Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Feedback Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Newbie Help  
User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 1642 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

rejected = quality, motive, color, soft

I am really at odds in seeing what is wrong with the rejection. I do understand the motive rejection "motive" they don't want too many just tail shots.

But soft and color? I'm just not getting it. I changed the color temp to 2100 as it got rid of the yellow ramp lighting, but I didn't go beyond that. I used unsharpen mask set very low and repeated.

I have good access for aircraft as I work on the ramp but this processing is eluding me.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...338775.3518expressjet26545nite.jpg

30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMaximLezin From Canada, joined Jun 2011, 360 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1636 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Thread starter):
"motive" they don't want too many just tail shots.

Hi, Well first of all the most probable reason there was a motive rejection included was because you cut off the tail a little bit. It should be completely visible as there is no apparent reason for it not to be.

The quality rejection may have been because you reduced the image size to rapidly, or expanded it too much. Although there can be other reasons.

I cant comment about the colour. Show us the original image and perhaps its salvagable, since this is quite a nice shot!


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1633 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Here is the original after only reducing color temp, convert to jpeg and just size reduction to post here.

I appreciate any suggestions.


2126avaforum by the_saint8, on Flickr


User currently onlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10101 posts, RR: 26
Reply 3, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1623 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It's tough to tell much about quality from a resized original, but your edit looks way overprocessed compared to the original.

It looks both soft and oversharpened to me. Did you use a fair amount of noise reduction or anything?

There's also noise visible, especially in the sky on the lower left.

Max covered the motive.

Color, I'm not entirely sure, maybe a bit red? The airplanes in the background look quite red.



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 1 month 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1606 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 3):
It's tough to tell much about quality from a resized original, but your edit looks way overprocessed compared to the original.

It looks both soft and oversharpened to me. Did you use a fair amount of noise reduction or anything?

There's also noise visible, especially in the sky on the lower left.

Max covered the motive.

Color, I'm not entirely sure, maybe a bit red? The airplanes in the background look quite red.

I have noise reduction set on in the camera settings and when I save to jpg I use best quality. The tail was cut off during the edit as after looking at some tail shots I seen it is sometimes done. As I wanted to focus the attention on the engine nacelle and vertical tail. A judgement call on my part.
?

Thanks to everyone.


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 5, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 1591 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 2):
Here is the original after only reducing color temp,

As Vik mentioned, the quality of the submitted image is much worse than this. You are obviously doing something wrong when editing. I would worry about the crop/motive only after you figure where you're going wrong with the editing.


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1557 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Thanks to everyone who replied and took time to view this topic.

Some more research on my part led me to converting the RAW to TIFF format and then to JPEG only after all editing was done. This took care of the noise (I think).

As for the color of some of the background aircraft, I'll try and play with this. I did have another image shot at the same time but with a bigger F stop number which helps.

Thanks


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1544 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Here is a re-edit of the original. This time RAW to TIFF to JPEG. I feel the noise is reduced and of course now fully visible. I would greatly appreciate critique before I re-submit.

As well I did not receive any email notification of the rejection, so I don't know if the screener had additional comments. Apparently others have not received email notification.


2126update1 by the_saint8, on Flickr


User currently offlineSoaring1972 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1537 times:

It looks quiet unlevel.

User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1535 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Soaring1972 (Reply 8):
It looks quiet unlevel.

Yes I see it now, although I know the left side of the ramp is unlit which exaggerates the effect. If that is all you see, I feel it's an accomplishment. I'll see what anyone else responds with and correct said levelness.


User currently onlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10101 posts, RR: 26
Reply 10, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1530 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

A bit off-level, oversharpened, still some slight noise in the sky, color still looks off (I think too red), and it's a bit low in the frame.


"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 11, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1526 times:

Level should not be an issue. Verticals in center are fine, and edges should slope inward for an UWA shot. Otherwise, Vik's comments are accurate: slightly low, os, and a touch yellow. Just needs minor adjustments.

User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (2 years 1 month 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1525 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 10):
A bit off-level, oversharpened, still some slight noise in the sky, color still looks off (I think too red), and it's a bit low in the frame.

Level, oversharpened and low in frame, I can fix although I felt it was more centered. Noise I have trouble seeing (no pun intended). And I will reduce the red.

I admit I have trouble with colours, as when I view the rejection guidelines and examples I can not see the differences in too blue, red and yellow!?!?!?!

Again everyone's critique is appreciated.


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (2 years 1 month 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1483 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I have been going through some files and found this and I would welcome some critique. It is linked from Flickr which I don't know if it degrades much quality.


fgznftest by the_saint8, on Flickr


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 14, posted (2 years 1 month 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1468 times:

Seems to get a bit soft towards the nose, and there are several large dust spots in the sky. Other than that, no major issues.

User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (2 years 1 month 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1459 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 14):
Seems to get a bit soft towards the nose, and there are several large dust spots in the sky. Other than that, no major issues

Thanks dlowwa. I have PS Elements now for editing which makes following the "how to" section much easier. I have several more in this taxi that there might be a better one. My biggest challenge is judging colour cast.

It's appreciated.


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 1334 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

After an upgrade in camera lens and some PS Elements edit, I would like some critique. The colour cast is an area I struggle with the most. As my work is spent with many hours working on the aircraft under the "orange" lighting, figuring which way to go with the adjustment is sometimes hard.

The aircraft is a light blue as used on the Air Canada fleet.

Thanks for looking.


georgian1test by the_saint8, on Flickr


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 17, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 1314 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 16):

Sky is noisy, and yes, you will need to adjust the color further. It is too magenta/orange now.


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 1303 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 17):
Sky is noisy, and yes, you will need to adjust the color further. It is too magenta/orange now.

Yes I can understand the magenta/orange comment, but noisy sky? Shot with 100 ISO and of course around 7 second exposure. Any suggestions on reducing noise? Aircraft and area below horizon was the only area sharpened.

Thanks.


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 19, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1298 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 18):
Any suggestions on reducing noise?

Maybe trying some noise reduction? It's not terrible, but it is noticeable.


User currently onlinevikkyvik From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 10101 posts, RR: 26
Reply 20, posted (2 years 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1295 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 19):

Maybe trying some noise reduction? It's not terrible, but it is noticeable.

Unfortunately, at least for me, I've found that NR on dark skies like that works terribly. Just makes it look different, but still noisy.

I actually don't have a good solution, so I'd be interested to hear if others do....I've struggled with night skies myself, even at ISO100. Overexposing a bit would help, but obviously you don't want to blow out other parts of the image....



"Two and a Half Men" was filmed in front of a live ostrich.
User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (2 years 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1219 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I have a rejection for color "magenta tint" which is hopefully fixed in the edit, and Compression which I assume is noise in the sky.

Yes the Color issue I've tried and hopefully corrected. But the noise issue is difficult. I've done some reading on reducing noise in night skies and used another image that had reduced increased shutter speed which supposedly helps noise reduction. I've also tinkered a bit more with the PS Elements noise reduction settings and I think has helped it somewhat.

Can someone tell me if the noise issue is looks better as I am putting a lot of effort taking the night shots and not yet ready to unload several thousand dollars for top line equipment.

rejection

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0121007_s1348771191.0464cgvga1.jpg

and the re-edit


cgvga2 by the_saint8, on Flickr


Thank you for reading and input.


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 22, posted (2 years 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1212 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 21):
Can someone tell me if the noise issue is looks better as I am putting a lot of effort taking the night shots and not yet ready to unload several thousand dollars for top line equipment.

Color looks better, but I think you're confusing (digital) noise and compression (jpeg artifacts). They are not the same thing, although the can look similar at times. I think the noise in the rejected version looks fine, but if you notice around the wing and tail especially, there is some visible compression artifacts. The good news is this is almost certainly just something you've done when editing, perhaps not saving the image at full quality, and should be fixable. Hard to tell about the compression on the revised shot, as Flickr typically applies a fair amount of compression on upload anyway.


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (2 years 2 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 1210 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 22):
but if you notice around the wing and tail especially, there is some visible compression artifacts

When sharpening, I use the "quick selection tool A" and then increase the pixel size by "1" before the first pass of USM and then another increase of "1" before a final USM. The jpeg is saved as "12" Highest Quality. And of course I am working from a RAW format to start.

Since my using the new lens, my USM is usually 200/.2/0 and final of 50/.2/0 . I find my new lens extremely sharp compared to the kit lens.

I assume your speaking of arifacts where the wing/tail meet the background sky?

Thank you Dana for all of you efforts. Highly appreciated.


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 24, posted (2 years 2 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1196 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 23):
The jpeg is saved as "12" Highest Quality. And of course I am working from a RAW format to start.

Saving at anything other than highest quality can often lead to visible compression, especially when you save multiple times, but if you save only once at max, then that's not likely the cause. Working from a RAW file won't affect that, as the compression is introduced later.

It could be I'm making the same mistake I ascribed to you above; namely, confusing noise for compression artifacts. Given how it appears to be localized around the transition areas between colors and straight lines (where you'd expect to se compression) I discounted it being noise, but it could be a bad masking job if you've applied any noise reduction in the sky. I don't think sharpening would have caused it.


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (2 years 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 1178 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting dlowwa (Reply 24):
Given how it appears to be localized around the transition areas between colors and straight lines (where you'd expect to se compression) I discounted it being noise, but it could be a bad masking job if you've applied any noise reduction in the sky. I don't think sharpening would have caused it.

I'm using a 15 inch laptop with 1280 x 800 res for my editing with PSE 11. My 50+ years of age requires the use of reading glasses and I am having trouble seeing these "artifacts". I'm not doubting what your seeing but all I really see are the lights reflecting off parts of the tail and mostly under wing at where the surface meets the background sky. The ramp was wet from rainfall and there is a lot of reflection from the many lights on the horizon.

I will re-edit and not expand the selected area. The horizontal part of the tailplane could not be selected for sharpening as it would just include too much of the sky. Maybe there are some settings I still need to adjust. I am using 3px settings for "Quick Selection Tool A" .

Thanks again for the input.


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 26, posted (2 years 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 1167 times:

Quoting baldwin8 (Reply 25):
I will re-edit and not expand the selected area.

Better if you post the re-edit when you have it in the queue because Flickr can introduce its own compression.


User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 27, posted (2 years 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 1077 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Here is my latest night shot. Didn't want to start another thread so I am using the existing one.

I would appreciate critiquing and comments. My problem now is discerning the color casts. It was just uploaded so there is time to edit if neccesary.

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/n1350347968.3437n13969_1.jpg


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 28, posted (2 years 1 week 1 hour ago) and read 1074 times:

Color looks slightly off, but workable. A bigger problem will be the uneven distribution of light. The nose is already starting to look a little blown out, while the rest of the fuselage is still dark. Not sure you will be able to fix that.

User currently offlinebaldwin8 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 83 posts, RR: 0
Reply 29, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 817 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I would just like to take a moment to thank everyone for there input and especially dlowwa, as he answers so many posts in this forum.

With giving my own images a critical look, I have now had more images uploaded on airliners.net. I've concentrated on night ramp shots which seem more of a challenge in editing. My investment in a new lens and software are paying off in personal satisfaction.

Thanks again.


User currently offlinedlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7328 posts, RR: 30
Reply 30, posted (1 year 11 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 808 times:

Night shots are definitely tricky to get right, so by starting off with the hard stuff, hopefully it will be mostly downhill for you (in terms of difficulty that is).

Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Newbie Help
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format