thowman
Posts: 342
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 6:51 am

Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:31 am

It's been a good while since I uploaded anything, however, I have started going through some of my remaining better shots and trying to get up to standard once again.

Having taken on board some of Jeff's ideas, I have processed this shot using some of the mask actions, and using some other things I learned on a recent PS course. Please feel free to comment. All is greatly welcome. Question is do I pull it from the queue and try again, or am I getting close?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/EIDEA-052609-AMSa.jpg

Cheers

Andy
 
9VSPO
Posts: 4187
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 9:03 pm

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:33 am

I'd say it looks very soft and slightly out of focus.

[Edited 2006-04-25 23:36:37]
 
Psych
Posts: 2944
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:17 am

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:42 am

Hi Andy.

Interesting lighting in this one. Unfortunately it is looking rather soft and won't make it as it is. The editing looks a little wrong to me.

If you want me to take a look at the original feel free to get in touch.

All the best.

Paul

P.S. I think you may also be suffering with a factor that has affected many of us when following a plane either side of perpendicular to your position. Something technical is going on whereby the point of your focus may be fine, but either end of the aircraft is slightly out of focus - here the tail end I think.

The best bet for this kind of shot to minimise the likelihood of this is to capture the plane directly opposite you, if at all possible, so there is no difference in the relative speed of either end of the plane (relative to your point). I recall a thread some time ago where Ed - IL76 - explained this properly.

[Edited 2006-04-25 23:50:15]
 
chris78cpr
Posts: 2733
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 7:44 am

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:43 am

This one is slightly out of focus and most likely can't be saved!

Chris
5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
 
thowman
Posts: 342
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 6:51 am

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:53 am

Thanks, looks like the pull, though I do like the composition and the cloudy background.

Ok, round 2, what about this one? I think there are some jaggies on the leading edge, now I have looked at it closely.

I always sharpen insufficently. It's the last thing I do after resizing down to 1024 x 683. I have used 500, 0.2 on these 2. Is it not enough???

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/PHKZK-052509-AMS.jpg

Cheers

Andy
 
9VSPO
Posts: 4187
Joined: Sun May 18, 2008 9:03 pm

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 6:58 am

Quoting Thowman (Reply 4):
Ok, round 2, what about this one?

I don't know what you have done to that one but I can only say from first impressions I don't like it.  Sad
 
aero145
Posts: 2867
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:59 am

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:15 am

Quoting Thowman (Reply 4):
Thanks, looks like the pull, though I do like the composition and the cloudy background.

Ok, round 2, what about this one? I think there are some jaggies on the leading edge, now I have looked at it closely.

I always sharpen insufficently. It's the last thing I do after resizing down to 1024 x 683. I have used 500, 0.2 on these 2. Is it not enough???

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/PHKZK-052509-AMS.jpg

Cheers

Andy

Andy,

I see something strange under the fuselage. It's black, and doesn't look right. I don't know if I can call it halo, but something similar to that.

It has to do with over-sharpening....

By the way: The photo rocks in motiv!

Regards,
David
 
LHRSIMON
Posts: 1314
Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2002 5:59 am

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:27 am

I agree there's sharpening halo's under the fuselarge. Theres just to much USM going on and quite a lot of areas need work. Also the contrast seems a bit to dark to me . Check the histogram. I like the motive also but if was editing the photo i would lose a bit of the sky at the top. Of course you need to remove a bit of ground at the bottom to keep the aircraft in the centre of the photo. With some work i think this one stands a chance.  Smile
Canon 1D Mk III,Canon 20D+17-40 L f4.0,70-200 L IS USM f2.8,400 L USM f5.6,135 mm L f2.0, 50 mm f1.8,1.4 x II extender
 
thowman
Posts: 342
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 6:51 am

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:04 am

Right, I think I have been getting a tad carried away with the editing. A little knowledge is very dangerous.

How's this for the second edit?

http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/PHKZK-052509-AMSb.jpg

Reduced the contrast and not used so much editing.

Andy

Oops. forgot to save with the sharpening layer visible.

[Edited 2006-04-26 01:12:38]

[Edited 2006-04-26 01:13:48]
 
chris78cpr
Posts: 2733
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 7:44 am

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 8:24 am

Quoting Aero145 (Reply 6):
I see something strange under the fuselage. It's black, and doesn't look right. I don't know if I can call it halo, but something similar to that.

That is the shadow from the wing.

The second edit is now too soft.

Chris
5D2/7D/1D2(soon to be a 1Dx) 17-40L/24-105L/70-200F2.8L/100-400L/24F1.4LII/50F1.2L/85F1.2LII
 
glennstewart
Posts: 952
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:11 am

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 10:27 am

Quoting Thowman (Reply 4):
http://www.airliners.net/addphotos/big/ready/PHKZK-052509-AMS.jpg

Hi Andy,

I have to agree with Chris. I prefer the second to the third edit. As I've said many a time though, these motion blur shots are hard to master. I must say though, the detail is there but it looks like you lucked out in terms of bad weather.

I have taken shots from the spot you took this at. It's excellent for motion blurs, so I'm sure you're going to get some brilliant shots. Upload only your very best.

Screening wise this is a borderline case. Remove the third edit from the queue (I see the first is already removed), by using www.airliners.net/myphotos. Leave the second edit in the queue and see how it goes.

I can't promise anything, but I can only say that it might not be an open and shut case. The shot has promise and there is a slim chance that it might be accepted. I only say this because apart from a lack of colour/saturation, you've actually managed to maintain some detail in the aircraft; something that the rejected motion blur shots typically miss out on.

Glenn
Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...
 
thowman
Posts: 342
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 6:51 am

RE: Comments Please

Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:00 pm

Guys, thanks for all the constructive comments. They're much appreciated. I'm not so bothered as to whether or not they are accepted as it was really an exercise in getting my anet workflow up to scratch. I uploaded them as it's the easiest and cheapest way of sharing them with everyone.

I have spent the last 8 months or so concentrating on landscape photography, so I need to re-learn my anet stuff. I have also been "playing" with JeffM's actions.

The thing I always struggle with on here is sharpness, as I tend to sharpen to what I would normally do for printing and landscapes, and these always get rejected as being soft on here. It is now always the last thing I do to an edited photo, and always after resizing the shot to the final size, but I still struggle to get it right. I'm going to have another go at it this evening and I'll redo the sharpening layer and use some higher settings than the 500,0.2,0 I used for this.

Quoting Glennstewart (Reply 10):
it looks like you lucked out in terms of bad weather.

True, it was a poor couple of days weather wise. I have already had some similar shots accepted from this trip, including the below, however, the accepted versions are some of the few where the sun actually came out briefly that afternoon:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Thowman
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Thowman



I took an awful lot of panning shots that day, and most of them are not useable - as expected. Perhaps as low as a couple per hundred shots. However, I liked the detail on this one.

Thanks once again.

Andy
 
glennstewart
Posts: 952
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:11 am

RE: Comments Please

Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:43 pm

Quoting Thowman (Reply 11):
True, it was a poor couple of days weather wise. I have already had some similar shots accepted from this trip

I had a similar trip to Taiwan. A whole day of shooting resulted in me keeping the entire day worth just for my personal collection. I doubt I'll get anything accepted.... and if I try, I'll end up editing each shot for probably far longer than it's worth.

Glenn
Respected users.... If my replies are useful, then by all means...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests