First up, The Twins (ships 439 & 440):
 |
| 0456 |
Second, a lucky (for me) Early Rotation view of still-extended undercarraige:
 |
[Edited 2010-07-21 17:29:39]
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Prescreen Comments - Still On The 300mm Nikkor
Still playing with the 300mm Nikkor as I'm usually restoring 70s-80s pix here, not shooting. Your comments. As always, appreciate the critique since my ego's long past bruising...comes with age, like wisdom.
First up, The Twins (ships 439 & 440):
Second, a lucky (for me) Early Rotation view of still-extended undercarraige:
[Edited 2010-07-21 17:29:39]
First up, The Twins (ships 439 & 440):
Second, a lucky (for me) Early Rotation view of still-extended undercarraige:
[Edited 2010-07-21 17:29:39]
RE: Prescreen Comments - Still On The 300mm Nikkor
Immediate obvious (to me) concern is centering vis-a-vis what do you do with those vertical fins? Evident in the Twins...center fuselages vertically or entire a/c? In the Rotation pic, go for the nose/fin relationship or the entire fuselage?
Also, your preference for NR/sharpening pre- or post-sizing. I usually work off the original in NN, adding additional sharpening if necessary when I resize. Your experiences on that issue would be a great help.
Dave
[Edited 2010-07-21 17:44:29]
Also, your preference for NR/sharpening pre- or post-sizing. I usually work off the original in NN, adding additional sharpening if necessary when I resize. Your experiences on that issue would be a great help.
Dave
[Edited 2010-07-21 17:44:29]
RE: Prescreen Comments - Still On The 300mm Nikkor
Hi,
First one is a write-off; quality is quite poor (looks like too much heat haze from shooting at a distance), and motive obviously as the noses of both aircraft are cut off.
Second one is better quality-wise, but again shooting at a distance has taken its toll - it looks like the quality is not quite there (extra sharpening applied to make up for softness, etc...). I'd have to see the original to know if that's where the problem is or if its just your editing, but if I had to guess I'd say the former.
Let me know if you want me to take a look.
Dana
First one is a write-off; quality is quite poor (looks like too much heat haze from shooting at a distance), and motive obviously as the noses of both aircraft are cut off.
Second one is better quality-wise, but again shooting at a distance has taken its toll - it looks like the quality is not quite there (extra sharpening applied to make up for softness, etc...). I'd have to see the original to know if that's where the problem is or if its just your editing, but if I had to guess I'd say the former.
Let me know if you want me to take a look.
Dana
RE: Prescreen Comments - Still On The 300mm Nikkor
One more, since it's the only one of the three that even gets me remotely excited.
 |
| 0549 |
RE: Prescreen Comments - Still On The 300mm Nikkor
Per my previous thread, Dana, I think I'm clearly on to three issues:
1. No monopod at full focal length.
2. Not shooting in RAW.
3. My resistance to halos in sharpening....I'll just have to get over it.
Thank you.
1. No monopod at full focal length.
2. Not shooting in RAW.
3. My resistance to halos in sharpening....I'll just have to get over it.
Thank you.
RE: Prescreen Comments - Still On The 300mm Nikkor
Hi,
The G4 looks better than the DL 752, though there are still a few minor issues with softness/sharpening.
As to your points,
1. I almost always use support (tripod/monopod) when shooting past 300mm effective, and if I'm up in the 500mm+ plus range, then it's a must to combat shake, as I don't like bumping up the ISO. Plus, it can get tiring always having to support all that weight if you're only shooting hand held with a longer lens
2. Shooting RAW is most beneficial for correcting exposure and color problems; it doesn't really help that much when it comes to sharpening, and of course can do nothing about heat haze.
3. Not sure what that means, but if you are trying to avoid oversharpening, I agree - the only place I see it badly is the leading edge of the wings in the G4 shot. The DL 752 has evidence of oversharpening - I think this is what you must mean by halos... adding more sharpening to the DL is not going to help. I was trying to imply that you had already added too much to try and compensate for a soft shot, and it wasn't really working too well. If I've ms-interpreted, let me know.
The G4 looks better than the DL 752, though there are still a few minor issues with softness/sharpening.
As to your points,
1. I almost always use support (tripod/monopod) when shooting past 300mm effective, and if I'm up in the 500mm+ plus range, then it's a must to combat shake, as I don't like bumping up the ISO. Plus, it can get tiring always having to support all that weight if you're only shooting hand held with a longer lens
2. Shooting RAW is most beneficial for correcting exposure and color problems; it doesn't really help that much when it comes to sharpening, and of course can do nothing about heat haze.
3. Not sure what that means, but if you are trying to avoid oversharpening, I agree - the only place I see it badly is the leading edge of the wings in the G4 shot. The DL 752 has evidence of oversharpening - I think this is what you must mean by halos... adding more sharpening to the DL is not going to help. I was trying to imply that you had already added too much to try and compensate for a soft shot, and it wasn't really working too well. If I've ms-interpreted, let me know.
RE: Prescreen Comments - Still On The 300mm Nikkor
As usual, Dana, you nailed it.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests