Hi All, I've gone out and attempted some more night shooting. Could anyone provide assistance on the noise reduction and sharpening stage.
This is the original image: https://bit.ly/2UGJoRe
And this is the edited one: https://bit.ly/3hrcyNV
All help is much appreciated!
That is an affirmative, Strangely not all the local photo groups see it that way Now there is an old name! I note this happened in Victoria: https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/incidents/couple-fined-3304-for-posting-yearold-travel-photos-online/news-story/e1c2280d3f1a2fe1c2f5da5d38d465ae...Jump to post
Dark (obviously as it was at night), blurry, lots of compression (too much noise reduction due to the high ISO setting). Thanks, Is there any improvement in this different shot + edit. I haven't done alot of editing like this in a while and am struggling at it https://imgur.com/eLOFBxv Kind regards...Jump to post
Could I please have thoughts on this please?
Settings were 1/100, ISO 4000, F2.8
Hey Daniel, The light is not really good for this case. Also seems some CW rotation needed. Blurry looks alright for me, but it does look noisy at the dark areas like the bottom of the a/c. Our basic standard for the fences like this situation is that we allow fences, but they have to be lower than...Jump to post
May I ask for your thoughts on this RAAF aircraft please.
kann123air wrote:Hi Daniel,
QR 777 is dark, soft, and noisy.
Could I ask for thoughts on this please, another taken just after sunset.
Just wanted to know if there was any potential in this shot. Another one taken just a minute after sunset.
Hi, I'd like to ask for thoughts on this please.
It was taken after sunset, and I feel it may be underexposed a little.
Could I please have your opinion on these 3 shots please. Taken in my beginner days and had no idea what I was doing.
Hi all, just requesting how much more contrast and exposure will be needed for this shot?
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 698954d190
Technically acceptable given that there are no obstructions or major parts cropped. But screener discretion may play a part. Personally, I'm not a fan. It feels like the front of the aircraft is "missing". Unusual to see a crop from the tail forward at this angle which keeps leading my ey...Jump to post
Hi, Obviously I'd love to (possibly) upload an image of A7-BAE in the FC Barcelona livery. A full aircraft isn't possible due to a bit of the nose wheel being cutoff, so I've gone for a different crop showcasing the livery in all it's glory. I'd love to know if this sort of crop is acceptable at Ane...Jump to post
I have a question for everyone. If you were in Scurrah/Deloitte shoes, which direction would you take? - Sell all ATR 72s - Sell all Airbus A330-200s - Sell all Boeing 777-300ERs - Remove all Boeing 737-800s which are leased, (Boeing 737-800s which are owned will remain) - Cancel all Boeing 737-800...Jump to post
H Daniel, I consulted the Acceptance Guide, and per the description for Motive Rejections, this one would get declined for the obstruction to the nose gear. The <50% blockage allowance is for terrain. The standards as defined for gate/ramp shots is more stringent. Regards, Jehan Thanks. Will leave ...Jump to post
Hi, would like your thoughts on this image please.
I'm aware of the GPU blocking approximately <50% of the nose wheel, would this get rejected for motive.
Hi, Could I please get your thoughts on this please.
Once again, thanks everyone for your feedback.
I can see quality issues for each but no heat-haze. I believe I've been to this spot (Int'l terminal, PER?) and you are too close/elevated for heat-haze to be an issue. Not heat haze, but optical haze. I see over-sharpening in all 3 though. Lots of jaggies in the titles and leading edge of vertical...Jump to post
The crop makes it inadmissible on its own, however, there is also some weird sort of haze, like blur and OS mixed into one. Not fixable. Tim Thanks for pointing out the weird hazing effect on it. I just wanted to know more about the crop. Cause I've seen some really nice images on the database with...Jump to post
Hi, I'm wondering if this shot has any potential. Was taken a long time ago and when I didn't really know Anet existed. Would love to get this on the database as it's history now. My only concern is the crop.
DanielK wrote:Hi, could I have your thoughts on this please.
Hi, Could I please get your thoughts on this please?
Hi Daniel, Sorry for the late reply for your issue. I just checked the log to find the comment screener gave you. " Category Cargo needed." is the P.M. for you since you missed the Cargo category when upload. Sorry for the inconvenience about having trouble in receiving Emails. If you got...Jump to post
Hi, if possible could I please get the personal message on this rejection as I haven’t received any emails.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... e519d292d9
Just wondering whether you guys reckon this image could be repaired or just scrapped.
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/ai ... 2644b1208a
Hi all, woudl like thoughts on this image please.
Taken at 1/15, ISO 4000, F2.8
And a quick question, I noticed the images were decreativized. I would've thought they'd be under creative screening since it iwas images of moving A/C and using high ISO techniques/skills/editing: "Images of moving aircraft (i.e. not traditional tripod/long exposure night shots of static aircr...Jump to post
Hi Daniel, I would pull the CZ A330, it looks too smudgy (especially the tail). The taxiing ANA 787 looks passable, but the dark tarmac underneath seems a little noisy. Some people may fall over that. Thanks, I'll be aware of that. I have removed the CZ A330, and will look for a better image overal...Jump to post