Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Feedback Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pre Screening  
User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (2 years 10 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7588 times:

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

http://img24.imageshack.us/img24/8986/30698052.jpg

310 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (2 years 10 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7574 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (2 years 10 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7556 times:

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


User currently offlinevikkyvik From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (2 years 10 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7553 times:

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.


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (2 years 10 months 1 day ago) and read 7549 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (2 years 10 months 11 hours ago) and read 7520 times:

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



http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/3232/bisdsc2945.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (2 years 10 months 10 hours ago) and read 7511 times:

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

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (2 years 10 months 10 hours ago) and read 7507 times:

now it improved??
thanks

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/9898/airlinersdsc2945.jpg


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (2 years 10 months 10 hours ago) and read 7502 times:

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


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (2 years 10 months 9 hours ago) and read 7497 times:

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.

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 7466 times:

thanks
to put more photos
continued here


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 7440 times:

What do you think of this
thanks

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/5674/srilankanairlinersdsc41.jpg


User currently offlineCargoLex From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 7437 times:

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

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 7436 times:

sorry I was wrong

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/5674/srilankanairlinersdsc41.jpg


User currently offlinevikkyvik From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 7431 times:

Looks a bit oversharpened to me.

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (2 years 9 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 7422 times:

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

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 7362 times:

an opinion on this photo
thanks

http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/9781/saudid.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7350 times:

Noisy, and VERY oversharpened.

User currently onlineteopilot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 7336 times:

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!


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7316 times:

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

http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/7756/webdsc1596.jpg


User currently onlineteopilot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7308 times:

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!  


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 7305 times:

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

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/3707/2webdsc1596.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 7291 times:

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

Still quite oversharpened.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 7268 times:

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


http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/3161/saudy3dsc1596.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 7255 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 25, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 7257 times:

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


http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/4466/layonairweb.jpg

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

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 26, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 7246 times:

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.


User currently onlineteopilot From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 27, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 7254 times:

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!  


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 28, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 7248 times:

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

http://img826.imageshack.us/img826/293/saudy3eiezl1024.jpg


and also put this occasion.
Thanks to all

http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/4029/cargowebdsc2952.jpg


User currently offlinevikkyvik From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 29, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 7237 times:

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.


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 30, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7221 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 31, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 7204 times:

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 32, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7165 times:

How about this
thanks

http://img688.imageshack.us/img688/8898/iranairepibl.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 33, posted (2 years 9 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 7148 times:

Quoting boing (Reply 32):
How about this

A little flat and noisy, but otherwise ok.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 34, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 7123 times:

I was rejected because soft
What do you think?


http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/4426/airlinersdsc1024.jpg


User currently offlineCargolex From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 35, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 7121 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 36, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 7116 times:

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


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 37, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 7095 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 38, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7085 times:

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 .....

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/8584/austrialianoelnndsc4836.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 39, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 7080 times:

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

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 40, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 7077 times:

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

recommendations?
less sharpening!
thanks


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 41, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 7067 times:

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.

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 42, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7041 times:

original image, reduced to 1200
thanks waiting for news

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/9828/dsc4836t.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 43, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7036 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 44, posted (2 years 9 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 7032 times:

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 45, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6979 times:

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

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/9828/dsc4836t.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 46, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6970 times:

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

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 47, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6954 times:

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

http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/4466/layonairweb.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 48, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 6935 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 49, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 6930 times:

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 50, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 6929 times:

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

http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/2148/thai171211dsc4108.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 51, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 6924 times:

Quoting boing (Reply 50):
How about

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 52, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 6931 times:

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

http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/4049/thaioriginale.jpg


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 53, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 6881 times:

Dlowwa, What do you think
thanks


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 54, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 6861 times:

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


http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/4857/dsc3174t.jpg

http://img535.imageshack.us/img535/4006/neos13212dsc3553.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 55, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 6857 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 56, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 6858 times:

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
http://img839.imageshack.us/img839/8305/dsc4865w.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 57, posted (2 years 9 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 6853 times:

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

See areas circled in red.

http://img542.imageshack.us/img542/4006/neos13212dsc3553.jpg

Quoting boing (Reply 56):
I also put this

Some heat haze, but otherwise not bad.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 58, posted (2 years 9 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 6775 times:

tell me your opinion
thanks


http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/8026/bisgulfair.jpg

http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/9683/weboktur.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 59, posted (2 years 9 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6768 times:

Quoting boing (Reply 58):
tell me your opinion

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 60, posted (2 years 9 months 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 6761 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 59):
suffering from jpeg compressi

What should be done
thanks


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 61, posted (2 years 9 months 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 6741 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 62, posted (2 years 9 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6728 times:

so it's better
thanks


http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/8757/parerebisdsc2861.jpg


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 63, posted (2 years 9 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6717 times:

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

can go so

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/3448/provaduedsc3754.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 64, posted (2 years 9 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 6712 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 65, posted (2 years 9 months 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6690 times:

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

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/7814/20120329l13322819816877.jpg

the plane so I have to hit:
thanks

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/2783/provabasso.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 66, posted (2 years 9 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6685 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 67, posted (2 years 9 months 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6678 times:

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 68, posted (2 years 9 months 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6670 times:

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 69, posted (2 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6622 times:

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



http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/3162/flybegjedp3012012dsc472.jpg

http://img846.imageshack.us/img846/5686/oman2532012dsc5493.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 70, posted (2 years 8 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 6606 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 71, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 6577 times:

I wanted to try this shot
thanks

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/4151/webpareredsc4342.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 72, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 6572 times:

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

Also suffering from some heat haze.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 73, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 6574 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 72):

I try .....

and this
Thanks to the availability

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/5033/webpareredsc5003.jpg


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 74, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 6572 times:

[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]

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 75, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 6560 times:

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?


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 76, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 6548 times:

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


http://img40.imageshack.us/img40/7028/rifattawebdsc3553.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 77, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 6528 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 78, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 6516 times:

opinion on some photos
thanks

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/308/bis392011dsc1021.jpg

http://img860.imageshack.us/img860/6807/pareredsc5006.jpg

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/7292/parere1dsc3193.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 79, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 6491 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 80, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6482 times:

proceed in order.
oversharpened, noisy, quality for the second;
http://img860.imageshack.us/img860/6807/pareredsc5006.jpg

and now as;
http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/8444/prova1dsc5006.jpg

noisy, soft, contrast for the thrid.

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/7292/parere1dsc3193.jpg

and now as;
http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/6833/prova1dsc3193.jpg

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

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

Soft, dark/contrast for the first;
http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/308/bis392011dsc1021.jpg

and now as;
http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/2355/prova1dsc1021.jpg


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

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 81, posted (2 years 8 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 6468 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 82, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 6426 times:

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]

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 83, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 6412 times:

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

User currently offlineTomskii From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 84, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 6412 times:

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  .


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 85, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 3 days 17 hours ago) and read 6397 times:

Quoting Tomskii (Reply 84):

What should you


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 86, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6364 times:

I wanted to try this

http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/2332/webmusodsc6226.jpg

thanks


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 87, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 6362 times:

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.

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 88, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6344 times:

it is better that way!!!!

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/1743/web2dsc6226gc.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 89, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6340 times:

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

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 90, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6339 times:

try last time with this

thanks

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/8070/web3dsc6226.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 91, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6333 times:

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

Still quite soft.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 92, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6323 times:

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

http://img576.imageshack.us/img576/1487/web4provaokdsc6226.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 93, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 6317 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 94, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6316 times:

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?

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/3217/web5ultima3dsc6226.jpg


how about this?

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/2300/web1okdsc6260.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 95, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6310 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 96, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6308 times:

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


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 97, posted (2 years 8 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6304 times:

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.

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 98, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 6293 times:

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

http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/2808/pass1basedsc6260.jpg

as is? I have to apply a contrast curve ?

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

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 99, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 6280 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 100, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6277 times:

I put !!!!!
thanks for patience


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 101, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 6238 times:

hello
I would try this shot

http://img543.imageshack.us/img543/296/webdsc6323.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 102, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 6239 times:

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

Should be ok.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 103, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 6216 times:

I want to try this shot
What do you think
thantks

http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/70/webdsc6682.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 104, posted (2 years 8 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 6203 times:

Not the best light, but the quality seems ok.

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 105, posted (2 years 8 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6170 times:

This foto was refused
1 time x grainy oversharpened
2 time x soft
now what do you think !!!
thanks
http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/26/webdsc4480.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 106, posted (2 years 8 months 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 6157 times:

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

A bit yellow, but passable for me.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 107, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 6018 times:

I wanted to put this
What do you think
thanks

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/8307/websingstardsc6843.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 108, posted (2 years 7 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 6005 times:

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

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 109, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5989 times:

I think it is heat, cancel singapore ok

Provo this page foto
thanks

http://img801.imageshack.us/img801/8531/prova1basedsc0463.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 110, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 5980 times:

A bit yellow, but otherwise ok.

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 111, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5968 times:

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]

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 112, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 5965 times:

Color looks better than the previous one.

User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 113, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 5940 times:

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

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/5946/webdsc5366.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 114, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 5929 times:

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

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 115, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5918 times:

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
http://img528.imageshack.us/img528/533/basesingdsc64002.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 116, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5903 times:

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.

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 117, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 5887 times:

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

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/5/webbisdsc6400.jpg

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

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 118, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 5855 times:

What do you think of this
thanks

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/5434/webcaraibesc6416.jpg


User currently offlineTomskii From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 119, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 5850 times:

First thing that comes up to my mind: Level

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 120, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5841 times:

now better Level ( then crop )
thanks
http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/2626/aircaraibesbisokdsc6416.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 121, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5836 times:

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

This one will be rejected for being soft.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 122, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5835 times:

so
http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/2626/aircaraibesbisokdsc6416.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 123, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5832 times:

Quoting boing (Reply 122):

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 124, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5826 times:

What do you think of this
thanks

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/2130/webhainandsc6556.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 125, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 5823 times:

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

Slightly oversharpened and needs a tighter crop.


User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 126, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5805 times:

This foto
Heat can be seen !!!
thanks

http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/680/webarmaviabaseadsc6806.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 127, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 5809 times:

Yes, definitely soft from heat haze.

User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 128, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 5794 times:

What do you think of this
thanks

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/4912/webdsc1001.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 129, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 5782 times:

Quoting Boing (Reply 128):
What do you think of this

A bit blurry & grainy; the whites are not white, probably from editing; there's a border on the top edge.


User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 130, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5771 times:

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 129):

now

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/3352/webbisokdsc1001.jpg


This occasion I put this
thanks

http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/4454/webdolomitidsc3763.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 131, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 5769 times:

Quoting Boing (Reply 130):
now

Still blurry/quality/grainy/color. Border is still there as well.

Quoting Boing (Reply 130):
This occasion I put this

Not too bad, though there is a fair amount of compression visible.


User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 132, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 5763 times:

I do not understand Compression
why occurs
I do as a guide
advice
thanks


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 133, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days ago) and read 5762 times:

Quoting Boing (Reply 132):
I do not understand Compression
why occurs

see: Rejection Guide - Compression


User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 134, posted (2 years 7 months 6 days ago) and read 5760 times:

I followed guide
because verificy


User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 135, posted (2 years 7 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 5746 times:

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

http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/8041/dolomitiokdsc3763.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 136, posted (2 years 7 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 5745 times:

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

User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 137, posted (2 years 7 months 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 5737 times:

I hope is ok
thanks

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/8041/dolomitiokdsc3763.jpg


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 138, posted (2 years 7 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5718 times:

you can check also this picture
thanks

http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/1486/americandsc6521.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 139, posted (2 years 7 months 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5715 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 140, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5706 times:

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
http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/8041/dolomitiokdsc3763.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 141, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 5691 times:

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.


User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 142, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5689 times:

How about this
thanks

http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/2508/thaiokdsc6527.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 143, posted (2 years 7 months 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 5685 times:

Quoting Boing (Reply 142):
How about this

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


User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 144, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5673 times:

What do you think
this cut
thanks

http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/4544/kmldsc6214.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 145, posted (2 years 7 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 5667 times:

Poor crop, especially bottom left.

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 146, posted (2 years 7 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 5636 times:

something like this
looks sympathetic (playground zurich airport )

thanks

http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/3205/hbiyu.jpg


User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 147, posted (2 years 7 months 14 hours ago) and read 5613 times:

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]

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 148, posted (2 years 6 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 5583 times:

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

User currently offlineBoing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 149, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5473 times:

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

http://img195.imageshack.us/img195/2508/thaiokdsc6527.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 150, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 5436 times:

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

Should be ok.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 151, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 5429 times:

these two photo
thanks

http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/1376/livingdsc4821.jpg

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/6904/koreadsc4694.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 152, posted (2 years 6 months 2 weeks 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 5411 times:

Both a little soft, but generally ok.

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 153, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 5345 times:

hello
I wanted to try this shot
thanks
http://img684.imageshack.us/img684/5174/britidsc7754.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 154, posted (2 years 6 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 5334 times:

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

Not too bad, should have a decent chance.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 155, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 5036 times:

hello
What do you think of this
thanks

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/4716/dsc4740x.jpg


User currently offlineTomskii From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 156, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 5027 times:

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

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 157, posted (2 years 5 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 5015 times:

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

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 158, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 4755 times:

hello
What do you think of this
thanks

http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/2326/provawizzdsc0448.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 159, posted (2 years 5 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4744 times:

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

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 160, posted (2 years 5 months 19 hours ago) and read 4727 times:

I changed photos
better !!

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/4532/wizzprovaokdsc8477.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 161, posted (2 years 5 months 12 hours ago) and read 4706 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 162, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4689 times:

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

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/6707/wizzprovaokdsc8477copia.jpg

or this

http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/9480/weboquestadsc0449.jpg

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

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 163, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4677 times:

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

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 164, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 4681 times:

this photograph has a chance ?
thanks

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/1463/dsc0307za.jpg


User currently offlinewhales From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 165, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 4637 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

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

William


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 166, posted (2 years 4 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 4609 times:

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

Soft and a bit dark, so probably not.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 167, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4419 times:

Reject reason:
Soft

http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/7350/musodsc6336.jpg

now

http://img17.imageshack.us/img17/952/musobisokdsc6336.jpg

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

http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/1471/noudsc8540.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 168, posted (2 years 4 months 2 weeks 14 hours ago) and read 4399 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 169, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4381 times:

What do you think
better ?????
thanks

http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/7432/musotrissokdsc6336.jpg

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/9676/noubisokdsc8540.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 170, posted (2 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 4362 times:

Quoting boing (Reply 163):
What do you think

First is bordering on os now; second maybe passable.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 171, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 4068 times:

Hello
What do you think of this photo
thanks

http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/8480/skydsc0751.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 172, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 4058 times:

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

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 173, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 4038 times:

reworked the original picture
what do you think
thanks


http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/1038/skybisdsc0751.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 174, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 4027 times:

Quoting boing (Reply 167):
what do you think

Better. A bit oversharpened in places now.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 175, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 4022 times:

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


http://img803.imageshack.us/img803/3661/sky3dsc0751.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 176, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4014 times:

Best so far, but still marginal.

User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 177, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3995 times:

now
thanks

http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/6033/sky4dsc0751.jpg


also add this photo

http://img838.imageshack.us/img838/6279/jetdsc0737.jpg

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

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 178, posted (2 years 3 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3982 times:

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.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 179, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3933 times:

What do you think this photograph
thanks

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/5810/provaskydsc8803.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 180, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3927 times:

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

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


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 181, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3910 times:

what do you think
these two photographs
thanks

http://img818.imageshack.us/img818/5097/cosmodsc0948.jpg

http://img823.imageshack.us/img823/9600/belleairpr8687.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 182, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 3893 times:

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

First is soft; second should be ok.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 183, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 3873 times:

What do you think this photograph
thanks

http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/3285/asianacargo8825.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 184, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 3870 times:

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

Looks a little soft.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 185, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 13 hours ago) and read 3846 times:

now
thanks



http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/7251/asianacargobisdsc8825.jpg

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

User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 186, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3840 times:

Quoting boing (Reply 179):
now

Still a bit soft, and noticeable compression now.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 187, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3819 times:

so
thanks

http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/9999/asicargodsc8825.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 188, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 3815 times:

Quoting boing (Reply 181):
so

Slightly better.


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 189, posted (2 years 3 months 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 3804 times:

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


http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/4647/dhldsc0896.jpg


User currently offlineboing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 190, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 3746 times:

or better with less saturation
thanks

http://imageshack.us/a/img513/1678/dhlmenosatdsc0896.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 191, posted (2 years 3 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 3736 times:

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