Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Editing advice/pre

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by nsxr__ View Post
    Hello, could I get some advice on this one please? Click image for larger version

Name:	SIA_A359_9V-SHC.jpg
Views:	80
Size:	514.4 KB
ID:	1115595
    Would be rejected for dark, soft, noisy, and centering.

    Comment


    • #32
      Made some more edits for the SIA A359. This any better? Click image for larger version

Name:	SIA_A359_9V-SHC2.jpg
Views:	73
Size:	398.9 KB
ID:	1115618

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by nsxr__ View Post
        Made some more edits for the SIA A359. This any better? Click image for larger version

Name:	SIA_A359_9V-SHC2.jpg
Views:	73
Size:	398.9 KB
ID:	1115618
        Would be rejected for dark, soft, noisy, centering, and contrast.

        Comment


        • #34
          Used a different angle for the SIA this time. Is this alright? Click image for larger version

Name:	SIA_A359_9V-SHC2.jpg
Views:	65
Size:	426.5 KB
ID:	1115649 Also finished this one, if I could get some advice on it please? Thanks. Click image for larger version

Name:	ELY_789_4X-EDD.jpg
Views:	67
Size:	414.7 KB
ID:	1115648

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by nsxr__ View Post
            Used a different angle for the SIA this time. Is this alright? Click image for larger version

Name:	SIA_A359_9V-SHC2.jpg
Views:	65
Size:	426.5 KB
ID:	1115649 Also finished this one, if I could get some advice on it please? Thanks. Click image for larger version

Name:	ELY_789_4X-EDD.jpg
Views:	67
Size:	414.7 KB
ID:	1115648
            Contrast/overprocessed/noisy for both.

            Comment


            • #36
              Further edits on the ELY. Is this better? Click image for larger version

Name:	ELY_789_4X-EDD2.jpg
Views:	64
Size:	346.1 KB
ID:	1115656

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by nsxr__ View Post
                Further edits on the ELY. Is this better?
                Not really.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

                  Not really.
                  Anything in specific with it or do the same issues still persist?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by nsxr__ View Post

                    Anything in specific with it or do the same issues still persist?
                    Same issues, contrast/overprocessed.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Hi, I got this image rejected for over processing/bad postprocessing https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=9125954 . I made some adjustments to the sharpening and would like some feedback on the improved image below. Click image for larger version

Name:	SVA_789_HZ-AR23 reedit.jpg
Views:	34
Size:	410.8 KB
ID:	1115723

                      Also made some more edits on the ELY 789, if I could receive some advice in that too. If it is still overprocessed, I'd like to know what edits I could do in my software to fix that. Click image for larger version  Name:	ELY_789_4X-EDD2.jpg Views:	0 Size:	353.3 KB ID:	1115722 Thanks.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by nsxr__ View Post
                        Hi, I got this image rejected for over processing/bad postprocessing https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=9125954 . I made some adjustments to the sharpening and would like some feedback on the improved image below.
                        Slightly soft, but wasn't rejected for sharpening issues.

                        Originally posted by nsxr__ View Post
                        Also made some more edits on the ELY 789, if I could receive some advice in that too. If it is still overprocessed, I'd like to know what edits I could do in my software to fix that.
                        Soft, dark/contrast, overprocessed (editing halos visible), compression. Not going to comment on this one any more.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Thank you for the previous comments on my pictures. I appreciate the advice and will continue improving upon them . I've just finished editing another image, If you could give me some advice on it please. I've used a different a different approach on my editing workflow for this one.Click image for larger version

Name:	ABG_A321_AP_BMW.jpg
Views:	37
Size:	396.9 KB
ID:	1115732

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by nsxr__ View Post
                            Thank you for the previous comments on my pictures. I appreciate the advice and will continue improving upon them . I've just finished editing another image, If you could give me some advice on it please. I've used a different a different approach on my editing workflow for this one.Click image for larger version

Name:	ABG_A321_AP_BMW.jpg
Views:	37
Size:	396.9 KB
ID:	1115732
                            Soft/blurry, and dark/poor contrast.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              I decided that the ABQ 321 pic can't be saved due to its blur. I appreciate the advice on it though and I'll use it on a different pic of that aircraft. I re-edited the SVA 789 to try and avoid the overprocessing issue by leaving the highlights and shadows alone to avoid haloes. I think it's a bit soft compared to the previous one but I'd like to know if it is still acceptable. Click image for larger version  Name:	SVA_789.jpg Views:	0 Size:	423.6 KB ID:	1115813I'd also like some advice on this one please. Click image for larger version

Name:	_MG_2086.jpg
Views:	26
Size:	394.3 KB
ID:	1115814Thanks.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by nsxr__ View Post
                                I decided that the ABQ 321 pic can't be saved due to its blur. I appreciate the advice on it though and I'll use it on a different pic of that aircraft. I re-edited the SVA 789 to try and avoid the overprocessing issue by leaving the highlights and shadows alone to avoid haloes. I think it's a bit soft compared to the previous one but I'd like to know if it is still acceptable.

                                I'd also like some advice on this one please.
                                Both images are soft. Poor dust removal on the second as well.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X