I think most of the rejections I'm getting now is heat haze / soft / oversharpened
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...09454778.2361aa_762_lax_200usm.jpg
This one was rejected for being soft and blurry. I don't really get why though. More sharpening will just make it oversharpened.
Heres my edit: https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ready/d1310393698.4141aa500usm.jpg
This one is rejected for heat haze/quality/soft
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...930.7556airtahitinui_a343_lax2.jpg
I'm surprised about this one b/c I thought it was pretty decent. I guess I lost my feel for editing
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r....2089koreanair_772_lax2002xusm.jpg
The Korean Air 777 got rejected for that it needs a little more contrast. I still don't get how to tell contrast, so any help on that will be great
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...11_a1309538659.6703sqa345_lax2.jpg
The SQ A345 was rejected for oversharpened
Heres my new edit: (hope it's not soft now)
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...dy/o1310479908.7525sqa345_lax1.jpg
Pre - Screening : Lastly here's some new photos I uploaded. Some help with these would be great too
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...0480369.1623ana_773_lax_500usm.jpg
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b.../p1310533402.5002hawaiian_7632.jpg
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...ady/n1310534107.4261ual74421nr.jpg
Once again, Thanks!
Kevin
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
I will venture a guess on the last three you posted...
ANA looks a bit over-sharpened in some areas
Hawaiian is back-lit
United is back lit and poor quality/heat/distortion/distance?
Now, be warned, I get rejected just like anyone else so take my observations with a grain of salt
ANA looks a bit over-sharpened in some areas
Hawaiian is back-lit
United is back lit and poor quality/heat/distortion/distance?
Now, be warned, I get rejected just like anyone else so take my observations with a grain of salt
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting 777LR (Thread starter): I think most of the rejections I'm getting now is heat haze / soft / oversharpened https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...09454778.2361aa_762_lax_200usm.jpg This one was rejected for being soft and blurry. I don't really get why though. More sharpening will just make it oversharpened. Heres my edit: https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...m.jpg |
Looks either blurry or heat-hazed. I wouldn't spend more time on that one. When I have shots like that, they tend to transition from blurry/heat-hazed to oversharpened without stopping by "good" in between.
| Quoting 777LR (Thread starter): This one is rejected for heat haze/quality/soft https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...930.7556airtahitinui_a343_lax2.jpg I'm surprised about this one b/c I thought it was pretty decent. I guess I lost my feel for editing |
Definitely heat-hazed. You can see it most obviously on the bottom of the fuse, behind the landing gear.
| Quoting 777LR (Thread starter): https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...11_a1309538659.6703sqa345_lax2.jpg The SQ A345 was rejected for oversharpened Heres my new edit: (hope it's not soft now) https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...1.jpg |
New edit looks slightly soft to me (mostly the titles and gear).
| Quoting gonzalu (Reply 1): Hawaiian is back-lit United is back lit and poor quality/heat/distortion/distance? |
Yup. Hawaiian also looks heat-hazed.
ANA I'm not too sure about, so I'll let someone else comment.
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting 777LR (Thread starter): This one was rejected for being soft and blurry. |
Does seem to be some minor blur, but it could just be the way in which you've processed the image. If there is no blur on the original, try another edit and you might get better results. I wouldn't just throw on another layer of sharpening as you seem to have done, you'll probably need to start again from scratch.
| Quoting 777LR (Thread starter): This one is rejected for heat haze/quality/soft |
I see images with worse heat haze every day, but it is somewhat noticeable in yours.
| Quoting 777LR (Thread starter): The Korean Air 777 got rejected for that it needs a little more contrast. I still don't get how to tell contrast, so any help on that will be great |
The blacks are weak and there's an overall 'milky' look - telltale signs of low contrast.
| Quoting 777LR (Thread starter): The SQ A345 was rejected for oversharpened Heres my new edit: (hope it's not soft now) |
Need to be a bit more selective in your sharpening. It seems you're just applying blanket sharpening to the whole image/aircraft. Certain areas will get oversharpened easily (titles & cheat line on the SQ for example), while others will take an extra pass before they lose the soft look (gear, etc...). I'm not sure you've got the balance right on this one, so next time try to work on that.
| Quoting 777LR (Thread starter): Pre - Screening : Lastly here's some new photos I uploaded. Some help with these would be great too |
1. a little os on the tail and blue fuselage lines
2 & 3 are both heat hazed, backlit, and low contrast. There is no fixing these I'm afraid.
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting gonzalu (Reply 1): Hawaiian is back-lit United is back lit and poor quality/heat/distortion/distance? |
The problem with SFO is that it requires 300mm - 400mm to get good shots, and the time I went there was a bad time to take pictures
| Quoting dlowwa (Reply 3): I see images with worse heat haze every day, but it is somewhat noticeable in yours. |
Should I go for appeal or not? By the way, the Delta Airlines A330 that you let pass a couple weeks ago got rejected again after the 2nd edit. I will pm that one to you for more feedback.
| Quoting dlowwa (Reply 3): Does seem to be some minor blur, but it could just be the way in which you've processed the image. If there is no blur on the original, try another edit and you might get better results. I wouldn't just throw on another layer of sharpening as you seem to have done, you'll probably need to start again from scratch. |
Basically before I save an image, I'll save it as "AA_767_beforeUSM.psd" So if I get rejected for soft and I submitted a photo with 2 passes of USM, I'll remember and re-submit after 3 USM.
Also I think a big problem I'm having is that I select the entire background and then select inverse and apply USM to the entire plane. What USM parameters do you guys use. I use 200%, 0.2, 0 on Photoshop Elements
| Quoting dlowwa (Reply 3): Need to be a bit more selective in your sharpening. It seems you're just applying blanket sharpening to the whole image/aircraft. Certain areas will get oversharpened easily (titles & cheat line on the SQ for example), while others will take an extra pass before they lose the soft look (gear, etc...). I'm not sure you've got the balance right on this one, so next time try to work on that. |
Yeah, for me that's a problem. I have a hard time telling whether the airplane is soft or oversharpened in certain parts.
Kevin Hsu
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting 777LR (Reply 4): Should I go for appeal or not? |
Not. What I was saying was yours wasn't as bad as others that get rejected, but it's still bad. Also, saying something in your appeal like "Screener Dana Low said it wasn't soft" won't do you much good, as appeals are handled by the head screeners, who will make up their own minds. Furthermore, make sure you read what is posted here carefully, as both Mark (Aussie18) and I in fact told you that the DL you appealed was soft, yet your appeal was worded in a way that tried to portray the opposite. Not sure what you were trying to accomplish with that.
| Quoting 777LR (Reply 4): Yeah, for me that's a problem. I have a hard time telling whether the airplane is soft or oversharpened in certain parts. |
If you want, I can take a look at the original of the AA and tell you if I think it's worth another edit.
[Edited 2011-07-14 23:09:10]
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting 777LR (Reply 4): Also I think a big problem I'm having is that I select the entire background and then select inverse and apply USM to the entire plane. What USM parameters do you guys use. I use 200%, 0.2, 0 on Photoshop Elements |
For shots against a blue sky or other un-detailed background, I do a similar thing:
1.) Select sky (may take a bunch of clicks).
2.) Select inverse.
3.) Expand selection by 1 or 2 pixels.
4.) Use the polygonal lasso tool to select any areas of the airplane that aren't already selected, if they exist.
5.) One pass of USM on the whole airplane (usually something like 70-80%, 0.3, 0).
6.) New duplicate layer.
7.) Expand the selection by 1 pixel.
8.) Another pass of USM on the whole airplane until the softer areas are acceptably sharp (usually 60-80%, 0.3, 0).
9.) Use eraser to erase oversharpened areas and noise if necessary.
10.) Flatten image.
It seems like a lot of steps, but in practice it doesn't take very long at all if the original image is reasonably sharp. Steps 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 10 are all basically one- or two-mouse-click steps.
For shots with lots of colors and detail in the background (where selecting the whole background would be a royal pain), I usually just select the whole airplane with the polygonal lasso tool, then pick up at step 4 above.
| Quoting 777LR (Reply 4): Yeah, for me that's a problem. I have a hard time telling whether the airplane is soft or oversharpened in certain parts. |
It takes some practice to develop an eye for it. I still get plenty of soft rejections.
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
Yeah, there isn't one way to sharpen ALL images... each is a bit different each time... even on the same day, same spot in the sky, different planes will benefit from different sharpening. And yes, I too get my share of soft rejections... sometimes it flips to oversharpening LOL but after Dana nudged me in the right direction, I have a better feeling for it (oversharpening) so I tend to get soft more than not because I just don;t like overdoing it.
When you get it right, it just looks right. I have been trying to apply the art of "Does IT Look Right?" and have had much more success with centering and sharpening using those basic rules.
When you get it right, it just looks right. I have been trying to apply the art of "Does IT Look Right?" and have had much more success with centering and sharpening using those basic rules.
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting dlowwa (Reply 5): |
I think I was trying to say the fact that you let it pass, but it didn't pass with other screeners. I understand now that it's completely futile. Thanks for informing me though, now I realized how big of a fool I was for typing that out.
| Quoting dlowwa (Reply 5): If you want, I can take a look at the original of the AA and tell you if I think it's worth another edit. |
Yeah sure, but it'll take a couple weeks before I get home.
| Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 6): For shots against a blue sky or other un-detailed background, I do a similar thing: 1.) Select sky (may take a bunch of clicks). 2.) Select inverse. 3.) Expand selection by 1 or 2 pixels. 4.) Use the polygonal lasso tool to select any areas of the airplane that aren't already selected, if they exist. 5.) One pass of USM on the whole airplane (usually something like 70-80%, 0.3, 0). 6.) New duplicate layer. 7.) Expand the selection by 1 pixel. 8.) Another pass of USM on the whole airplane until the softer areas are acceptably sharp (usually 60-80%, 0.3, 0). 9.) Use eraser to erase oversharpened areas and noise if necessary. 10.) Flatten image. |
Sweet, I'll try that next time I edit. Two questions though, where do you select the polygonal lasso tool on Photoshop? Not sure if Elements 9 has it because I never saw it. So you basically do two passes of USM and then use eraser, not doing selective sharpening on the aircraft? I always feel that the eraser will blur the picture.
| Quoting gonzalu (Reply 7): I have a better feeling for it (oversharpening) so I tend to get soft more than not because I just don;t like overdoing it. |
I tend to like it sharper, may be because I'm not wearing glasses when I edit, I don't know if that makes a difference or not.
| Quoting gonzalu (Reply 7): When you get it right, it just looks right. I have been trying to apply the art of "Does IT Look Right?" and have had much more success with centering and sharpening using those basic rules. |
I think I've gotten the hang of centering with that concept, but I need to get the feel for sharpening.
Kevin
[Edited 2011-07-15 07:17:06]
-
- dumbell2424
- Posts: 929
- Joined:
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting 777LR (Reply 8): Sweet, I'll try that next time I edit. Two questions though, where do you select the polygonal lasso tool on Photoshop? Not sure if Elements 9 has it because I never saw it. So you basically do two passes of USM and then use eraser, not doing selective sharpening on the aircraft? I always feel that the eraser will blur the picture. |
Here it is in regular Photoshop, hope it can help
 |
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting 777LR (Reply 8): I always feel that the eraser will blur the picture. |
If you're using a duplicate layer, then all the eraser will do is erase whichever layer you're working on.
The way it works is that you create a new duplicate layer, and then you sharpen just one of the layers. So now you have one unsharpened layer, and a duplicate sharpened layer sitting on top of it. Then, you erase the parts of the sharpened layer that are oversharpened, so the unsharpened layer shows through.
So it shouldn't blur anything.
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting dumbell2424 (Reply 9): Here it is in regular Photoshop, hope it can help |
Thank you, I'll check if elements 9 has it
| Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 10): |
Got it, I'm just not used to making new layers, I usually just edit directly (background)
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
Thanks for your help! For the layers pictures, what do you mean by Layer Mask Ready and Not Ready? I have trouble understanding that picture. The second picture is really helpful, and for the third one, what does D, E, F, and G do?
Thanks,
Kevin
Thanks,
Kevin
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
OK, the ready/not ready
So, if the THUMBNAIL has focus, anything you do like brush or erase, it will be to the actual layer ... BAD
If you instead have the focus on the MASK, so the MASK is active, whatever you do is done to the MASK and not your image...
Typically you want to paint in the mask in white or black. Just remember that black hides and white reveals... anything between black and white (the grays) is a fade ... so full white reveals 100% of the layer and BLACK hides 100% of the layer. 50% gray will reveal 50 percent of the layer... IF it is not clear, just ask... but do practice on a dummy image or even on real images, just don't save...
Now, the DEFG are basically the effect the lasso tools will have on the existing selection... REPLACE, ADD, SUBTRACT, INTERSECTION (or RESULT) which are essentially BOOLEAN operations similar to AND/OR/XOR etc...
Again, if not clear, just ask
[Edited 2011-07-17 17:24:10]
[Edited 2011-07-17 17:24:59]
So, if the THUMBNAIL has focus, anything you do like brush or erase, it will be to the actual layer ... BAD
If you instead have the focus on the MASK, so the MASK is active, whatever you do is done to the MASK and not your image...
Typically you want to paint in the mask in white or black. Just remember that black hides and white reveals... anything between black and white (the grays) is a fade ... so full white reveals 100% of the layer and BLACK hides 100% of the layer. 50% gray will reveal 50 percent of the layer... IF it is not clear, just ask... but do practice on a dummy image or even on real images, just don't save...
Now, the DEFG are basically the effect the lasso tools will have on the existing selection... REPLACE, ADD, SUBTRACT, INTERSECTION (or RESULT) which are essentially BOOLEAN operations similar to AND/OR/XOR etc...
Again, if not clear, just ask
[Edited 2011-07-17 17:24:10]
[Edited 2011-07-17 17:24:59]
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting 777LR (Reply 11): Got it, I'm just not used to making new layers, I usually just edit directly (background) |
I used to do that as well for airplane shots, but it would require quite a bit of selective sharpening (actually selecting only the parts I wanted to sharpen).
Eventually, I gave in and started doing what many recommend - using a duplicate layer for sharpening, then erasing oversharpened parts. I found out that there's a reason so many recommend it.
To be clear, though, I use Photoshop and have never used Elements, so I'm assuming Elements has the same tools, but I don't know for sure.
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
And for the sake of clarity, there are differences in ERASING vs MASKING. I like masking better because when you erase, there is no going back (easily that is) where as with MASKING you have much more visual control and feedback... the end result is identical, just how it works and how you use it that changes.
Masking allows you to also use tools to REFINE the mask whereas when you erase, there is nothing left to tweak... the data is gone. Granted, it is a LAYER you are destroying and before you save, the image is never committed but you should always try to use tools and methods that ultimately make your life better and easier!
Masking allows you to also use tools to REFINE the mask whereas when you erase, there is nothing left to tweak... the data is gone. Granted, it is a LAYER you are destroying and before you save, the image is never committed but you should always try to use tools and methods that ultimately make your life better and easier!
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting gonzalu (Reply 16): |
I kind of see what you're saying, but don't totally agree.
With Duplicate Layer + Eraser, if I erase a section of sharpened edge, then I immediately see the unsharpened layer underneath. I can then immediately undo what I just did. I store 40 steps in my history (I think), so generally I can go back quite a ways. I almost never run into the case where I need to undo something I did more than 40 steps ago (indeed, hardly ever need to undo something I did more than 5 steps ago).
The key to this all though (for me), is first sharpening the image as much as it can handle without being oversharpened anywhere. Then any sharpening beyond that is done on a duplicate layer. This way, I ensure that when I erase part of the duplicate layer, the underlying layer isn't too soft.
But you know, I may try using a mask one of these days. Sounds interesting. I'm just resistant to change.
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting gonzalu (Reply 14): Typically you want to paint in the mask in white or black. Just remember that black hides and white reveals... anything between black and white (the grays) is a fade ... so full white reveals 100% of the layer and BLACK hides 100% of the layer. 50% gray will reveal 50 percent of the layer... IF it is not clear, just ask... but do practice on a dummy image or even on real images, just don't save... |
When you say mask, are you referring to duplicate layer? Sorry for so many questions, but how do you mask something and why do you have to paint it black or white?
| Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 17): The key to this all though (for me), is first sharpening the image as much as it can handle without being oversharpened anywhere. Then any sharpening beyond that is done on a duplicate layer. This way, I ensure that when I erase part of the duplicate layer, the underlying layer isn't too soft. |
Dang this is a lot more complicated than the stuff I used to do (I follow the a.net photoshop editing guide), but I'll follow the step by step instructions you typed on reply 6 this weekend.
Kevin
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting 777LR (Reply 18): Dang this is a lot more complicated than the stuff I used to do (I follow the a.net photoshop editing guide), but I'll follow the step by step instructions you typed on reply 6 this weekend. |
I was going to say... if you have to spend more than 5-10 minutes editing an image, you're spending too long. The best editing is the simplest. Start with a good, clean image that needs a minimal amount of editing. Do the work before and while taking the photo, not afterward while processing.
Kevin, as I mentioned after seeing the originals, your images tend to be pretty badly heat hazed, which no amount of editing is going to fix.
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting 777LR (Reply 18): Dang this is a lot more complicated than the stuff I used to do (I follow the a.net photoshop editing guide), but I'll follow the step by step instructions you typed on reply 6 this weekend. |
It's really not that bad. Like anything, it takes some getting used to, after which it goes very quickly.
| Quoting dlowwa (Reply 19): I was going to say... if you have to spend more than 5-10 minutes editing an image, you're spending too long. |
That's about how long they typically take me, though sometimes I'll sit there for a few minutes agonizing over whether an airplane is actually sharp or not. But most of those steps I wrote above are incredibly quick.
The most important factor I find in editing time, aside from obvious things like blur and exposure, is whether I've stretched my lens too far. My recent shots from the In'n'Out were/are ridiculously easy to edit, as they were mostly between 100 and 200mm focal length. When I start getting out to 240-260mm, although the shots are usable, they take more time.
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting dlowwa (Reply 19): Kevin, as I mentioned after seeing the originals, your images tend to be pretty badly heat hazed, which no amount of editing is going to fix. |
I hate heat haze
| Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 20): That's about how long they typically take me, though sometimes I'll sit there for a few minutes agonizing over whether an airplane is actually sharp or not. But most of those steps I wrote above are incredibly quick. |
Longest part for me is selecting the aircraft for sharpening
| Quoting vikkyvik (Reply 20): My recent shots from the In'n'Out were/are ridiculously easy to edit, as they were mostly between 100 and 200mm focal length. When I start getting out to 240-260mm, although the shots are usable, they take more time. |
True, because it may be more soft, a little bit on heat haze, etc.
| Quoting dlowwa (Reply 19): Start with a good, clean image that needs a minimal amount of editing. |
For me, it's editing photos with just blue sky in the background
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
Hey Manny and Vik, thx for the interesting discussion with the detailed explanations on some editing steps in PS. I'm gonna take a look at these this weekend and see if I can get it to work.
I've actually heard this repeatedly from several people, I still can't get it to apply to my real world editing. Take for example applying a mask. Click magic wand tool, select the area you need masked, click click. Area selected. Simple right? On clear images with good contrasts, no problem, but on images in low light I can hardly ever get a mask to apply properly. Read somewhere I'm supposed to adjust the properties of the mask by changing pixel values. Was hoping maybe Vik or Manny could take a second to elaborate on this. In most of my editing, I spend more time trying to get masks to conform to the areas I need actually selected than anything else, upwards of 20~30 minutes just for masking (one image). So by Dana's definition... I'm definitely spending waaaaaaaaaaaaay too much time editing. But I knew that already. If I could learn to apply masks properly in seconds flat, yeah, that would definitely make life a bit easier.
Thanks in advance guys!
| Quoting dlowwa (Reply 19): I was going to say... if you have to spend more than 5-10 minutes editing an image, you're spending too long. |
I've actually heard this repeatedly from several people, I still can't get it to apply to my real world editing. Take for example applying a mask. Click magic wand tool, select the area you need masked, click click. Area selected. Simple right? On clear images with good contrasts, no problem, but on images in low light I can hardly ever get a mask to apply properly. Read somewhere I'm supposed to adjust the properties of the mask by changing pixel values. Was hoping maybe Vik or Manny could take a second to elaborate on this. In most of my editing, I spend more time trying to get masks to conform to the areas I need actually selected than anything else, upwards of 20~30 minutes just for masking (one image). So by Dana's definition... I'm definitely spending waaaaaaaaaaaaay too much time editing. But I knew that already. If I could learn to apply masks properly in seconds flat, yeah, that would definitely make life a bit easier.
Thanks in advance guys!
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
| Quoting zbot69 (Reply 22): . If I could learn to apply masks properly in seconds flat, yeah, that would definitely make life a bit easier. |
OK, in Photoshop, your Magic Wand has a "Tolerance" setting and then next to that, the tool allows for Anti-Aliasing the selection (or not) and to make the selection "Contiguous" or not... these are checkboxes so you can select them or not select them. Then there is "Sample all layers" or not. Leave that one off for now.
The First one, Tolerance, is your best friend. It allows you to set a reference for the tool to make up its mind. So when you set it to say, 1, the tool will tolerate a difference of only one pixel around before it stops selecting, meaning it tolerates LESS difference. As the number goes higher, it tolerates more and more difference in pixels. So when selecting a sky, a low tolerance will work just fine to select just the sky as the abrupt difference on the plane will make it select pretty tightly to the fuselage.
If you decrease it to very low numbers, it helps selection of areas adjacent to overexposed parts of the aircraft as the difference is less between sky and white fuselage for example. Play around with the tolerance level on the same image while clicking the same spot over and over to see how it works. You'll get a feel for it soon enough
The other checkboxes affect the selection in the same way they would affect a mask or any other form of selection.
The Anti-Alias will make the resulting selection smoother.
Contiguous means it will not skip around the image to select non touching areas. It creates a single selection loop.
RE: Post Screening/Pre Screening - Blurry, Soft, Etc.
Hey guys, I need some more insight on these pictures
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...11_a1309538659.6703sqa345_lax2.jpg
This one was rejected for oversharpened and soft.
I tried using the duplicate layer when I re-edited. Here's my new edit
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...f1311537051.9285sqa345newedit2.jpg
The Korean Air 777-300ER was rejected with the screener saying "a bit more contrast needed"
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r....2089koreanair_772_lax2002xusm.jpg
Here's my new edit adding more contrast:
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b....0205kal_773er_laxmorecontrast.jpg
Lastly, the ANA was rejected for soft
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0480369.1623ana_773_lax_500usm.jpg
My new edit again using the duplicate layer:
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...536491.2716ana_773_lax_newedit.jpg
Thanks again,
Kevin Hsu
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...11_a1309538659.6703sqa345_lax2.jpg
This one was rejected for oversharpened and soft.
I tried using the duplicate layer when I re-edited. Here's my new edit
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...f1311537051.9285sqa345newedit2.jpg
The Korean Air 777-300ER was rejected with the screener saying "a bit more contrast needed"
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r....2089koreanair_772_lax2002xusm.jpg
Here's my new edit adding more contrast:
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b....0205kal_773er_laxmorecontrast.jpg
Lastly, the ANA was rejected for soft
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/r...0480369.1623ana_773_lax_500usm.jpg
My new edit again using the duplicate layer:
https://www.airliners.net/addphotos/b...536491.2716ana_773_lax_newedit.jpg
Thanks again,
Kevin Hsu
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests