Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Feedback Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pre-Screening (Tomskii)  
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 7 months 14 hours ago) and read 6430 times:

Hey guys,

went out for spotting today and here's my first pic. I'm lets say fairly new to this when you compare me to others on here so I'm looking for valuable feedback on how to improve my aircraft photography and getting my images on Airliners.net

I think that this picture: http://www.airliners.net/ufview.file?id=145937&filename=phpXQhIpv.jpeg might need a tad sharpening but I'm not sure as I'm not working on my Photoshop pc but on my work pc.

Thanks for helping me out in advance!

Tom


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
203 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2913 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 14 hours ago) and read 6434 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Thread starter):
might need a tad sharpening but I'm not sure as I'm not working on my Photoshop pc but on my work pc.

Hi Tom,

Composition looks fine although i'd probably crop a little more from the left of the frame to even the amount of blue sky left and right of the aircraft. The front of the aircraft is a little blurry and even with more sharpenig, it's unlikely you'll able to recover that one I'm afraid. This is a common aircraft with lots of photos in the database so standards are a little higher than normal. What aperture / shutter speed did you use? I've not seen the histogram, but the contrast looks like it needs increasing a little too. Other than that, it's not a bad try.

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 offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 13 hours ago) and read 6427 times:

Hi Darren,

Thanks for the info! I will be uploading more pics soon. As for the histogram and such:
Program (Aperture priority) A
Aperture: f8
Shutter Speed: 1/320s so it's a bit on the slow side, but that's because I've overexposed the pic a bit to keep the noise to a minimum.

Histogram: http://www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/misc/uf/145937/phpQB1nxb.jpeg

EDIT: What do you think about this one? Think my shutter speed might have been a tad too slow as well but I prefer hearing it from someone who has 'the eye'. It seems maybe a tad oversharpened to me but again I might be wrong!

http://www.airliners.net/uf/145937/phpTwDLf9.jpeg

[Edited 2012-02-20 08:39:37]

EDIT2: Or this one?

http://www.airliners.net/uf/145937/phpZqR68K.jpeg


[Edited 2012-02-20 08:48:34]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2913 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 13 hours ago) and read 6419 times:

Maybe that's why the front of the aircraft is a little blurry compared to the rest of the frame. There's no problem in using ISO 200, most dSLR's produce little noise at ISO 200 to give you a little more shutter speed if needed. I regularly use ISO 200 in the winter months when the light isn't as strong so don't worry about increasing it. The histogram confirms the contrast I mentioned above.

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 offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 13 hours ago) and read 6418 times:

First one is blurry and flat; second one is better, but too high in the frame.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 13 hours ago) and read 6416 times:

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 3):

Thanks darren,

I'm going out thursday morning again for spotting at BRU so. As for know please look at the 2 foto's in the editted msg above. Thanks again for all your help!

Tom



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 13 hours ago) and read 6416 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 5):
please look at the 2 foto'

It is soft. You might also want to convert the colorspace for your images to sRGB before you upload, as that's how they will be displayed on the web/when they are screened. Otherwise you are going to be seeing a difference in the colors between what you are working on, and what you upload.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 12 hours ago) and read 6411 times:

It should already be set to sRGB, as for the 2nd pic. I suppose I should crop until the space below the plane equals the space above.


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 11 hours ago) and read 6402 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 7):
It should already be set to sRGB, as for the 2nd pic

It is not. It is currently set to Adobe RGB, and when opening the file in Photoshop, the colors are quite different from how they are displayed in the browser.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6378 times:

Allrighty, i'll make sure to change that in photoshop then. As for the picture the flat one was the SN airbus Insuppose and the second soft one is the JetairFly right?


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 6348 times:

What about this? It's the JetairFly again but recropped it and sharpened it. It is also in sRGB 16-bit. I feel like I might have oversharpened it, or maybe I'm just wrong. I used a guideline to put the plane in the middle but I still feel like (might be wrong again) that it's slightly too high in frame.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0015.jpg

Thanks for the help,

Tom



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2913 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 6342 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 10):
feel like I might have oversharpened it

It is a little oversharp and too high in the frame.

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 offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6342 times:

Sounds a bit dumb probably but how much should I get the airplane down in the picture. Seems I have some issues distinguishing the right ratio between upper and lower part of the plane at that angle.


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 13, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6330 times:

Sharpening should be ok, but it is slightly high.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 12):
how much should I get the airplane down in the picture.

It's not an exact science, but there are two things that can help: 1) try looking at the thumbnail version to get an idea of the overall centering, and 2) don't forget to consider the tail fin, as it is also part of the aircraft.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6327 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 13):
It's not an exact science, but there are two things that can help: 1) try looking at the thumbnail version to get an idea of the overall centering, and 2) don't forget to consider the tail fin, as it is also part of the aircraft.

Thanks,

That's where I go wrong I guess: the tail. As for the sharpening: you would bring it down just slightly if I understand you well?

Tom



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 15, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 6314 times:

Sharpening looks ok overall, like I said. I can only see a few jaggies on the flaps.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 6307 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 15):
Sharpening looks ok overall, like I said. I can only see a few jaggies on the flaps.

Jep noticed that too. So if I just bring the pic a bit down and upload it to the queue I should be ok right?

EDIT: Wasn't exactly what you'd call nice weather today but hey. Went to the BRU General Aviation area and some Italian diplomatic just arrived in his D'assault Falcon. What do you think?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0113.jpg

[Edited 2012-02-23 04:59:15]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 17, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6296 times:

Unlevel and very poor contrast I'm afraid.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6292 times:

Both things can be arranged, will post re-edited tomorrow.


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 6280 times:

How's this? I did a small rotate on the pic CW as I thought the pic was not level (going down) from right to left. Secondly adjusted contrast.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0113%28re-edit%29.jpg

EDIT: Might be a bit low in frame now though, or is it just me?

[Edited 2012-02-24 05:38:59]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 6275 times:

And I re-edited OO-JAS the jetairfly 737:

Is this better or did I put it too low in frame now? How's the sharpening?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0015%282%29.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 21, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6253 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 19):
How's this?

Still needs a tiny bit of cw rotation, and contrast is still not great, though I don't think you'll be able to do much more to improve it.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 20):
And I re-edited OO-JAS the jetairfly 737:

Maybe a touch low, and color a bit strong, but might be passable. Sharpening should be fine.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6252 times:

Cheers,

I'll get the colors down a bit and then see how it goes in the queue, do you think it stands a chance?



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 23, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 6237 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 22):
do you think it stands a chance?

With minor corrections, yes.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6233 times:

Hi again Dana,

Brought the saturation of the colors down a bit and reworked from the original to crop again. This time I lowered it a bit in comparison to the first edit, but it is higher than the second edit.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0015%283%29.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 25, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 6213 times:

Color still looks a bit off, but might be worth a try as is.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 26, posted (2 years 6 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 6214 times:

Well to me the colors are quite right as I see those planes regularly, but I suppose you mean the sky.

Once again thanks for all help, pic has been uploaded,

Tom



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 6169 times:

Dana again thanks for all your help, has paid off! First acceptance on a.net


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 28, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6110 times:

2 more pics from today. Tell me what you think. 1st one has received 1° of CW. Second one I wasn't sure.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0003.jpg

Not sure if it needs a bit more lighting or not.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0013.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 29, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6103 times:

Both have very poor (low) contrast. The LH also seems a bit blurry.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 30, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6100 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 29):
The LH also seems a bit blurry.

Mmm weird I would've thought you would've said that about the SN one and not the LH one. Anyways I'll give the contrast a boost of the first one.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0003%282%29.jpg How's this?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0013%282%29.jpg

[Edited 2012-03-10 04:29:02]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 31, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 6076 times:

I can see you've increased the contrast a lot on both, but to be honest because the light was pretty terrible to begin with, they only look a little bit better. You can try adding more contrast, but the benefit won't be that significant. Better to wait for nicer conditions next time.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 6075 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 31):
I can see you've increased the contrast a lot on both, but to be honest because the light was pretty terrible to begin with, they only look a little bit better. You can try adding more contrast, but the benefit won't be that significant. Better to wait for nicer conditions next time.

Conditions indeed where sh*t, so if I understand you well you think it won't have any big effect if I work on the contrast anymore due to the poor light.



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 33, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 6012 times:

Picture from today (sun was setting) so I don't know if the orangy cast is an issue (as it's the normal lighting of the sun on the plane at this time of the day. Secondly I didn't exactly know how to crop a cockpit picture properly so feel free to give me advice on that  !

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0044.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 34, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 6000 times:

And this one:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0025.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 35, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 5990 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 34):
And this one:

Dark, and really poor/unmotivated crop.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 36, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 5989 times:

And the first one? How would you crop it? Exclude the engine and just use the nose till the fwd door?


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 37, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 5986 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 36):
And the first one?

Crop is better, but also a bit dark.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 36):
How would you crop it?

Pretty much any way other than what you did. Why did you crop it like that? Any specific reason, or was that simply what came out of the camera? Take a look through the database at previously accepted images to get an idea of what kind of crop is acceptable. That you can't find any similar to yours would be a good hint that such a crop wouldn't be acceptable.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 38, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 5987 times:

So if I brighten the LX one up a bit, crop should be ok? Anyways I'll take a look at the db to have an idea how to crop it.  


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5964 times:

How's this now Dana? http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0044%282%29.jpg

EDIT: I suppose this one will not be able to make it because of quality/oversharpening? Or am I wrong?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0002.jpg

[Edited 2012-03-15 09:56:24]

EDIT2: Not sure about the cropping here and I suppose it might be a bit dark as well? http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0040.jpg


[Edited 2012-03-15 10:24:15]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5947 times:

And another one: I suppose (after looking up some images on Airliners.net) that this crop isn't good for Airliners.net either? Just want the confirmation  http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0007.jpg

Also please look at the pictures above, thanks for your help Dana!



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 41, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5919 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 39):
How's this now Dana?

Should have a pretty good chance.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 39):
EDIT: I suppose this one will not be able to make it because of quality/oversharpening? Or am I wrong?

Maybe a bit os, but bigger problem is the harsh contrast.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 39):
EDIT2

Looks ok

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 40):
And another one: I suppose (after looking up some images on Airliners.net) that this crop isn't good for Airliners.net either?

Better than the TAP, but if you want to be really safe, try to avoid cutting the engine.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 42, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5916 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 41):
Maybe a bit os, but bigger problem is the harsh contrast.

Not sure what you mean by os?   I've brought the contrast down a bit:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0002%282%29.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 43, posted (2 years 6 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5901 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 42):
Not sure what you mean by os?

os = Over Sharpened.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 42):
I've brought the contrast down a bit:

Slight yellow tint, but otherwise looks passable.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 5880 times:

Better? http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0002%283%29.jpg


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 45, posted (2 years 6 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5865 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 44):
Better?

Should have a good chance.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 46, posted (2 years 5 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 5765 times:

The LX has been rejected, because I've left too much space on the top of the plane. Oh well, just a small re-edit and done  


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 47, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 5714 times:

What do you think about these:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0021.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0019.jpg

Not sure about cropping on the last one.

EDIT:

Suppose this one is too high in frame?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0027.jpg

[Edited 2012-03-28 09:54:49]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 48, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 5704 times:

All three are a little soft and flat, but otherwise ok. Third one is a little low, but should be passable. It also has some dust spots.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 49, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5704 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 48):
All three are a little soft and flat, but otherwise ok. Third one is a little low, but should be passable. It also has some dust spots.

So a bit more contrast I suppose. As for the dust spots, only visible on the third?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0021%282%29.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0019%282%29.jpg

[Edited 2012-03-28 12:03:47]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 50, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 5695 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 49):
As for the dust spots, only visible on the third?

As far as I could see, yes.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 51, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5695 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 50):

As far as I could see, yes.

Two last pics are good now as for contrast and sharpness?



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 52, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 5692 times:

Sharpness is ok, the second one looks a little overexposed now. Light is quite marginal for that one.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 53, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 5680 times:

Ok thanks! I will bring the exposure down a bit and see what that does.


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 54, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 5678 times:

Ok now?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0019%283%29.jpg

[Edited 2012-03-29 02:19:04]

[Edited 2012-03-29 02:20:39]
Adjusted a bit of brightness here as well so the nose isn't as overexposed and details are better readable  Smile Tell me if you like the previous version better or this one.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0021%283%29.jpg


[Edited 2012-03-29 02:40:57]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 55, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 5660 times:

I removed the dust spots on the JAF and increased contrast a bit. Tell me what you think (and don't forget the previous post of course ^^)

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0027%282%29.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 56, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 5652 times:

Your links seem to be broken.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 57, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5650 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 56):
Your links seem to be broken.

Do they? I still can see the pics.
Even after a hard refresh.

[Edited 2012-03-29 09:40:42]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 58, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5641 times:

Working now. Second should be fine; first is a bit contrasty but will probably be ok.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5640 times:

And what about the JAF? Is that one ok or would you advise not to upload it because of the light?


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 60, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 5635 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 59):
And what about the JAF? Is that one ok or would you advise not to upload it because of the light?

Contrast is a bit harsh, but I've seen worse, so might as well give it a shot.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 61, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5633 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 60):
Contrast is a bit harsh, but I've seen worse, so might as well give it a shot.

Reduced the contrast slightly. Thanks again for your help! Have I mentioned that the KL E190 made it AND is a first addition to the database because it is new?



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 62, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5534 times:

Another one:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0032.jpg

I suppose it might be a tad too dark and probably it has some other issues, anyways interested in your opinion. I also think it might be a bit low in frame?

[Edited 2012-04-12 11:26:56]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 63, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5527 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 62):
Another one:

A touch soft, but should otherwise be ok.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 64, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5529 times:

Really, not too dark or anything? (Lol must be weird to see me surprised?)

EDIT:

Better?
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0032%282%29.jpg

[Edited 2012-04-12 11:47:09]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 65, posted (2 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5524 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 64):
Really, not too dark or anything?

Well, the front part is obviously covered in shadow, but not much you can do about it now.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 64):
EDIT:

Better?

Looks passable.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 66, posted (2 years 5 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5503 times:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0011.jpg

Is this one too low in frame? I wasn't sure but when I look at it, it seems a bit low in frame.
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0017.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0027.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059.jpg

[Edited 2012-04-14 08:56:10]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 67, posted (2 years 5 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5490 times:

Last three are a little bright, especially 2 & 3. The TG is a little low, but the light is pretty bad, so probably not worth trying to fix.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 68, posted (2 years 5 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5486 times:

I see, will reduce the brightness on the last 2 and increase on the first LH. Light conditions were indeed variable so the TG will have to wait to join my a.net collection  

Thanks again for your valuable feedback.



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (2 years 5 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5485 times:

Hows this? Only made minor adjustments to the brightness of the IB and Transavia as you said a little too bright haha. But the LH has had a bigger increase of brightness.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0011(2).jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0027(2).jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059(2).jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 70, posted (2 years 5 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 5460 times:

Not sure why you brightened the LH; the other two look better for exposure.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 71, posted (2 years 5 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 5454 times:

Oh I misunderstood then. So the LH is ok then (first version)? Will adjust exposure on the other 2

[Edited 2012-04-15 00:19:53]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 72, posted (2 years 5 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5442 times:

Better/Worse?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0027(3).jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059(3).jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 73, posted (2 years 5 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5434 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 72):
Better/Worse?

A bit better.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 74, posted (2 years 5 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5433 times:

Would you bring it down a bit more or should they be ok?


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 75, posted (2 years 5 months 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 5431 times:

Exposure? Just leave it where it is. The light's not too great (especially on the IB, which if anything looks flat) so just put them through and see how it goes - just be prepared for issues with the IB.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 76, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5428 times:

What do you think about this one?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0033.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 77, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5401 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 76):
What do you think about this one?

Touch flat, but otherwise ok.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 78, posted (2 years 5 months 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 5397 times:

Cheers, will increase the contrast a bit and upload it. Thanks again!

EDIT: This should be better then:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0033(2).jpg

[Edited 2012-04-16 12:45:36]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 79, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5302 times:

Hi Dana,

I have been spotting today. I will tell you that it was cloudy, but I still wanted to have some feedback on some pictures. I have editted a first one, a Asiana 744F. I've editted it the usual way but with the sharpening I did the regular one like I do normally and a second edition with the High Pass Technique. Please tell me what you think.

Regular
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0057.jpg

High Pass
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0057%28high%20pass%29.jpg

I thank you again for your time and the help you have given me in the passed (My latest pictures were all accepted btw).

Greetings,

Tom



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 80, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 5282 times:

Second one is better for sharpening; both have a slight cyan/yellow cast to them.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 81, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5275 times:

Any change? I have the feeling it's too red now, but I might be wrong. What would you suggest to adjust the casts?
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0057%282%29.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 82, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5275 times:

This one needs a bit more of CW I think? And if you have other remarks, I will be pleased to hear them of course!  http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0036.jpg


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinefrankc From Belgium, joined Oct 2011, 100 posts, RR: 0
Reply 83, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5263 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi Tom, the verticals lean to the left, so CW is indeed needed.
I think the aircraft is a bit high in the frame too, given the large tail.
Cheers
Frank


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 84, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5253 times:

It does need a touch of cw; it also has a yellow/green cast, and is a bit contrasty.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 85, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5249 times:

I'll leave the Austrian as it is, as when I took the picture I zoomed in so far on the plane that it resulted in not having enough space to rotate the picture. Anyways thanks.

What do you think of the Asiana re-edit? And I repeat my question, how would you remove the cyan and yellow cast (if it's still there)

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0057%282%29.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 86, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5245 times:

Still looks a little cyan, but not too bad. You can usually balance out cyan by adding more red.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 87, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5236 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 86):
Still looks a little cyan, but not too bad. You can usually balance out cyan by adding more red.

That's what I thought, wont I risk having too much red in the pic then though?

EDIT: Added a bit more red:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0057%283%29.jpg

[Edited 2012-05-10 12:51:42]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 88, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 5224 times:

I honestly don't see a big difference between the third and fourth versions, but if I had to go with one, it would be third.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 89, posted (2 years 4 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 5202 times:

New material, tell me what you think! (more coming up as soon (tomorrow probably) as I have done the following edits)

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0016.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0040.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0094.jpg

[Edited 2012-05-14 12:20:19]

[Edited 2012-05-14 12:29:38]



[Edited 2012-05-14 12:58:47]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 90, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 5179 times:

Hi,

First will be rejected for motive, the second two have a yellow/green cast and are partially backlit so will have a difficult time with the light.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 91, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 5175 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 90):
Hi,

First will be rejected for motive,

Why the first one for motive? Because of the nosewheel that is blocked by the fence?


The other two indeed have a bit of backlit due to the sun that was already almost facing them  . I maybe should've chosen the opposite side of the runway as soon as the sun was backlitting the planes.  

So you guess, both the last pictures would not make it due to the light right? (after removing the yellow and green cast)



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 92, posted (2 years 4 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 5167 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 91):
Why the first one for motive? Because of the nosewheel that is blocked by the fence?

Yes.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 91):
So you guess, both the last pictures would not make it due to the light right? (after removing the yellow and green cast)

The second would have a bit better chance than the third.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 93, posted (2 years 4 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 5150 times:

Thanks I'll work on the second one then to remove the yello and greenish cast

Thanks for your time again!



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 94, posted (2 years 4 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5123 times:

Hows This:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0040(2).jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 95, posted (2 years 4 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5117 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 94):
Hows This:

Color slightly better; light is still marginal; I've also just noticed there is some relatively strong vignetting in the corners.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 96, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5092 times:

Would this one have any chance? (taken today)
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0055.jpg

And then I have another picture which I am unsure about wether the motive is enough to let it pass. (I also noted that, due to the distance the plane is quite hazy, but maybe the motive is more important. Anyways thanks)

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0050.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 97, posted (2 years 4 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5089 times:

And would this be able to make the cut?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0085.jpg

PS: Don't forget about the two previous pics when answerring to this post  



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 98, posted (2 years 4 months 23 hours ago) and read 5069 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 96):
Would this one have any chance?

A bit too bright and heat-hazed, so probably not.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 96):
And then I have another picture which I am unsure about wether the motive is enough to let it pass.

No, not sure why the pole would be motive for such a crop.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 97):
And would this be able to make the cut?

No, quality is just not there unfortunately.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 99, posted (2 years 4 months 21 hours ago) and read 5066 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 98):
No, not sure why the pole would be motive for such a crop.

Not the pole, but the people sitting on the right  



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 100, posted (2 years 4 months 21 hours ago) and read 5066 times:

How's this then, (I've included a 1600px version and the regular size I do thus 1200px, tell me if the 1600 would make the cut or not  )

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059%20%282%29.jpg

Large:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059%28large%29.jpg

I have the feeling they are both still a bit soft and need some sharpening.

Tom

[Edited 2012-05-20 01:40:58]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 101, posted (2 years 4 months 15 hours ago) and read 5061 times:

(This is the re-sharpened version of the 1600px wide one)

Large 2:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059%28large2%29.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 102, posted (2 years 4 months 10 hours ago) and read 5056 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 99):
Not the pole, but the people sitting on the right

Hardly enough to justify the off-center & distance.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 100):
tell me if the 1600 would make the cut or not

It would not, and neither would the 1200.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 103, posted (2 years 4 months 9 hours ago) and read 5054 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 102):
It would not, and neither would the 1200.

Due to the light/Contrast? (although the sun was shining (in periods :p))



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 104, posted (2 years 4 months 9 hours ago) and read 5054 times:

The light, but more importantly the fact that it is very soft.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 105, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 5038 times:

Also the last version? But I suppose I do not have to put any effort in the picture because of the lighting (although the sun was actually there).


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 106, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5030 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 105):
Also the last version?

Yes.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 107, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5020 times:

The sun is shining it's 28,5 °C and I went spotting. Results are below. Please tell me what you think, and of course what needs improvement/is ok.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0018.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0027%20%282%29.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0043.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059%20%283%29.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0063.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0079.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0087.jpg

[Edited 2012-05-23 09:25:10]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 108, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5011 times:

All have a cyan cast & heat haze. You might be able to hide the haze at 1024, but other than that, there's not much you can do.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 109, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5004 times:

Hi Dana,

Thanks for your reply, I do not doubt your judgement, but for instance on the jetairfly 767 for instance I do not immediately spot any heat haze  



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 110, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 5001 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 109):

No problem, I'm just offering advice. If you decide to go ahead with it, make sure you fix the color & contrast, and also remove the dust spots.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 111, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4993 times:

Any comments on this? http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0032.jpg Mind that the green reflection is due to the grass below, which you should be able to see in the reflection of the plane.  


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 112, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 4976 times:

Whole image (not the reflection on the belly) has a cyan tint.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 113, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 4963 times:

Thanks I'll counter that. Looks like I'll need to check my camera/photoshop settings as you have been telling me on a lot of pics that there is a cyan tint :s.


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 114, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 4961 times:

Added +15 red

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0032(2).jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 115, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4950 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 114):
Added +15 red

Color still looks off.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 116, posted (2 years 3 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4831 times:

Ok it has been a while again but I have 2 shots for you, hope these are not cyan tinted.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0067.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0062.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0076.jpg
Suppose the second one is a bit too soft?

[Edited 2012-06-16 02:19:00]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 117, posted (2 years 3 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 4791 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 114):
Ok it has been a while again but I have 2 shots for you

3 shots, no? All three have issues with color and contrast.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 118, posted (2 years 3 months 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 4789 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 117):
3 shots, no? All three have issues with color and contrast.

Yes, 3 shots lol :p I suppose they have a cyan tint and the contrast is a bit too high(?)



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 119, posted (2 years 3 months 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 4773 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 116):
I suppose they have a cyan tint and the contrast is a bit too high(?)

Exactly. A little cyan, but might also be a little oversaturated.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 120, posted (2 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4774 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 119):

Exactly. A little cyan, but might also be a little oversaturated.

mmm yes I did add like +5 of color saturation, might be that. I'll do a -5 for the saturation, and if the cyan is still there afterwards I'll counter that as well.



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 121, posted (2 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4770 times:

This should be better, all three have had a -10 in saturation, just to make sure. Tell me if the cyan tint is still there and if the contrast is still too high now  http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0067%282%29.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0062%282%29.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0076%282%29.jpg

Thanks again!

Tom



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 122, posted (2 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4763 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 121):
Tell me if the cyan tint is still there and if the contrast is still too high now

Don't see much difference, contrast & color still off.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 123, posted (2 years 3 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 4761 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 122):
Don't see much difference, contrast & color still off.

Could you, maybe if you have the time just download one of these pics and edit the colour and contrast like you would do it in Photoshop? Show the final picture and then eventually tell what you've done, cause I am a bit 'walking in the dark' if you know what I mean at this very moment :s

EDIT: Any better this? https://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0076%283%29.jpg

[Edited 2012-06-17 03:20:29]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 124, posted (2 years 3 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 4745 times:

If you want to send me one the original RAW files, I can do an edit from that. No point in doing it from one of the versions posted above.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 125, posted (2 years 3 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4740 times:

Sent you an email via the contact funtion  


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 126, posted (2 years 3 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4734 times:

Pretty easy to come up with better colors from the RAW file, so whatever you're doing wrong, you're doing it when processing the image. Compare:

Your original edit -

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0067%282%29.jpg

My edit -

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/303/dsc00671200.jpg


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 127, posted (2 years 3 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4732 times:

I think it might be related to my screen, as your edit appears to have a bit of red to it on my screen.  

Any tips on calibrating my screen?   I have a Samsung 2333HD



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 128, posted (2 years 3 months 9 hours ago) and read 4712 times:

How's this btw


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 129, posted (2 years 3 months 9 hours ago) and read 4722 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 128):
How's this btw

It would be rejected for color and contrast; same problems as above.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 130, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4665 times:

How about this?
Not sure about the contrast
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059.jpg

And I suppose this one suffers too much of heat haze but I wanted to see what you think.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0093.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 131, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 4645 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 128):
Not sure about the contrast

Contrast ok, level not.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 128):
I suppose this one suffers too much of heat haze

Yes. Would be rejected for soft & contrast.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 132, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4636 times:

How would you level it as the angle at which it was taken of course causesa little optical illusion  


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 133, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4629 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 130):
How would you level it as the angle at which it was taken of course causesa little optical illusion

No optical illusion, it's severely slanted to the right.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 134, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 4624 times:

How's this? 3° CCW. Does it need more? I've also included a 1600px version, just wondering if it would need more sharpening at that size? (or would it even make the cut?)

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059(2).jpg

Large Version:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059(large).jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 135, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 4587 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 134):
How's this? 3° CCW.

Better, but still might have issues with level. Not sure why you are so keen on 1600 pix, your chances of acceptance drop exponentially when you try images at that size.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 136, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 4577 times:

4 degrees CCW now, should be good I suppose now as the numbers on the ground appear to be completely level now.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0059(3).jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 137, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4570 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 134):

Level should be fine.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 138, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4569 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 135):

Level should be fine.

No other things that might be an issue?

Here are another few new pics.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0011.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0022.jpg

And I suppose this one would be subject to a 'motive' rejection due to the airstairs?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0096.jpg

And this one mainly for lighting (and I suppose due to the distance that heat haze might be an issue as well)

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0090.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 139, posted (2 years 2 months 3 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 4555 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 136):
No other things that might be an issue?

Not the best light, but should be passable.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 136):
Here are another few new pics.

Generally look ok.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 136):
And I suppose this one would be subject to a 'motive' rejection due to the airstairs?

Yes.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 136):
And this one mainly for lighting

Very poor, will be a dark/contrast rejection.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 140, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 4453 times:

And another one for you today, I have the impression I might have cropped it a bit too low in frame.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0028.jpg

In meanwhile, the Portugalia has been accepted and the two other ones will be screened tomorrow probably.

[Edited 2012-07-07 08:07:07]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 141, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 4408 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 138):
And another one for you today

A little soft, but otherwise ok.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 142, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 4413 times:

Better?
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0028%282%29.jpg

[Edited 2012-07-08 09:33:58]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 143, posted (2 years 2 months 1 week 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4370 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 142):
Better?

Yes.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 144, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4036 times:

I'm not giving it a lot of chances but I thought it might be considered as a airport overview submission? Anyways odds are it is either not showing enough of the airport, or if you think the focus is on the plane holding short I suppose it wouldn't stand a chance either?  

Tom

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/OO-RMC%282%29.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 145, posted (2 years 1 month 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 4022 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 142):
I'm not giving it a lot of chances but I thought it might be considered as a airport overview submission?

Not enough of the airport visible for that.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 146, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 3952 times:

3 for you again.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0100.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0196.jpg
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0202.jpg

I feel like I have oversharpened them a bit?



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 147, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3880 times:

Anyone willing to answer?


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 148, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3791 times:

Any comments on this one please?  http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0032.jpg


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 149, posted (2 years 1 month 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3773 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 146):
Any comments on this one please?

A little dark, and personally I think the angle is terrible.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 150, posted (2 years 1 month 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3765 times:

Added just a tad of exposere as I thought it would be overexposed otherwise. Can't change much about the angle since well yeah the pilot flew right over me. Thanks again for your help. Could you also check the 3 pics in my previous post and see if any have a chance? (personally I do not think so)


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 151, posted (2 years 1 month 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 3749 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 148):
Could you also check the 3 pics in my previous post and see if any have a chance?

They're a little on the dark and/or soft side, but should be fixable.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 152, posted (2 years 1 month 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 3738 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 149):
They're a little on the dark and/or soft side, but should be fixable.

Thanks, I'll work on them after the weekend since I'm going on a weekend with some friends. Thanks once again for the help, and about my remark in another topic the other day: I should've rephrased myself better as it seemed I was insinuating that screeners have little or no knowledge.



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 153, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3388 times:

What do you think about this: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0002.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0223.jpg

[Edited 2012-09-09 09:40:39]

EDIT: Suppose I shouldn't even ask due to the lighting but still going to do it:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0161.jpg


[Edited 2012-09-09 09:42:13]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 154, posted (2 years 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3383 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 153):
What do you think about this:

Generally ok.

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 153):
Suppose I shouldn't even ask due to the lighting but still going to do it:

A bit noisy & flat.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 155, posted (2 years 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3353 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 152):
A bit noisy & flat.

And I suppose due to the lighting that it wouldn't really help if I increase contrast? Or would it?



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 156, posted (2 years 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 3350 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 153):
And I suppose due to the lighting that it wouldn't really help if I increase contrast?

You could try.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 157, posted (2 years 16 hours ago) and read 3273 times:

Hi there Dana,

Would this airport overview stand any chance? If yes how do I upload it (because I do not have to select any airplane)?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0071.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 158, posted (2 years 11 hours ago) and read 3262 times:

For motive, the distance and fence kind of kill it for me. Also seems a bit dark and soft.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 159, posted (1 year 12 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3233 times:

Is it just me or did I oversharpen this picture?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0018.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 160, posted (1 year 12 months 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 3219 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 157):
Is it just me or did I oversharpen this picture?

Sharpening looks passable, but it is quite dark.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 161, posted (1 year 12 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 3220 times:

It seems like SN just doesn't like the camera's lol. If you look up SSQ's pics or any other SN plane the 'brussels airlines' in the front always looks quite bad.

Hows this?

EDIT: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0018%282%29.jpg

[Edited 2012-09-19 09:48:59]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 162, posted (1 year 12 months 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 3201 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 161):
Hows this?

Would likely be rejected for dark/harsh contrast.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 163, posted (1 year 12 months 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3187 times:

I can still bring the contrast down, yet would the dark remain a problem you think?


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 164, posted (1 year 12 months 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3164 times:

If it is still underexposed, yes.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 165, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3090 times:

Hey Dana,

Just found this one left on my HDD, any good?
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0225.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 166, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 3074 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 163):
Just found this one left on my HDD, any good?

Noisy, but otherwise should be ok.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 167, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 2492 times:

After a long while I finally found the time again for some spotting, please tell me what you think Dana:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0009.jpg

Not sure if this one would be allowed
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0023.jpg

Nor this one
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0043.jpg

Greetings,

Tom



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 168, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2485 times:

First is dark/contrasty, and is pretty common, so you'll need to have it near perfect. It's also got some pretty obvious dust spots. Second is an awkward crop, but might be acceptable. Third would be no for the crop on the left, and would be double with the second anyway.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 169, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 2484 times:

Was pretty sure about that last one that it wouldn't get past, I'll leave the first one and add it to my personal collection and I'll give the second one a go.

Awkward crop is due to the building where the 9W was sitting, Would've liked a spot where it was in the same position yet without that building on the left :P



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 170, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2479 times:

Too harsh on contrast this one I suppose?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0026.jpg



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 171, posted (1 year 10 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2474 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 168):
Too harsh on contrast this one I suppose?

Too harsh? Too low if anything. Also needs cw rotation.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 172, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2456 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 169):
Too harsh? Too low if anything. Also needs cw rotation.

Lol I thought it would be too harsh (maybe it's just my screen) will edit it again and repost it.

EDIT: How's this?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0026%282%29.jpg

[Edited 2012-11-01 04:27:47]

[Edited 2012-11-01 05:08:42]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 173, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 2447 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 170):
How's this?

Looks better.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 174, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2433 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 171):
Looks better.

Still needs to a bit or is it ok?



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 175, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2426 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 174):
Still needs to a bit or is it ok?

More contrast? No, contrast should be fine.


User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 176, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2415 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 173):

More contrast? No, contrast should be fine.

Allright thanks,

Think my English (or writing skills) have gone out the window with that last post lol



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 177, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2408 times:

Hi there again Dana,

Would this stand any chance?

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0029.jpg

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0045.jpg

Doubt this one but just trying
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0064.jpg

Greetings,

Tom

[Edited 2012-11-02 17:53:52]

[Edited 2012-11-02 17:54:25]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 178, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 2399 times:

First would be rejected for grainy, oversharpened, quality, and maybe centering for the crop. Second is a bit dark. Third would be rejected for blurry and dark.

User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 179, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2404 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 176):
First would be rejected for grainy, oversharpened, quality, and maybe centering for the crop. Second is a bit dark. Third would be rejected for blurry and dark.

Would've expected that for 1 and 3, I'll just make #2 a bit lighter and it should be good  



Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 180, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2383 times:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_0045%282%29.jpg


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm
User currently offlineTomskii From Belgium, joined May 2011, 467 posts, RR: 0
Reply 181, posted (1 year 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2284 times:

Hi Dana another one for you to check:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_2741.jpg

and this one:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33281487/DSC_2743.jpg

[Edited 2012-11-26 10:43:41]


Nikon D90 + Nikkor f4.5-5.6 18-105mm + Tamron f4-5.6 70-300mm