Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NacPhotographer - Editing Advice

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

  • NacPhotographer - Editing Advice

    This photo was rejected with the reason given as "Over Processed / Bad postprocessing." While I did do a few basic edits, I certainly didn't do anything I'd consider "over-done." Candid feedback is appreciated.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	D67A0992-2.jpg
Views:	359
Size:	625.3 KB
ID:	1104581
    Attached Files

  • #2
    Originally posted by NacPhotographer View Post
    This photo was rejected with the reason given as "Over Processed / Bad postprocessing." While I did do a few basic edits, I certainly didn't do anything I'd consider "over-done." Candid feedback is appreciated.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	D67A0992-2.jpg
Views:	359
Size:	625.3 KB
ID:	1104581
    This is not the actual image that was submitted/rejected.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

      This is not the actual image that was submitted/rejected.
      Try this one... sorry.
      Click image for larger version

Name:	D67A0992.jpg
Views:	349
Size:	748.3 KB
ID:	1104588

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by NacPhotographer View Post

        Try this one... sorry.
        Click image for larger version

Name:	D67A0992.jpg
Views:	349
Size:	748.3 KB
ID:	1104588
        There is a very slight halo around the tail, but that shouldn't have been enough for a rejection. I see a bigger issue with noise/compression in the sky, so if you can fix those two (minor) issues, should be acceptable.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

          There is a very slight halo around the tail, but that shouldn't have been enough for a rejection. I see a bigger issue with noise/compression in the sky, so if you can fix those two (minor) issues, should be acceptable.
          Thanks a ton! This is all new to me, so I've been struggling to figure out what you guys are looking for. As for the noise, what's the best way to go about getting rid of it without losing sharpness in the rest of the photo?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

            There is a very slight halo around the tail, but that shouldn't have been enough for a rejection. I see a bigger issue with noise/compression in the sky, so if you can fix those two (minor) issues, should be acceptable.
            Also, I am limited to 1280px on the longest side... in order to maintain detail in the image, what DPI do you recommend I save them? I've been using 300.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by NacPhotographer View Post

              Also, I am limited to 1280px on the longest side... in order to maintain detail in the image, what DPI do you recommend I save them? I've been using 300.
              Unless you're printing the image, dpi is irrelevant. Make sure you're saving the jpgs at max quality obviously (which I think you've done here, since the file size is near 1MB). If you're getting issues with noise/banding in blue skies where there is a fine gradation in the hues/shading, trying saving the raw file as a 16-bit tiff first, doing all of your editing, downsizing to 1280, and then converting to a jpg as the final step. Jpgs are obviously a lot more compressed, so starting with that format will make it more likely you'll see that kind of thing (blotchy/banding/visible compression in the sky).

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

                Unless you're printing the image, dpi is irrelevant. Make sure you're saving the jpgs at max quality obviously (which I think you've done here, since the file size is near 1MB). If you're getting issues with noise/banding in blue skies where there is a fine gradation in the hues/shading, trying saving the raw file as a 16-bit tiff first, doing all of your editing, downsizing to 1280, and then converting to a jpg as the final step. Jpgs are obviously a lot more compressed, so starting with that format will make it more likely you'll see that kind of thing (blotchy/banding/visible compression in the sky).
                Alright, I obviously had to start with a new round of edits, so this image will be slightly different than the original. How does it look?

                Click image for larger version

Name:	image_36678.jpg
Views:	330
Size:	667.4 KB
ID:	1104604

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by NacPhotographer View Post

                  Alright, I obviously had to start with a new round of edits, so this image will be slightly different than the original. How does it look?

                  Click image for larger version

Name:	image_36678.jpg
Views:	330
Size:	667.4 KB
ID:	1104604
                  Still see a slight halo around the tail, but might not be an issue (this is usually caused by adjustments to things like shadow.highlights, clarity, vibrance, etc.). Sky looks much better for noise/compression on the other hand..

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Well, it got rejected again.
                    • Over Processed / Bad postprocessing
                    • Too much or too little contrast

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by NacPhotographer View Post
                      Well, it got rejected again.
                      • Over Processed / Bad postprocessing
                      • Too much or too little contrast
                      Don't think the contrast is that bad, but as I said halo around the tail is still visible, so..

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        So, here's a new one. VERY minor adjustments in LR. Thoughts?

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	D67A2012.jpg
Views:	179
Size:	444.4 KB
ID:	1105416
                        Attached Files

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by NacPhotographer View Post
                          So, here's a new one. VERY minor adjustments in LR. Thoughts?

                          Click image for larger version

Name:	D67A2012.jpg
Views:	179
Size:	444.4 KB
ID:	1105416
                          Image would be rejected for soft, dirty, and backlit. The latter is not fixable.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

                            Image would be rejected for soft, dirty, and backlit. The latter is not fixable.
                            You are teaching me more than you can imagine. Stick with me... I'll have a beaut for you eventually.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by NacPhotographer View Post

                              You are teaching me more than you can imagine. Stick with me... I'll have a beaut for you eventually.
                              There's a pretty steep curve at first, but once you get past it, I expect I won't be seeing you back here too often

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X