Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Any Chance For This Type Of Shot?  
User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4095 times:

http://airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=747sapproiaching.jpg

for get size/quality etc because that can be addressed, just wondering if you think this 'type' of shot has a chance?

LGW

18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3122 posts, RR: 15
Reply 1, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4076 times:

I hate to see a 1600px photo on a 1024 resolution monitor and I'm not going to change my monitor.

About your photo, maybe... but if it was already rejected I think you have the answer.

Luis


User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4073 times:

Hi Luis, sorry.

It was rejected because of low quality and I thought it may well be being at 1600 and I fully understand what you say but I just felt, to give the photo some crediblity (by showing the other 747 at a good enough size) i uploaded at 1600 as i felt at 1024 the other 747 would be too small and the effect of the shot would be lost

Just wondered if people think its worth uploading at 1200 or 1024 or whether there is no point

Cheers

LGW


User currently offlineJderden777 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 1754 posts, RR: 30
Reply 3, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 4061 times:

no chance whatsoever....

just kidding  Wink/being sarcastic

i like these types of shots, really...as far as being accepted, i have no idea...

anyway LHR/LGW/MAN looks like a possibility for me in the very near future...i'll be going on a buddy pass and i'd have to fly into LGW but that's cool...just wondering if anyone could help a couple guys out while we are up there for a few days...maybe july 12-17 or something like that are the dates...we'll just have to wait and see what the parents say about it!

best,
jonathan d.



"my soul is in the sky" - shakespeare
User currently offlineEGGD From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 12443 posts, RR: 36
Reply 4, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4049 times:

Well, I think at 1600x1200 the bad weather really shows, and the a/c look a bit blotchy. Maybe if you just resized it to 1024x768 and tried then, you might have more luck...

Good luck Jonathan, I hope to see you in the UK sometime  Big grin


User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3122 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4005 times:

Don't take my comment to personal Ben, it was directed to all 1600px photos, not just this one.

Try, you never know.

Luis


User currently offlineExitRow From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3994 times:

LGW,
I like it alot. Three aircraft heading straight at the POV. One gear down, one up. And an itty bitty third plane in the backround. Very cool! I think the composition alone would get it accepted.

The quality is a bit dodgy (especially the underbelly of the dirty 74), but I think the composition makes up for it. Do you have Photoshop? If you burned in some of the clouds and made them just a bit higher contrast, I think it would be an excellent "ominous" background.

Just my pennies.



User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 3982 times:

Thanks for that ExitRow, its what I was looking for 0 i know about the quality because its on 1600 etc i was trying to get ppl's opinion on if the composition was enough..thanks...il have a go

LGW


User currently offlinePUnmuth@VIE From Austria, joined Aug 2000, 4162 posts, RR: 54
Reply 8, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3958 times:

Nice shot ben, but the missing part of the first one adds a bit of a strange (unbalanced) look to the pictures
Peter



-
User currently offlineCraigy From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2001, 1118 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3929 times:

Ben,
I like the shot, but you have to wait for good light and go out and take the shot again. The shot below is proof that this type of shot can be very popular (and you don't have to go to LHR either).
Regards,
Craig.


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Chris Sheldon



User currently offlineChazzerguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2002, 277 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 3847 times:

Ben-

If you haven't already, I would most certainly try submitting again, but at 1024 resolution... Even at 1024 the trailing 74 would show up quite well I think. Run it through a sharp filter once, resample it, and I think you'll have yourself a winner...

-Chaz


User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3122 posts, RR: 15
Reply 11, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3831 times:

Chaz, sharpen should be the last step, after resampling down to 1024px, not before.

Luis


User currently offlineChazzerguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2002, 277 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3832 times:

Really?... Why? I'm new to this, so pardon the question... I'll tell you my rationale for sharpening first:

I've noticed sometimes that my sharp filter (it's an Extensis filter in PhotoShop Home) will sometimes leave artifacts... Little bits of noise... Not a lot, just a bit... So, if I sharpen first, if there's a little bit of noise, that tends to be removed when I resample down to 1024 (which I do using Corel PhotoPaint). I would be worried about applying the filter last for fear I would end up with some of that noise. However, I will be the first to admit I might be totally wrong!

Tell me more Luis!



User currently offlineMirage From Portugal, joined May 1999, 3122 posts, RR: 15
Reply 13, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3827 times:

Well, from my experience, if you sharpen first and then resample down any photo, some of the sharpen effect will be lost due to the resampling process. Your example of some noise being removed after resampling down shows how the photo tends to loose some definition, good to eliminate some noise but bad to make the image softer.

If you resample and only after this you apply a good unsharp mask you get an image more clear and with more definition. You also get more noise, that's true but this is something we must live with. To eliminate the noise you can use the clone tool, sometimes it can be a hard and long work but it must be done, everybody do it.

Nothing as trying for yourself and seeing the differences.

Luis


User currently offlineAndyhunt From Singapore, joined Jan 2001, 1306 posts, RR: 52
Reply 14, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3810 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Ben,

A lot of debate over this shot from the screeners, I did the only thing possible, I have passed it onto Johan for his final call!!! Big grin

Andrew



Full frame always beats post processing
User currently offlineLGW From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3815 times:

Thats cool Andy. I too think its very boarderline. On a sunny day with the BA left winglet no chopped off! i think it would be a go-er but as it is i am not sure - oh well - nice excuse to go to LHR and do it all over again!

Cheers all

LGW


User currently offlineAndyhunt From Singapore, joined Jan 2001, 1306 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 3804 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

It has a good chance Ben, it's just that us screeners couldn't make up our minds!!!!

Andrew



Full frame always beats post processing
User currently offlineLOT767-300ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 9 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 3799 times:

"I've noticed sometimes that my sharp filter (it's an Extensis filter in PhotoShop Home) will sometimes leave artifacts... Little bits of noise... Not a lot, just a bit... So, if I sharpen first, if there's a little bit of noise, that tends to be removed when I resample down to 1024 (which I do using Corel PhotoPaint). I would be worried about applying the filter last for fear I would end up with some of that noise. However, I will be the first to admit I might be totally wrong!"

First of all maybe you should try Photoshop or PaintShop Pro. If you need 2 programs to do basic things like sharpening and resizing then there is a problem. Photoshop Home is probably giving you jpeg compression when you resize and when you sharpen you get the noise and oversharpening in some areas of the photo. Do you have an Unsharp Mask in any of those programs? That is the perfect tool for sharpening both more and less. What you also want to do is resize it first then tweak the photo like do some sharpening, brightness, colors etc. This is an art that takes time to learn and some decent tools.


User currently offlineChazzerguy From United States of America, joined Jun 2002, 277 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (11 years 9 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3773 times:

Lot-

I'll be honest... The reason I use two different programs is because I've been too lazy to figure out the sharpening functions of Corel... They are there, but the Extensis filter in Photoshop is a no-brain one click thing... For all I know, Corel is the same way, I just haven't gotten to it yet.

Actually, Photoshop Home does have an option for no JPG compression, so the output is good... However, I don't to the resizing with PS Home because sometimes, and for reasons I don't understand, it gives me white borders around the image.

But you're totally correct, I need to sit down and really learn my Corel software better and move away from the PS Home. Just slack I guess!

-Chaz


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...
Any Chance For This Kind Of 'artistic' Shot? posted Tue Aug 27 2002 12:15:04 by 707cmf
Any Chance For This Shot? posted Fri Jul 8 2005 20:08:11 by DLX737200
Is This Type Of Shot Allowed? posted Tue Sep 12 2006 03:13:03 by PlymSpotter
Any Chance For This One? posted Sun Apr 23 2006 23:24:30 by Christeljs
Any Chance For This One? posted Wed Apr 12 2006 16:48:39 by AirKas1
Screening's Fun When You Get This Type Of Shot! posted Sat Sep 3 2005 04:13:49 by AndyHunt
Any Chance For This One? posted Fri Aug 12 2005 16:20:48 by Interpaul
Any Chance For This One? posted Tue Mar 29 2005 23:19:42 by A346Dude
Is There Any Chance For This? posted Sat Aug 7 2004 23:28:18 by Dlx737200
Any Chance For This Photo? posted Wed Jul 7 2004 01:07:04 by Mighluss