrjong (Reply 15):
With Smart Sharpening, do you still manually deselect the background even if it's only sky? Or isn't that helpful?

No, there is no need to do that. Sharpen the entire image.

Quoting ckw (Reply 16):
Viv's suggestion is a reasonable starting point - and may be ideal with a given setup - but I think some experimentation will be required for optimum results with your own camera and lenses.

Agreed. My setup is a Nikon D700 with in-camera sharpening set to 'off'; and the old Nikkor 80-400 lens. Aperture is usually in the range f/7.1 to f/11.

For static aircraft, I somtimes use a Fuji X Pro 1 with the Fuji 18-55 lens. Sharpening procedure is the same.

[Edited 2013-07-16 23:00:40]


Nikon D700, Nikkor 80-400, Fuji X Pro 1, Fujinon 35 f/1.4, Fujinon 18 f/2
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...
Little Dark Orbs In Photos... posted Sat Mar 20 2004 05:43:17 by Maiznblu_757
Jagged Lines In Photos posted Thu May 29 2003 13:05:48 by Airbus Lover
Faces Pictured In Photos...I Am Confused. posted Thu May 9 2002 04:15:49 by Dazed767
What Did We Decide About People In Photos? posted Mon Oct 15 2001 06:47:18 by Chris28_17
People In Photos posted Tue Sep 25 2001 23:35:02 by Airplanenut
Missing Photos In The DB posted Fri Jun 14 2013 01:15:57 by olegchaplin
Uploaded Photos Not Appearing In The Queue? posted Tue Jun 4 2013 06:58:23 by ekkaihla
Info For Photos In Moscow, St Petersburg & Kiev posted Mon Sep 24 2012 04:42:24 by aagold
Uploaded Photos Never Appeared In Queue posted Fri Jul 6 2012 19:50:25 by Chukcha
Anet Facebook Page And Photos In Last 24 Hrs? posted Sat Apr 7 2012 14:10:59 by whales