Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Pre-screening advice - p_nilly

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by p_nilly View Post

    Alright. Overdone as in just the noise reduction, or everything in general?
    Noise reduction.

    Leave a comment:


  • p_nilly
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Less noise reduction? It's really overdone, the colors are bleeding through the edges in multiple places. As such, an overprocessed rejection is just as likely as for soft.
    Alright. Overdone as in just the noise reduction, or everything in general?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by p_nilly View Post
    How would I sharpen this up further? The original shot was sharp, I checked this. But since the ISO was high, I had to use a lot of noise reduction. My sharpening slider on Lightroom is already at 150. What else could I do?

    Less noise reduction? It's really overdone, the colors are bleeding through the edges in multiple places. As such, an overprocessed rejection is just as likely as for soft.

    Leave a comment:


  • p_nilly
    replied
    How would I sharpen this up further? The original shot was sharp, I checked this. But since the ISO was high, I had to use a lot of noise reduction. My sharpening slider on Lightroom is already at 150. What else could I do?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by p_nilly View Post
    Have these been overdone and at risk of contrast rejection anyway?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2768.jpg
Views:	76
Size:	767.5 KB
ID:	1100630

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2794.jpg
Views:	77
Size:	718.5 KB
ID:	1100629

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2691.jpg
Views:	76
Size:	871.9 KB
ID:	1100628
    Yes, there are contrast issues (among others) for all three.

    Leave a comment:


  • p_nilly
    replied
    Have these been overdone and at risk of contrast rejection anyway?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2768.jpg
Views:	76
Size:	767.5 KB
ID:	1100630

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2794.jpg
Views:	77
Size:	718.5 KB
ID:	1100629

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2691.jpg
Views:	76
Size:	871.9 KB
ID:	1100628

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by p_nilly View Post
    Would this be better, and if not, what do I need to do to fix it?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2529.jpg
Views:	89
Size:	728.6 KB
ID:	1100467
    Probably as good as you're going to be able to get it due to the weather conditions, but still borderline at best I think.

    Leave a comment:


  • p_nilly
    replied
    Would this be better, and if not, what do I need to do to fix it?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2529.jpg
Views:	89
Size:	728.6 KB
ID:	1100467

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by p_nilly View Post
    Would these shots need any improvements?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2202.jpg
Views:	206
Size:	683.1 KB
ID:	1100447Click image for larger version Name:	IMG_2530.jpg Views:	0 Size:	815.5 KB ID:	1100446
    First ok for me; second has issues with exposure/contrast, noise, and oversharpening.

    Leave a comment:


  • p_nilly
    replied
    Would these shots need any improvements?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2202.jpg
Views:	206
Size:	683.1 KB
ID:	1100447Click image for larger version  Name:	IMG_2530.jpg Views:	0 Size:	815.5 KB ID:	1100446

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by p_nilly View Post
    Would this be sharp enough?
    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_1938.jpg
Views:	283
Size:	611.2 KB
ID:	1100245
    No.

    Leave a comment:


  • p_nilly
    replied
    Would this be sharp enough?
    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_1938.jpg
Views:	283
Size:	611.2 KB
ID:	1100245

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by p_nilly View Post
    I got an overprocessing/bad post processing rejection on this photo, but I don't know why. Is it because I pushed shadows too much? And would I have been at risk of a contrast rejection anyway?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_1315.jpg
Views:	247
Size:	539.1 KB
ID:	1100221
    Editing halos are visible.

    Leave a comment:


  • p_nilly
    replied
    I got an overprocessing/bad post processing rejection on this photo, but I don't know why. Is it because I pushed shadows too much? And would I have been at risk of a contrast rejection anyway?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_1315.jpg
Views:	247
Size:	539.1 KB
ID:	1100221

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by p_nilly View Post
    Is this cropping acceptable or should I just crop as standard? (I wanted to include the shadow)

    And for the night shot, is white balance acceptable?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_1663.jpg
Views:	270
Size:	909.7 KB
ID:	1100178

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_1942.jpg
Views:	249
Size:	632.5 KB
ID:	1100179



    1. I suggest cropping tighter on right. Shadow doesn't really add much to the image, and you can crop closer without even cutting it.
    2. a bit too yellow, and also appears blurry in parts.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X