Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
JakTrax
Topic Author
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

'Reverse vignetting'

Mon Jun 22, 2020 2:54 pm

Every so often we seem to have a new rejection reason that pops up out of nowhere that is subsequently used almost universally. This month's buzz-term is 'reverse vignetting' — which doesn't actually exist — so what's going on?

As pointed out lately in other threads the use of wide-angle lenses (even the most expensive ones) will, under clear daytime skies, lead to areas of the frame being lighter, both in tone and colour. This phenomenon is NOT 'reverse vignetting' as such but limitations of optics (regular vignetting can be negated pretty easily) so I'm really failing to see how something that's been part of photography since its inception is suddenly frowned upon. What's worse is that screener images appear to be exempt from this current crackdown, which begs the question: are they looking too hard at the images of others while not applying the same scrutiny to their own images?

This isn't a screener-bashing thread; it's a topic that I think should be discussed since it's a very recent thing that has no basis in the technical side of photography. It's just something else that, if carried on, is going to drive photographers elsewhere.
 
angad84
Posts: 2077
Joined: Mon Nov 05, 2012 3:04 pm

Re: 'Reverse vignetting'

Tue Jun 23, 2020 6:38 am

over-corrected vignetting can lead to reverse vignetting. as far as the photographers being driven away, I think that ship has mostly sailed.
 
KFTG
Posts: 811
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2019 12:08 am

Re: 'Reverse vignetting'

Tue Jun 23, 2020 7:38 am

The hobby is dying a slow death.
The average "spotter" today is an 16 year-old with $2000 worth of gear, yet posts to nothing more than Instagram and has no idea what a histogram is.
The days of slides, screening, etc. are mostly behind us.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

Re: 'Reverse vignetting'

Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:48 pm

I can only imagine it means too much vignetting correction.
 
JakTrax
Topic Author
Posts: 5189
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:30 am

Re: 'Reverse vignetting'

Tue Jun 23, 2020 1:38 pm

But how come this has only been picked up on in the last few weeks?

Vignetting correction doesn't typically cause this effect unless it's been done manually/badly. I don't use peripheral illumination correction and many of my wider angle images still exhibit the phenomenon, albeit subtly. Besides, vignetting should be at a minimum with a sufficiently narrow aperture, particularly if a crop is involved.

Very recently there was one image I saw in which something abnormal did appear to be going on at the frame edges, but the others all looked entirely natural to me. My point is, with wide-angle images the light fall-off is inherently more noticeable and colour and tone are not going to be uniform across the frame. Manipulating images in any way, whether it be in camera or post-capture, is always going to introduce artefacts. It's just the nature of digital photography. Finally, there's the cornsweet illusion (similar to mach bands), where the human eye perceives tones/colours to be different where there is a defined 'edge' in an image (in this case, the edge of the image frame).
 
cpd
Posts: 6381
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2008 4:46 am

Re: 'Reverse vignetting'

Tue Jun 23, 2020 9:19 pm

angad84 wrote:
over-corrected vignetting can lead to reverse vignetting. as far as the photographers being driven away, I think that ship has mostly sailed.


I never remember that happening back in my time. I didn’t take that many wide angle shots but I did have a few. Never remembered encountering this and don’t remember seeing much mention of it either. I guess it means over fixing the problem.

As for the driven away photographers, those people who’ve gone are gone, they won’t come back. Some either have photos elsewhere or just left photography completely.

In my case, there are better things to do than hanging around an airport taking photos of the same old things all the time. I haven’t taken a photo in a long while.

I only really take notice of the images of classic airliners posted by certain photographers these days. The rest I usually skip over.

KFTG wrote:
The hobby is dying a slow death.
The average "spotter" today is an 16 year-old with $2000 worth of gear, yet posts to nothing more than Instagram and has no idea what a histogram is.
The days of slides, screening, etc. are mostly behind us.


People want things to happen immediately these days and they can share things with a big audience through social media really fast. I only used Instagram briefly (before it became very big) and never for this purpose, it was just really easy and fast.

It is the way of the world, traditional media is struggling with this phenomenon too, they are also complaining. They want taxes/tariffs on the “new-media“.
 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9175
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

Re: 'Reverse vignetting'

Wed Jun 24, 2020 3:39 pm

A few random comments.

My previously rejected wide-angle shots have since been added, and I have had a couple others added since then. I will link them below. I am of the opinion that the current screening team is not familiar with wide-angle photography, the same as various people who have commented on these threads. But, that is okay. This is an opportunity to learn some new things.

Obviously shooting wide is an acquired taste. Sadly, given the current state of our world, getting close enough to even shoot up-close is something most people don't have the opportunity to enjoy. But, it is fun. And really comes in handy if you are somewhere that the planes are packed in tight.

My shooting style is early morning or late afternoon, which exaggerates the effect, due to the scene captured (the wider the view the less chance for the sky to be one, even color). If you shoot in poor weather you won't notice the effect. It is also less noticeable in high, mid-day sun.

It is a ridiculous statement to say that fixing regular vignetting (aka physical vignetting) will lead to what the screening team has been calling "reverse vignetting." They look nothing alike. I am happy to post an example.

 
User avatar
clickhappy
Posts: 9175
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2001 12:10 pm

Re: 'Reverse vignetting'

Wed Jun 24, 2020 5:13 pm

Also, I wanted to add; I've been using a Luminosity Mask on the blue channel (quick mask on the sky) in Photoshop on my last several wide-angle uploads.
 
User avatar
jelpee
Head Screener
Posts: 1050
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 1:34 am

Re: 'Reverse vignetting'

Wed Jun 24, 2020 6:08 pm

angad84 wrote:
over-corrected vignetting can lead to reverse vignetting. as far as the photographers being driven away, I think that ship has mostly sailed.


While not a widely used term, reverse vignetting is where the corners are lighter (vs darker). This is typically the result of over applying correction for vignetting in using editing software. IMO, any other use of the term is incorrect. BTW, I have not been able to find any writings that attribute it to optical properties of lenses. If images are rejected for "Reverse Vignetting" feel free to Appeal with comments

Regards,

Jehan
Airliners.net Crew - Photo Screener
 
Silver1SWA
Posts: 4672
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 6:11 pm

Re: 'Reverse vignetting'

Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:06 pm

KFTG wrote:
The hobby is dying a slow death.


The hobby isn’t dying. Airliners.net relevance is.

cpd wrote:

As for the driven away photographers, those people who’ve gone are gone, they won’t come back. Some either have photos elsewhere or just left photography completely.

In my case, there are better things to do than hanging around an airport taking photos of the same old things all the time. I haven’t taken a photo in a long while.

I only really take notice of the images of classic airliners posted by certain photographers these days. The rest I usually skip over.

KFTG wrote:
The hobby is dying a slow death.
The average "spotter" today is an 16 year-old with $2000 worth of gear, yet posts to nothing more than Instagram and has no idea what a histogram is.
The days of slides, screening, etc. are mostly behind us.


People want things to happen immediately these days and they can share things with a big audience through social media really fast. I only used Instagram briefly (before it became very big) and never for this purpose, it was just really easy and fast.

It is the way of the world, traditional media is struggling with this phenomenon too, they are also complaining. They want taxes/tariffs on the “new-media“.


People still enjoy hanging around airports taking photos. The hobby has evolved. For the younger generation is a social game. They build large followings by following and sharing to the same large followings of other popular accounts. Flight tracking and cross promoting each other is a big part of it, not just the photography.

And I’ve said this a hundred times and nobody seems interested in taking it seriously but why are we still bickering over small details like sharpness, noise, etc when I can’t tell the difference on my 6 inch iPhone retina screen? What relevance do the standards have to me if I cannot edit on my Mac for any chance of acceptance here? I still hold my images to my personal standards, but I’m mostly uploading to a social media platform with 1080 pixel dimensions viewed on a smart phone.

I miss uploading here and I have a lot of new material taken the past year and a half at an airport with a lot of good traffic but I’m not interested in stepping back to 2010 just to play an old game.

jelpee wrote:
angad84 wrote:
over-corrected vignetting can lead to reverse vignetting. as far as the photographers being driven away, I think that ship has mostly sailed.


While not a widely used term, reverse vignetting is where the corners are lighter (vs darker). This is typically the result of over applying correction for vignetting in using editing software. IMO, any other use of the term is incorrect. BTW, I have not been able to find any writings that attribute it to optical properties of lenses. If images are rejected for "Reverse Vignetting" feel free to Appeal with comments

Regards,

Jehan


Anyone who shoots with a lens 20mm or wider on a bright sunny day should be familiar with how they tend to give the sky deep, rich blues in the center with brighter, less saturated blues towards the top corners.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
 
dutchspotter1
Posts: 378
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2005 9:24 pm

Re: 'Reverse vignetting'

Wed Jul 01, 2020 7:43 pm

How about actually adding vignetting to photos that have "reverse vignetting"? Just curious if that would work :) (I don't have any wide-angle lenses so I can't try it out myself).
NO URLS in signature

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos