powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Posted (7 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2337 times:
opening a new thread for my uploads, the old one has been locked.
Please comment on these two new uploads, which one to keep? probably can not have both because of the double rule.
These are the first 787 flight arriving at ORD, I like the second one better because the angle probably will be a bit different with others and the 320 adds some interest too. but the light was not as good, so I hope it can make it, what do you think? Thanks!
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 5702 posts, RR: 39 Reply 3, posted (7 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 2337 times:
UA 738 - more of a cast here than on the others, that's for sure; if that helps, I'm not too sure.. It only really exists towards the nose.
I see no cyan on the BR MD11.
I hardly see a cyan cast on the A320.. If there was one, it's extremely faint. I'd probably add a wee bit more contrast to this one if you were going to edit it further..
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7318 posts, RR: 31 Reply 4, posted (7 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 2337 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
Quoting powwwiii (Reply 2): Please comment on these rejections, both for cyan tint, I thought they are already a bit yellow, what do you think?
Yes, they all have color casts to varying degrees. Cyan/green on the two UA, and I'd say the BR is also a bit oversaturated. Check out the right side of the two below which I've adjusted:
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 5, posted (7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2337 times:
Thanks NZ107, and thank Dana for the edition, now I can see the color tint.
Now, these two new rejections are for grainy and soft, I have taken many pictures with similar light condition, ISO was still 200 I believe, same work flow as many accepted pictures, never had a grainy rejection, soft is different question. so I want to ask for a second opinion to see if you see grainy and soft. thanks!
Colour seems ok.. But I'd probably tone down the images - the 2 E170s seem a bit overexposed for my liking.. Another sharpening pass could also be beneficial.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2240 times:
Thanks NZ107.
I just recently got a new monitor, seems the color and brightness are different with the old one, probably my eyes are already used to the old one. Please help me to calibrate my eyes to the new monitor. Here are three new uploads, please comment on the quaility, especially color, brightness, etc. Thanks!
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 5702 posts, RR: 39 Reply 13, posted (6 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2233 times:
AA and B6 seem ok.. I'd be inclined to add a bit more contrast to the UA 753. It just feels a little flat, especially under the wings and around the undercarriage.
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7318 posts, RR: 31 Reply 17, posted (6 months ago) and read 2071 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
Quoting powwwiii (Reply 16): Here are two new uploads, please comment on them
Color is off, cyan cast or worse. Look at the top of the fuselage of the 67, the color is different than the rest. I see my fair share of AC aircraft, and can't say I've ever seen a similar effect.
NZ107 From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 5702 posts, RR: 39 Reply 21, posted (5 months 1 week 6 days ago) and read 1940 times:
1. A bit soft, possibly due to the noise reduction and still a little flat.
2. Might be ok but to me, it doesn't really add too much to the picture. Seems a little on the cool side too.
3. It's low in the frame to begin with and the other bits are distracting, especially the overhead light.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 27, posted (5 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1869 times:
thanks Mark!
got this one rejected for the crop too tight, I used to like to crop a bit tight, maybe too tight, but seems not a problem for upload, so really a problem?
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 34, posted (4 months 3 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 1750 times:
thanks DL747. Got two rejections for grainy, these were taken at sunset, so lighting was not really good, any chance to fix them? although I could not really see too much noise in the sky.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 36, posted (4 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1719 times:
thanks DL747.
got this rejection for cyan cast and overexposure. but I only adjust the white balance very little to get rid of the yellow cast, now cyan? also I feel the exposure is fine, what you think? Thanks!
Overexposed, soft, and more yellow than cyan. It seems you have more problems with color than most. Perhaps there is an issue somewhere, either with your monitor, camera, or other?
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 42, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1618 times:
Thanks Dana, those have been corrected, hopefully they are fine now.
Got a few rejections, and this one was for oversharpened to compensate a blurry/soft or out of focus picture. I looked at the raw picture, it is not blurry or out of focus. This is the second time it was rejected, first time for low contrast, and I added a bit more contrast, but now oversharpened... What you think? Thanks!
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7318 posts, RR: 31 Reply 43, posted (4 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 1607 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
Yeah, hard to judge the sharpening on that one. All that wording/advertising on the aircraft is either going to look too soft, or oversharpened. Not sure what to tell you in this case. That KL 47 you also had rejected for dark, however, shouldn't have been.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 44, posted (4 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1525 times:
Thanks Dana!
I have a few rejections on a few 57s. one I just can not get the color right, I might need maybe Dana to help me with the processing, can I send the RAW to you? Thanks!
Then the following first 57 was for dark, but I think it is not dark at all. the second 57 was for soft, I really don't see it. And finally the 77W, for cyan tint and oversharpen, it may has the color problem, but again I can not see the sharpness problem, what is your opionion? Thanks!
Not much aircraft visible on the first, so motive would be a concern. Second has a very strong yellow cast.
Quoting powwwiii (Reply 46): got 12 rejections today, mostly for dark, kind of surprise for me, will you please take a look?
Sorry, I'm not going to go looking through your rejections to find possible issues. If you have questions about specific images, please post them here.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 54, posted (2 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 1013 times:
Thanks again, Dana. That UA 772 was for Dark and Level, I brighten it up a bit. But based on the tower, I feel the level is fine. Definitely not looking for a warning, do you see problem with its level? Please let me know.
Banding artifacts is something new to me, any suggestion how to fix it? Or what caused banding? Thanks!
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7318 posts, RR: 31 Reply 55, posted (2 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 1010 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
Quoting powwwiii (Reply 54): Definitely not looking for a warning, do you see problem with its level?
If you don't agree with a rejection, the proper recourse is to appeal. Simply uploading it again unchanged because you don't agree will get you a warning first, and then a ban if it happens again. Both will remain on your membership permanently, so best not to upload it unchanged if you wish to avoid that. The image looks very bright and needing ccw rotation to me.
Quoting powwwiii (Reply 54): Banding artifacts is something new to me, any suggestion how to fix it? Or what caused banding?
Almost impossible to remove, better not to introduce them in the first place. From my experience they are most commonly introduced with noise reduction, either on the jpeg, or the RAW file itself.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 56, posted (2 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 1003 times:
OK, I re-worked on that UA 772, less brightening and some CCW. Also trying to avoid bandings, I actually decrease the sharpening a little bit, and then only apply minimium amount of noise reduction, maybe less sharpening only need very minor noise reduction plus they were taken in bright sunlight, so they don't really need too much noise reduction. Here is what I got, hopefully they are ok now?
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 61, posted (2 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 837 times:
Thanks Dana, very slightly reduced the brightness on that one and resubmitted.
Also resubmitting this one, it was rejected for cyan tint, heat haze and soft. I adjusted the white balance and resized it to a smaller size, to address the softness. But looking at the original RAW, I can see only minimum heat haze on the aircraft, there is significiant heathaze on the buildings behind, but that is a mile or more away. I reupload this version, it is acceptable? Thanks!
Definitely not. Actually a little yellow. Not meaning to offend, but do you perhaps have issues with color blindness? It could be the reason you often have problems with color in your images. If not, then I would strongly recommend getting your monitor properly calibrated.
Centering should also be checked on those images, as the first two are a little high.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 65, posted (2 months 5 hours ago) and read 728 times:
Thanks Dana, I don't really think I am color blind. I can tell there is a color difference when I adjust the color temperature, my problem is I have not got the sense of a neutral white balance. Anyway, looking through my pictures in database, I think I am making progress in term of the color.
I have a different question, what is the policy about reflections? I have a few pictures, the aircraft itself is good and sharp, but because they were shot through windows, there are some reflection on the picture too, not too bad but definitely there, so it is a automatic rejection if there is a reflection? Thanks!
Again this one UA was rejected again for yellow tint and grainy, here is the new upload, http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/c1366563807.8105dsc_5306-5.jpg
this one was shot with good lighting, early morning with nice sunshine, but turns out it is difficult to get this one accepted, hope now it is fine. Thanks!
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7318 posts, RR: 31 Reply 68, posted (1 month 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 683 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
Quoting powwwiii (Reply 67): Here is the new upload, hope it is ok now?
No, still looks pretty bad. I assume a fair amount of heat haze you tried to fix by oversharpening?
Quoting powwwiii (Reply 67): Again this one UA was rejected again for yellow tint and grainy,
Again, whatever you are (or aren't) doing in regards to color simply isn't very effective. Most of your images have a yellow-ish cyan hue as on this one.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 69, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 666 times:
Thank you Dana, I try to adjust the tint to remove the yellow, but doing that I also can see the image become purple or magenta, I am wondering how you adjust because I don't see purple on the half image you processed, how did you do that?
That CZ cargo does not have too much heat haze, and I only applied low sharpening when exporting, I am not sure why it appeared oversharpened.
dlowwa From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7318 posts, RR: 31 Reply 70, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 661 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW HEAD SCREENER
Quoting powwwiii (Reply 69): Thank you Dana, I try to adjust the tint to remove the yellow, but doing that I also can see the image become purple or magenta, I am wondering how you adjust because I don't see purple on the half image you processed, how did you do that?
Simple adjustment to the hue. I would guess it's something you're doing with the white balance or maybe saturation. Are you setting the white balance manually?
Quoting powwwiii (Reply 69): That CZ cargo does not have too much heat haze, and I only applied low sharpening when exporting, I am not sure why it appeared oversharpened.
Yes, after seeing the original, I can see that. This is just a case then of the cheat lines being jagged to start with, and sharpening and re-sizing making it look worse.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 71, posted (1 month 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 660 times:
so you just add more blue hue to the image to remove the yellow? or just decrease yellow? I tried to play with hue in LR but seem the effects were not very obvious, PS is more powerful to do the hue adjustment? Yes, I pretty much set the color temp and tint manually now, trying to address this color issue.
For that CZ cargo, it was rotating so the cheat line was not a level line, maybe I will try 1400 size with low sharpening when exporting, to see if that looks a bit better.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 76, posted (2 weeks 2 days 18 hours 9 minutes ago) and read 251 times:
Thanks Dana, also got your message, thought I could resubmit the appeal with more specific reason, but found once I removed it from the appeal queue, it disappeared forever. I will brighten them up a bit and resubmit.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 77, posted (2 weeks 2 days 4 hours 50 minutes ago) and read 236 times:
Here are two new uploads, first is a 748i cockpit, my question is for cockpit/cabin shots, does everything need to be in focus? like this example, I had some DOF issues, those chairs are definitely not in focus, is it a problem?
and for the following American Eagle, I would like to add it to the database as it just got the new paint too, unfortunately a cloud blocked the sun when I took the picture, so it was dark while background was pretty bright, I try to brighten it up, so I wonder if it is savageable?
angad84 From India, joined Nov 2012, 226 posts, RR: 0 Reply 78, posted (2 weeks 2 days 34 minutes ago) and read 226 times:
The cockpit shot looks all right. I've seen plenty of shots in the DB with out of focus seats in the foreground. I think everyone recognizes that shooting at close quarters means you are guaranteed DoF issues.
The Eagle actually looks great to me, but I don't think it would hurt to give it a tenth of a stop more in terms of brightness.
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 79, posted (5 days 16 hours ago) and read 102 times:
Thank angad84.
Just got this one rejected for overexposed, which I don't agree, nothing blown out and I am thinking about appealing this one, what do you think? thanks!
powwwiii From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, RR: 0 Reply 83, posted (5 days 10 hours 37 minutes ago) and read 86 times:
I think those are something on the runway, they appear to be vertical to the length of the runway, nothing from inside of the aircraft would have that pattern.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined May 2011, 240 posts, 
From Canada, joined Apr 2005, 7318 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Jul 2005, 5702 posts, 
From Germany, joined Nov 2011, 110 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jun 2005, 1617 posts, 
From India, joined Nov 2012, 226 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}
){kind=link}