Despite being swedish I've never flown <acronym title="Scandinavian Airlines (Denmark/Norway/Sweden)">SK</acronym> tbh. Going maddog would be fun though and the opportunities might go away in a not too distant future. Never flown <acronym title="Air One (Italy)">AP</acronym> either, planes seem newe...
Jump to postI know Airone flies A32X aircraft on the route. SK has both A32X and M80 planes flying it.
Jump to postHello! Sitting here planning a trip for spring next year. I know, some time in advance, but still curious to hear opinions. Made the trip last year with <acronym title="Air France">AF</acronym>-KLM but thing is the route was actually <acronym title="Copenhagen - Kastrup (CPH / EKCH), Denmark">CPH</a...
Jump to postContinuing this thread. Had the second shot of my session rejected at second screening for contrast and level. Any ideas? Didn't know it had to be level when there's no horizon. The planes do land with a slight nose up angle obviously, which this photo shows. Can I do anything about the contrast stu...
Jump to postYeah I believe it's 300, I haven't actually found the number in Photoshop but I recall that 300 is default setting isn't that right? And I haven't changed the resolution.
Jump to postYeah, centered was the only reason. The jpg compression is strange, because I shot this one raw, and worked it in photoshop.
Jump to postObviously not! However I don't know in which direction I should move it. IMO it's quite centered, maybe a tiny bit too high in the frame. Please give some feedback! <a href="http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20080229_Kastrup080219_008_JB1.jpg" target=_blank>http://www.airlin...
Jump to postAllright, sorted out the most special ones. They are not edited at all, only transfered from RAW to jpg and resized for web. They need cropping, sharpening, a touch of contrast, I'm all aware of that, but are the originals "special" enough to justify a place here? The Stirling would be the first for...
Jump to postSpent yesterday shooting at cph, but the weather Gods were against me and the day was overcast from dusk to dawn. I still think I got a some decent pictures, sharpness looks good and I was shooting raw so I have good opportunities to improve the pictures more in the computer. But I see that there ar...
Jump to postVery modest goals. Would like to bring my number of photos up to atleast ten, have four at the moment. This took me the better part of six months so patience is likely to be my friend in achieving my goals.
Jump to postI use quality "fine" which is 3000-2000 on my D70S or therabouts atleast. Use as good quality as possible and then resize and crop on the computer. Lowest compression and highest resolution is the best way. Then you can always work the rest later, and this gives you more to work with. I will probabl...
Jump to postDon't know much about that camera I'm afraid. I had a small long zoomer before and it produced ok pictures but not much more. Of course technology has evolved since. Anyway, you need better light and probably shorter shutter speed, that will reduce blurryness alot. Use spot measuring if you can set ...
Jump to postIt's blurry, don't think there's much to do about it. If you try and sharpen it you need to do it only on the blurry parts. The one you had rejected was terribly grainy in the sky from all the sharpening. It needs to be cropped closer too. Best advice though is to scrap this shot, the quality isn't ...
Jump to post<a href="http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20080116_Kastrup_071031_046_JB3.jpg" target=_blank>http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...0080116_Kastrup_071031_046_JB3.jpg</a> This one first was rejected for soft alone, which I accepted after a closer look. I reworked it applyin...
Jump to postUse photoshop and create a duplicate layer. Equalise the duplicate layer. Image/Adjustments/Equalise Select backround layer. Select spot healing brush. Rub it over the dustspots, you will notice no difference right now. Select the duplicated layer again. Delete the duplicated layer. Layer/Delete Lay...
Jump to postSure but a DSLR has a broader field of use I'd say since you can change lenses for what you plan on doing and you don't have to get it all at once. You could buy a used DSLR and some budget lens to start with and sharpen your teeth a little and then, if you like what you are doing spend some more on...
Jump to postRemember that you will need a decent telephoto lens for aircraft photography. You should be fine with 200mm if you can get somewhat close to the action but it depends on the layout of the airport where you will be doing your photographing. You could also hava look at used Nikon D70 or D50's. They sh...
Jump to postA DSLR is probably what you are looking for. Doesn't have to cost a fortune, but can if you want the best lenses and most advanced cameras. A Canon 400D or a Nikon D80 should be good enough, even a D40 could be a decent option if money is tight. You want a zoom lens of maybe 70-200 or even 300 if yo...
Jump to postThats interesting Javibi, I've been playing around a little with those actions and they seem to work. I don't think I've learned to exploit them fully. But I will reprocess a previously rejected photo and see if I come up with a better result using this method compared to my normal one which has gra...
Jump to postWhile it seems perfectly sharp around the engine I think I notice some blurryness around the wingtips. Particularly the left one as seen from the front. Very cool shot, but I doubt it will make it.
Jump to postThat sounds interesting Garry, would you please explain a little further what effect I should expect if I set blending to luminosity rather than normal. I'm quite new with <acronym title="Ukraine International Airlines">PS</acronym> and didn't know about this feature. But will do anything to learn m...
Jump to postWill be really difficult to make the plane bright enough because it's quite underexposed. The background is already very bright so I think this shot will not make it.
Jump to postThe normal procedure would be to sharpen on a duplicate layer with unsharp mask. Then erase the jaggies that appear from sharpening with the eraser tool. I've done it for quite a while and it was a long time since I had a jaggies rejection. Plenty of other reasons, but not jaggies.
Jump to postThe F4 has severe graining issues on the wheels, especially the rear ones. And also in other dark places like in the air intakes. It's also a little soft around the intakes and on the extra fuel tank below the plane. The sky looks awesome until I zoom in and see the grain. I'm no expert that's for s...
Jump to postI have the same type of lens and I can only say that while it's quite cheap and decently sharp I've never managed to produce a good image at close to 300mm and I've been using it for about 1½ years now. Imo it works best below 250 and you might stretch that even down to 220.
Jump to postThank you Cpd and thanks for the extensive answer Psych. I will try some more selective usm, I do it already but it perhaps can do with some more. If I'm careful with the jaggies and erase the grain it causes there might be a chance. I only have an upload limit of 2 so which one should accompany the...
Jump to post<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><a href="http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h256/Ligern/Kastrup071031_036_JB6.jpg" target=_blank><img src="http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h256/Ligern/Kastrup071031_036_JB6.jpg" width=650 height=452 alt="http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h256/Ligern/...
Jump to postThis was shot with f/8. I had the camera in A-mode and preset it to f/8 as long as the sun was shining then went down to 6.3 as the coulds came.
Jump to postAnother week, two more rejections. I'm determined to make it here but need some help from better photographers than me to make it to the next level. I had this one rejected for blurry. With this picture I have done levels and some selective sharpening on parts of the body, mainly on the tail section...
Jump to postI shoot with the exact same equipment you do. I noticed that my results went up significantly and got more consistant when I selected aperture priority and f/8 for sunshine shots and about two steps bigger hole for clouded ones. Spot or center measurement was also alot better than the 3d because tha...
Jump to postThink I see them you mean right on the edge of the picture? Don't understand how they got there though. All I've done there is cropping it. I used selective sharpening on the plane only. Ah well... back to the drawing board. :P
Jump to post<a href="http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20071120_Kastrup071031_062_JB5.jpg" target=_blank>http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...20071120_Kastrup071031_062_JB5.jpg</a> I had this one rejected for borders. I suppose they mean the darker grey line above the front of the fus...
Jump to postThanks Bubbles for explaining things to me. It makes more sense now. I think I'll just ditch this image then and try another from my photosession and hope for better luck next time. I have edited and reedited this one so many times now I'm sick of seeing it. Can't force myself to do it all over once...
Jump to postThanks for your help guys. I have gotten my first acceptance. This one <a href="http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1271351/M/" target=_blank>http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1271351/M/</a> . I was totally over the moon the rest of that day. I'm looking for number two with this one. The camera sett...
Jump to postAnother rejection, stopped counting them now. I got my hopes up about this one <a href="http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20071114_Kastrup071031_041_JB2.jpg" target=_blank>http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...20071114_Kastrup071031_041_JB2.jpg</a> because I recieved a mess...
Jump to postNo expert as my one only picture on a.net shows <img src="/discussions/graphics/smilies/wink.gif" alt="Wink"> but to me it lacks contrast, looks gray and flat and it's a tad soft in the right end of the picture. Foreground and background is kind of blurry aswell. Gray thing might be <acronym t...
Jump to postI also have some rejections I would like some advice on. First is rejected for quality and dark. <a href="http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/rejphoto.main?filename=20071028_Agh071018_JB_038.jpg" target=_blank>http://www.airliners.net/procphotos/...name=20071028_Agh071018_JB_038.jpg</a> I personally...
Jump to postThanks for your help. I recropped the first one and resent it. The second was overexposed beyond saving. Still no good though as it was rejected once again, for quality and blurry this time. There's always something new to complain about apparently. I guess I have to give up on these two pics and tr...
Jump to postI'm running out of ideas on how to impress the screeners now and would very much like some help improving my pictures. I've had a few rejections lately for centered IMO the pictures are well centered, but it's not my opinion that counts is it? I've been browsing these forums and still I'm quite unsu...
Jump to post