hello, your help
What do you think of this picture??
thanks

Quoting boing (Thread starter): What do you think of this picture?

Soft and taken in very poor light.

You do not need to start a new thread for every image/question. If you have any new images or questions related to them, keep them in this thread.

Sorry, but soft to fix the problem what to do?? photo taken in backlight.
If I can give advice to solve the soft, I do not understand how to do (my photos are always soft)
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 2): Sorry, but soft to fix the problem what to do??

You would have to sharpen it in Photoshop or a similar editing program.

However, given this:

Quoting boing (Reply 2): photo taken in backlight.

There's not much point in editing it for A.net.

Quoting boing (Reply 2): photo taken in backlight.

It is very difficult to get backlit photos accepted here without the proper motivation. The best thing for you to do is wait for better conditions (i.e. clear skies and sun at your back), and then try again. We can worry about sharpening at that time. I don't think any editing will help you save the photo above.

What do you think,
I've improved it soft?
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 5): What do you think, I've improved it soft?

It's a little oversharpened and noisy, but should be fixable.

now it improved??
thanks

sorry, I did not notice and I mistakenly deleted the previous
image

Sharpening is better, but it appears there is some heat haze. You can try to hide it by submitting at 1024, but that may or may not work.

thanks
to put more photos
continued here

What do you think of this
thanks

It's below the minimum size requirement, so it's hard to evaluate. It would be rejected for size if uploaded at those dimensions.

sorry I was wrong

Looks a bit oversharpened to me.

Also has some editing halos around the aircraft that you should take care of.

an opinion on this photo
thanks

Noisy, and VERY oversharpened.

I agree with what Dana said... (and how can he be wrong?! LOL)

You've applied too much USM, thus probably ending up into grain (because I don't know if the picture was already grainy by itself, but the USM usually make things worse...).
Also, I see some grain in the sky, probably due to the fact that you didn't use the USM selectively (there's a quick how-to-do guide for this on A.net photo editing guide)

A general rule: exceeding never pays off... and, also in this case, by exceeding with the USM you have got a picture that seems quite "unreal" to me, because of its excessive sharpening.
I'll give you a word of advice, basing on my experience: generally I apply USM three times...
1. 200%, 0.2, 0
2. 200%, 0.2, 0
3. 100%, 0.2, 0
This technique works almost perfectly for my combos, both 70-200L and 15-85 on my 450D.
But there are not general rules when it comes to sharpening... you can be given advice, but you have to try and try until you find the perfect settings.

But what I think you're missing too is a quick pass with NR tool: USM generally makes some grain come out... with a "soft" NR pass, you can benefit a lot (at least, this works with me!).

I can see lots of jaggies on your last picture too.
It's better to apply USM on a duplicated layer and then to use the eraser tool to erase them. (Jaggies are those "white lines" that came to be noticeable with strong USM passes).

Hope it helps!

hours as it goes,
I selected the aircraft and unsharp mask 90, 0.5, 0

anyway you advise me to select only one aircraft to apply sharpening.

Thanks for your valuable advice

Well, to be honest, I see it better if compared to the previous one.

But it is still soft to my eye... I'd go with several further USM passes. Don't be harsh in applying it... and use the same method: duplicate layer, select the aircraft, USM, eraser tool, Noise reducion and flatten image.
That's all!  

sorry but I have not quite clear how to use the eraser
Can you explain it to me since you're so kind
thanks
applied two mask steps as you said 200,0.2,0
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 21): applied two mask steps as you said 200,0.2,0

Still quite oversharpened.

back again
so could go, almost nothing usm
thanks,
unfortunately I can not see the marks that you say or you say the lines ....

Quoting boing (Reply 23): back again

Best one so far, though just a little too soft now. It looks like heat haze might be present, and if that is the case, you will not be able to fix the image.

although I really like,
changing image.
How about this
thanks




[Edited 2012-03-08 09:23:25]

Quoting boing (Reply 25): How about this

Not too bad, though there seems to be a fair amount of compression. Because of that hard to say for sure if it's too noisy/os.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 24): It looks like heat haze might be present, and if that is the case, you will not be able to fix the image.

I agree that heat haze is always a pain in the neck as it is not fixable in any way... but I can still remember a word of advice someone (probably Dana himself) here gave me some time ago: to try with a resize.
I think that in this case it worth a try, since the image should be around 1200px wide... So, if I were you, I'd have a go with a 1024px resize and see what it looks like.
Maybe I remmber wrong... but I used it at times and it seems to work properly when heat haze is not so incisive!  

We tried again in 1024 what do you say thanks
I love this photo!!




and also put this occasion.
Thanks to all

Quoting boing (Reply 28): We tried again in 1024 what do you say thanks I love this photo!!

It is a nice photo, but just might not be what A.net is looking for. Acceptance or rejection here isn't necessarily a judgment on your photographic skills, or even on the particular photo. It's worth keeping that in mind.

Even at 1024, your photo looks quite soft in parts, yet almost oversharpened in others. I think heat haze is probably the killer for this one.

Quoting boing (Reply 28): and also put this occasion.

It's soft and a bit high in the frame for my taste (Dana may disagree), but the major obstacle (no pun intended) is the blockage of the gear and engine by the taxiway signs. That will likely result in a motive rejection.

Quoting boing (Reply 28): We tried again in 1024 what do you say thanks

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 29): Even at 1024, your photo looks quite soft in parts, yet almost oversharpened in others.

Yes, probably best to give up on this one.

Quoting boing (Reply 28): and also put this occasion.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 29): It's soft and a bit high in the frame for my taste (Dana may disagree)

No, you are correct on both counts Vik.

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 29): It's soft and a bit high in the frame for my taste (Dana may disagree), but the major obstacle (no pun intended) is the blockage of the gear and engine by the taxiway signs. That will likely result in a motive rejection.

I understand it, the obstacles that are seen close to the wheels
and the motor are cause for rejection.
thanks

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 29): It is a nice photo, but just might not be what A.net is looking for. Acceptance or rejection here isn't necessarily a judgment on your photographic skills, or even on the particular photo. It's worth keeping that in mind.

ok
I know abandonment,
try again with more photos
thanks

How about this
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 32): How about this

A little flat and noisy, but otherwise ok.

I was rejected because soft
What do you think?

It looks like a fair rejection to me - it does look soft overall to me. Selective sharpening might help. If you're working in photoshop, try selecting individual areas of the aircraft and copying them into a new layer, then applying unsharp mask (I realize you may already have done this).

I get a significant number of soft rejections and I have to tell you, sharpening is probably the most difficult and frustrating aspect of working on my images - so take my opinion with a grain of salt.

Quoting Cargolex (Reply 35): If you're working in photoshop, try selecting individual areas of the aircraft and copying them into a new layer, then applying unsharp mask (I realize you may already have done this).

I selected only the plane and I applied unsharp mask.
I can better explain what it means to select individual parts of the plane (what you mean by parts?)
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 34): I was rejected because soft What do you think?

I think what I said in reply 9 is still true. There is some heat haze, and you weren't able to hide it even at the smaller size. You probably cannot fix this image for here.

ok, I just wanted to understand what needs to be done to solve the problem "soft"
thanks

while I post this.
Give me good news .....

Quoting boing (Reply 38): while I post this.

A little oversharpened. Might be acceptable with a better edit.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 39): A little oversharpened. Might be acceptable with a better edit.

recommendations?
less sharpening!
thanks

Hard to tell without seeing the original. I can take a look if you would like and tell you if the quality is there to make it worth another attempt.

original image, reduced to 1200
thanks waiting for news

Quoting boing (Reply 42): original image, reduced to 1200

Reduced to 1200 defeats the purpose. Contact me privately, and then I can give you an address where you can send the original full-size file.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 43): Reduced to 1200 defeats the purpose. Contact me privately, and then I can give you an address where you can send the original full-size file.

I sent the mail
thanks

Hello, I'm back,
so can fit?
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 45): Hello, I'm back, so can fit?

Hi, it's soft, dark, and poorly centered.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 26): Not too bad, though there seems to be a fair amount of compression. Because of that hard to say for sure if it's too noisy/os.

but it is possible that I was rejected for the following reason
Reject reason: soft oversharpened
or are the subjects that are not interesting??

if not, asks advice sucome solve this problem
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 47): but it is possible that I was rejected for the following reason Reject reason: soft oversharpened

Yes, it does have that look... Personally, I try to never give soft and oversharpened as reasons for a single image as I can see how confusing/contradictory that can seem, but there are certainly are cases when it could happen. If your image is quite soft to start and you apply too much sharpening to compensate, that would be the result. I can't say if that's exactly what happened with your image, but like I said, it does have that look.

ok, but at least when the place can tell me please the image
be accepted, so I avoid long waits and then .....
thanks always very kind

do not give up, I go back to the office
How about
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 50): How about

Not too bad. Maybe a touch soft, but only needs minor fixing.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 51): Not too bad. Maybe a touch soft, but only needs minor fixing.

I only adjusted levels and unsharp mask 80, 02, 0
This is the original, what do I trim and clean only.
thanks

Dlowwa, What do you think
thanks

Let's see if I improved
What do you think??

Quoting boing (Reply 54): What do you think??

First is oversharpened and poor (low) contrast. Second is almost ok, but looks like there are some dust spots above the forward fuselage.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 55): but looks like there are some dust spots above the forward fuselage.

are those dots on the right of the written noesait.it

I also put this
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 56): are those dots on the right of the written noesait.it

See areas circled in red.

Quoting boing (Reply 56): I also put this

Some heat haze, but otherwise not bad.

tell me your opinion
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 58): tell me your opinion

First is soft & heat hazed; the second is oversharpened and suffering from jpeg compression.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 59): suffering from jpeg compressi

What should be done
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 60): What should be done

Use less compression when you save your jpegs. Typically this is done by saving at the highest quality setting.

so it's better
thanks

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 59): First is soft & heat hazed;

can go so

Quoting boing (Reply 62): so it's better

Seems to be, yes.

Quoting boing (Reply 63): can go so

Can't really fix heat haze, so still no.

sorry, but what does it mean?
Contrasts are now better, but the aircraft is still high in frame. Regards centered personal



the plane so I have to hit:
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 65): the aircraft is still high in frame

It means you need to place it lower.

Quoting boing (Reply 65): the plane so I have to hit:

Much softer than the previous version.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 66): Much softer than the previous version.

no, just tell me if you look at the quality so it is centered
thanks

I'll explain
the first is rejected as
the second plane collagato more below.
do not look at quality photos but only if the aircraft is positioned exactly
thanks

I'll explain
the first is rejected as
the second plane collagato more below.
do not look at quality photos but only if the aircraft is positioned exactly
thanks

you can answer this question
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 69):

Both are somewhat soft, possibly due to heat haze. The first also as the nose gear obstructed (avoidable) and the second a border along the bottom of the image.

I wanted to try this shot
thanks

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 70): I wanted to try this shot

Also suffering from some heat haze.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 72):

I try .....

and this
Thanks to the availability

[quote=dlowwa,reply=57]Some heat haze, but otherwise not bad.

dlowwa excuse I say not bad but then I was rejected for this reason
sky abnormally bright in the corners oversharpened editing personal


http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r.../20120404_i1332874256.2193neos.jpg

[Edited 2012-04-04 14:14:18]

Quoting boing (Reply 73): and this

Will be rejeced for oversharpened/quality.

Quoting boing (Reply 74): dlowwa excuse I say not bad but then I was rejected for this reason sky abnormally bright in the corners oversharpened editing personal

I think the sharpening is ok, but the corners do look a little bright...did you try to remove some vignetting?

give me the certainty that goes beyond the passage!
I redid the image, I want to point out that there were alterations of the image, I think the white at the edges is due to the fact that in opening the raw files I have given the type of lens, and this causes the clear corners, I cut , slight unsharp mask 90, 0.2. (if you want I can also do the original image where you found no alterations or cloning) I like you mentioned in the link of rejection under edit.
I forgot I have always rejected the images and post them to wait 10 days or so or you have to send in another address??
because of the availability

Quoting boing (Reply 76): I redid the image

Corners look more normal, so it must have been your previous edit that had caused that issue.

opinion on some photos
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 78): opinion on some photos

Unfortunately these are all likely to be rejected. Soft, dark/contrast for the first; oversharpened, noisy, quality for the second; noisy, soft, contrast for the thrid.

proceed in order.
oversharpened, noisy, quality for the second;


and now as;


noisy, soft, contrast for the thrid.



and now as;


[Edited 2012-04-08 12:55:05]

[Edited 2012-04-08 12:56:13]

Soft, dark/contrast for the first;


and now as;


[Edited 2012-04-08 13:50:21]

Quoting boing (Reply 80): oversharpened, noisy, quality for the second;

Now soft, low contrast, quality.

Quoting boing (Reply 80): noisy, soft, contrast for the thrid.

Contrast, quality, soft.

Quoting boing (Reply 80): Soft, dark/contrast for the first;

Still dark/backlit, contrast

Sorry, I don't think any of these have the quality necessary to be accepted.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 64): Quoting boing (Reply 62): so it's better Seems to be, yes.

I was refused, oversharpened
dlowwa What do you think thanks

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...412_c1333574433.6226okdsc_2861.jpg

[Edited 2012-04-12 14:41:54]

Yes, looks oversharpened, especially on the titles (regular & special).

Quoting boing (Reply 76): http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/702...3.jpg

Do not mean to be harsh or anything, but the white around the characters of the airlines name is caused due to the sharpening  .

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 84):

What should you

I wanted to try this



thanks

Motive should be ok, but there are several quality issues. The contras is quite low, and it looks quite soft & over-processed, maybe from too much noise reduction.

it is better that way!!!!

Quoting boing (Reply 88): it is better that way!!!!

Very soft/blurry, this has no chance of being accepted I'm afraid.

try last time with this

thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 90): try last time with this

Still quite soft.

so!
I added a bit of unsharp mask, then the rubber jaggies and a bit of noise reduction.
hope for the best
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 92): I added a bit of unsharp mask, then the rubber jaggies and a bit of noise reduction.

Sorry, I think the quality's just not there, or at least it has been over-edited to the point you've destroyed a lot of the quality.

sorry I do not understand
the first was soft now with two passages I have destroyed.
but when it is soft what to do!! add some contrast?




how about this?

Quoting boing (Reply 94): the first was soft now with two passages I have destroyed.

It was either too soft to start, or you've made it that way through editing, primarily through noise reduction. Without seeing the original, I can't say for sure.

Quoting boing (Reply 94): how about this?

Looks soft, almost blurry, and then sharpened to try and compensate.

summary, then tell me if the steps are ok:

amount of photos
regulate levels image
cropping
dust Removal
color and levels
only
sharpening
rubber serrations
If needed now apply noise reduction
thanks

Looks basically correct, though I'm not sure what 'amount of photos' means. Remember, there is no one 'correct' way to do things. We each need to find the best way that works for us. My editing flow may differ from yours, but as long as the results are there, it doesn't really matter. If you're not getting results you are happy with, maybe try changing things up, and see what happens.

Sorry, can see steps to make my eye
clipping
cleaning
levels



as is? I have to apply a contrast curve ?

[Edited 2012-04-17 11:58:19]

Quoting boing (Reply 98): as is? I have to apply a contrast curve

You could maybe add a little contrast, but looks pretty good as is.

I put !!!!!
thanks for patience

hello
I would try this shot

Quoting boing (Reply 101): I would try this shot

Should be ok.

I want to try this shot
What do you think
thantks

Not the best light, but the quality seems ok.

This foto was refused
1 time x grainy oversharpened
2 time x soft
now what do you think !!!
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 105): now what do you think !!!

A bit yellow, but passable for me.

I wanted to put this
What do you think
thanks

Looks just a touch yellow, but also like there might have been some heat haze.

I think it is heat, cancel singapore ok

Provo this page foto
thanks

A bit yellow, but otherwise ok.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 110):

so you think you can go
thanks

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...6831886.618provaokbasedsc_0463.jpg

[Edited 2012-05-12 07:17:54]

Color looks better than the previous one.

I want to try
with this photo
What do you think
thanks

A bit flat and mostly backlit. Not a great angle for the light. The sky also seems to have some banding.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 114): A bit flat and mostly backlit. Not a great angle for the light. The sky also seems to have some banding.

ok you're right,
thanks observation I learned another thing that I did not know
abandonment, I want to try with this photo

Also a little back/toplit but that's not an immediate killer. It would also need a little ccw rotation. The main problem is that there is pretty heavy compression throughout the frame.

I changed the method of cropping
photos with the lowest possible JPEG compression (highest quality, 12 in Photoshop).



[Edited 2012-05-16 13:33:39]

What do you think of this
thanks

First thing that comes up to my mind: Level

now better Level ( then crop )
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 120): now better Level ( then crop )

This one will be rejected for being soft.

so

Quoting boing (Reply 122):

Better, but I don't think the quality is there for 1280. Might work at 1024.

What do you think of this
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 124): What do you think of this

Slightly oversharpened and needs a tighter crop.

This foto
Heat can be seen !!!
thanks

Yes, definitely soft from heat haze.

I followed the guide
even before i used same way
What do you think
thanks

Seems to be less compression, but this one is also a bit flatter.

I hope is ok
thanks

you can check also this picture
thanks

Quoting Boing (Reply 137): I hope is ok

Softer and more compression than before. Are you simply re-editing the same file each time, or are you starting from the original?

Quoting boing (Reply 138): you can check also this picture

Should be ok.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 139): Softer and more compression than before. Are you simply re-editing the same file each time, or are you starting from the original?

starting from the original
I try this foto photo
otherwise cancellation
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 140): I try this foto photo

I don't see much compression in this one. It's slightly high, but other than that could be ok.

How about this
thanks

Quoting Boing (Reply 142): How about this

Not too bad. Slight oversharpening, but could be ok.

What do you think
this cut
thanks

Poor crop, especially bottom left.

something like this
looks sympathetic (playground zurich airport )

thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 146): something like this

Is it (or was it) a real aircraft? If not, then no.

Reject reason: cyan cast colour personal

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...1337518143.7718websingdsc_6404.jpg

now okay

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...8403466.2233webregsingdsc_6404.jpg

[Edited 2012-05-30 11:49:33]

Second one looks a bit better, but don't see too much of a difference in color.

hello
after a period of absence I'm back
with this photo
What do you think
thanks

Quoting Boing (Reply 143): with this photo What do you think

Should be ok.

these two photo
thanks

Both a little soft, but generally ok.

hello
I wanted to try this shot
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 147): I wanted to try this shot

Not too bad, should have a decent chance.

hello
What do you think of this
thanks

WOW Imma require the Full HD resolution picture of that one hahaha :p Now that would be a nice desktop background ^^.

Quoting boing (Reply 149): What do you think of this

A little over-processed, but might have a chance.

hello
What do you think of this
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 152): What do you think of this

Dark, oversharpened to compensate for blur/softness, halo around aircraft, and compressed/blotchy sky.

I changed photos
better !!

Quoting boing (Reply 154): I changed photos better !!

If you say so, but impossible to compare given you have removed the first version. The second one is soft, has a red tint, and a soft editing halo. Likely to be rejected.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 155): If you say so,

statement was not, was only a request

you have removed the first version
because I put a different picture same airplane

now



or this



[Edited 2012-07-30 08:44:59 by Boing]

Don't see much difference between the two, but if I had to choose, it would be the first.

this photograph has a chance ?
thanks

I think that this would receive a dark rejection, as it is backlit.

William

Quoting boing (Reply 158): this photograph has a chance ?

Soft and a bit dark, so probably not.

Reject reason:
Soft



now



What do you think of this photo
thank you for your willingness

Quoting boing (Reply 161): now

Not much better.

Quoting boing (Reply 161): What do you think of this photo

Bit soft toward the nose. Might be better smaller.

What do you think
better ?????
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 163): What do you think

First is bordering on os now; second maybe passable.

Hello
What do you think of this photo
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 165): What do you think of this photo

Very soft and over-edited. Will certainly be rejected.

reworked the original picture
what do you think
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 167): what do you think

Better. A bit oversharpened in places now.

I try again, starting from the original
one step di USM
What do you think
thanks

Best so far, but still marginal.

now
thanks




also add this photo



[Edited 2012-09-05 10:25:33]

Quoting boing (Reply 171): now

Quoting boing (Reply 171): also add this photo

Same as above, marginal at best. Would help your chances if you went with 1024 instead of anything larger.

What do you think this photograph
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 173): What do you think this photograph

A bit soft and a lot of compression. Otherwise should be ok.

what do you think
these two photographs
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 175): what do you think these two photographs

First is soft; second should be ok.

What do you think this photograph
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 177): What do you think this photograph

Looks a little soft.

now
thanks





[Edited 2012-09-11 12:55:45]

Quoting boing (Reply 179): now

Still a bit soft, and noticeable compression now.

so
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 181): so

Slightly better.

let's try this other picture
what do you think
thanks

or better with less saturation
thanks

Second one is better, but there is a fair amount of jpeg compression visible.

jpeg compression visible.

can you help me ????
I followed your guide edit
where am I wrong ??

original image



I reduce 1200



save jpg



thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 186): I followed your guide edit where am I wrong ??

Looks like you're taking the right steps, so it might just be that imageshack is compressing it upon upload.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r..._r1347301837.3516cosmodsc_0948.jpg

Reject reason: quality soft

I did it again
What do you think
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 194): I did it again What do you think

Still looks soft.

now
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 190): now thanks

soft
you're welcome

try this
different angle
best light



or this
I used more USM and rubber



[Edited 2012-09-22 09:59:21]

Quoting boing (Reply 198): different angle best light

Quoting boing (Reply 198): or this I used more USM and rubber

First one I guess; the second has far too much jpeg compression to determine much else about.

let's try this other picture
what do you think
thanks




[Edited 2012-09-23 10:26:38]

dd



[Edited 2012-09-23 10:27:36]

let's try this other picture
what do you think
thanks



[Edited 2012-09-23 14:19:44]

Quoting boing (Reply 195): let's try this other picture

Over-exposed and backlit. Not a good combination.

but it is possible to
this photograph
is reduced so bad
to receive such a refusal
thanks

Reject reason: quality blurry grainy common oversharpened

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...47565094.4382asi_cargodsc_8825.jpg

Not too bad, but as the 'common' rejection should tell you, standards are even higher for more common subjects such as this.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 198): Not too bad, but as the 'common' rejection should tell you, standards are even higher for more common subjects such as this.

ok
I understand

this
what do you think
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 199): what do you think

Oversharpened, bit noisy, and some vignetting in corners.

this
what do you think
thanks



[Edited 2012-09-30 10:00:57]

Quoting boing (Reply 201): what do you think

Dirty/birds & blotchy sky.

this
what do you think
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 203): what do you think

Soft and backlit. No chance because of the light.

I hope this fotografia
is better of the previous
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 205): I hope this fotografia is better

Yes, a bit better. Just looks a little soft in some places and maybe starting to be oversharpened to compensate.

Hello
What do you think about this photo

thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 207): What do you think about this photo

A little soft/heat hazed, and has some editing halos.

I try again
starting from the original photography
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 209): I try again

The crop is too wide, and it still has halos & heat haze.

let's try this picture
thanks

What do you think of these two photographs
Thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 212): What do you think of these two photographs

First is a little soft, and both have editing halos.

how can I fix and avoid halos
Thanks
where I halos ????

[Edited 2012-10-15 12:30:10]

Quoting boing (Reply 220): how can I fix and avoid halos

I would start by turning off the D-Lighting on your Nikon. If that doesn't fix it, then it's something you're doing in post-processing.

Nikon D-Lighting is off Ok
indicate where see halos !!! !!!
so I can better understand

in this photo you see still halos ???

Quoting boing (Reply 216): in this photo you see still halos ?

Looks more like vignetting than halos in this one. Notice how the four corners are much darker than the center.

now
what do you think
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 218): what do you think

No visible halos on that one.

now
this photo as you see it
thanks



[Edited 2012-10-16 14:38:30]

Quoting boing (Reply 220): this photo

No halos either, but looks like a lot of noise reduction, and you could have easily avoided the fence in the bottom right.

What do you think this photo
thanks

Slight red cast, but otherwise should be ok.

I would try
also this shot
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 224): I would try also this shot

Looks a bit soft.

now
What do you think
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 226): What do you think

Still a bit soft.

now
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 234): now

Soft and harsh contrast. Also dust spot below tail.

now

some advice is well accepted
thamks




[Edited 2012-10-21 14:54:54]

now

some advice is well accepted
thanks



[Edited 2012-10-22 13:25:43]

as you see it
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 237): some advice is well accepted thanks

Soft.

Quoting boing (Reply 238): as you see it

Also soft/quality problems.

hello
what do you think

thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 240): what do you think

High in frame, soft, and oversaturated color.

This Fotografia
What do you think
thanks

This photography
What do you think
thanks




you can check also this photography
thanks





[Edited 2012-11-06 13:51:23]

First has a cyan tint, harsh contrast, and editing halos; second is dirty and will get you an editing rejection and possibly even warning or ban for whatever you've done in the upper-left corner.

top left I have not done anything, not my interest to change the forografie.
I see the original photograph to find out what happened. then the problem would only dirt???????
Thanks

top left I have not done anything, not my interest to change the forografie.
I see the original photograph to find out what happened. then the problem would only dirt???????
Thanks

this is the original photograph reduced to 1200 confirming that I have not made ​​any changes
if he has any chance i try to develop .
I do not know why it formed the green in the upper left.



with green stripe



thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 240): I do not know why it formed the green in the upper left.

As I said, almost certainly from editing, probably from removing either the dust spot or the vignetting in the corners.

you did not say if this picture has any chance
thamks

It is backlit, and there is a fair amount of compression in the sky.

hi
What do you think of this picture
thanks

Color is a bit oversaturated.

now
thanks

Quoting Boing (Reply 252): now

Slightly better?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...21_k1352927205.4704aladsc_9638.jpg


sorry

what it means : Reject reason: color ok colour

thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 248): what it means : Reject reason: color ok colour

Probably a mistake by the screener. The color looks ok to me, but it is oversharpened.

now
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 250): now thanks

color
quality

welcome

hello
this photograph has a chance
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 258): this photograph has a chance

No

It has

halos/vignetting
high in frame
grain
jpeg compression
poor quality for size

welcome

hello
how do you feel
this photography
thanks

For me personally the crop looks wrong. I would have ended the crop on the right hand side to just right of the vertical stabilizer.

do not look at the size

example x crop
so goes the better crop, or was it better before
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 256): so goes the better crop, or was it better before

This crop is better.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...7141.3912ala_okprova2_dsc_9638.jpg


Hello
and I was rejected this photo
reason Reject reason: soft category

so what do you think
occasion can you tell quale
category photograph
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 258): so what do you think

I think the rejection was correct.

ok
I only asked your opinion on this edit
and which category photograph
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 260): I only asked your opinion on this edit

Color looks a little oversaturated.

Quoting boing (Reply 260): which category

Window View

What are you think?
Thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 268): What are you think?

Motive rejection.

I just wanted you opinion
before putting

What are you think?
Thanks




an opinion for the previous
Thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 265): What are you think?

Color's off (cyan hue) but otherwise not too bad.

Quoting boing (Reply 265): an opinion for the previous

See:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 263): Motive rejection.

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 266): See: Quoting dlowwa (Reply 263): Motive rejection.

I just wanted you opinion
before putting

Quoting boing (Reply 267): I just wanted you opinion before putting

Yes, and I've said my opinion three times now: it will be rejected for 'Motive' because of the obstruction.

kindly
a comment for this picture
before posting
thanks

Looks oversharpened, but still soft towards the back. Might the original be a bit blurry? I am not sure if it has the quality, but consult Dana, as he's the pro, not me. I can't tell due to the very poor light, but is it backlit also? Also could use a bit tighter crop on the left, but not much, just to make the photo a bit more balanced.

Quoting boing (Reply 269): a comment for this picture

Soft and too much noise reduction.

I made these two tests
what do you think
thanks





also add this test



[Edited 2013-01-07 14:32:58]

hello Dana
can valuare my photos
thanks

As for the CRJ, third is best.Perhaps a bit dark and oversharpened.The UA looks way oversharpened. In addition, it looks sort of like HDR, which is against site rules. Or, did you do something way weird witht he shadow highlight/levels? Also looks like a dust sopt below tail.

UA is not HDR, I used it only applies image,
Melting channels and fusion.
It will definitely be the effect of shadows / highlights
Thanks for the ride

Quoting boing (Reply 275): Thanks for the ride

???

Did you use the auto levels? Something is definitely not right, but I can't put my finger on it. It is probably a couple of things.

Quoting boing (Reply 272): I made these two tests

Unfortunately all are quite poor, so don't think there is much chance of them being accepted.

Quoting boing (Reply 273): can valuare my photos

A bit soft and has some editing halos/banding in the sky. Color slightly cyan/oversaturated as well.

hello
I would like to try again with these two photos
we hope that....
thanks

Quoting Boing (Reply 278): I would like to try again with these two photos

First is a bit oversharpened now, and the color is still a bit strong. Second is generally not too bad., but there is some vignetting in the corners.

I reduced the saturation
and the mask contrast
what do you think
thanks

Quoting Boing (Reply 280): what do you think

Color looks better, but the contrast is too harsh. You also should make sure you post your images with sRGB as the embedded profile, otherwise you are going to see a difference in the color/contrast between what you are working on, and what you post/upload.

I did not notice the color profile..
in this photo I lightened the contrast
what do you think
thanks

Quoting Boing (Reply 282): what do you think

Some banding in the sky and contrast a bit harsh.

hello
I did two tests
reworked image, contrasto nullo
schiarito ombre ect
as you see
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 284): I did two tests

Halos and banding in both, though much stronger on the first.

Quoting boing (Reply 284): contrasto nullo schiarito ombre ect

Sorry, don't know what that means.

okay
see if that works better with this picture
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 286): see if that works better with this picture

This has pretty severe banding as well.

I do not understand why the bands are formed
I do not see in this bands
hopefully good



add this photo
I do not see bands ????



[Edited 2013-01-13 13:27:53]

what do you think

[Edited 2013-01-13 13:52:06]

Quoting boing (Reply 288): hopefully good

No banding in either of these two.

Quoting boing (Reply 288): I do not understand why the bands are formed

Almost certainly from your editing.

Quoting boing (Reply 288): I do not see in this bands

Quite obvious in your earlier attempts, but as they have been removed, I can't point it out to you.

ok
but what do you think?
I try to put them in the queue?

thanks

I'm sorry I should create a new Thread
I didn't found the delete option
Sorry

[Edited 2013-01-15 10:53:11]

Quoting boing (Reply 290): but what do you think? I try to put them in the queue?

A touch soft and colors still seem a bit off.

now is better ????
thanks

This foto
as you see it ?
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 294): This foto as you see it ?

Dark, soft, grainy, quality, compression.

try again
with this photograph
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 296): try again

Oversharpened and low contrast.

now
as you see it
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 298): now

Same as above, but contrast is even lower than before. Also a bit dark.

I changed my photo
i did not have space to raise airplane.
this photo as you see it ?
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 306): I changed my photo i did not have space to raise airplane.

Not sure why you changed the centering; now it is too high. Also starting to see some editing halos.

so '

as halo is observed , what procedure needs to be done
thanks

Quoting boing (Reply 302): what procedure needs to be done

Don't introduce them with your editing. You are in danger of receiving an official warning of upload ban if you upload an image like the above, as you are changing the sky color/brightness too much - see how the area between the flaps is a different color from the rest of the sky.



That's indicative of prohibited editing, and has led to upload bans in the past. Whether you're using the shadow/highlight tool or something else, there is one solution: stop using it.

sorry
but the command shadow / highlights you can not use ????
Now i have brighten up the shadows with camera raw as I did before.
but the filter accentuates passage e and Gaussian Blur you can use ???

this photo adjusted only with contrast, curves, Levels.
as you see it
thanks


or with a curve



[Edited 2013-01-19 08:30:08]