Lovenir - editing/photo advice

[dlowwa]

Well, yea everything in the background looks a bit soft to say the least. Thanks for pointing it out though, I'll see what I can do, maybe chose another shot. Is it ok to ask for your opinion on a similar image again in a bit? As I've said before, Im here at the forums to learn of my mistakes.

Background is irrelevant, we don't screen the background for sharpness.

[Lovenir]

Background is irrelevant, we don't screen the background for sharpness.

Well alright, just thought it might have had something with that to do in this case but alright.

To me this looks a lot better, at least it isn't noisy in the black and I believe I fixed the oversharpend issue as well. But please provide your opinion, as I don't have eyes for finding those kinds of screening issues.

[dlowwa]

Well alright, just thought it might have had something with that to do in this case but alright.

To me this looks a lot better, at least it isn't noisy in the black and I believe I fixed the oversharpend issue as well. But please provide your opinion, as I don't have eyes for finding those kinds of screening issues.

Less sharpening, so no longer oversharpened, but soft in more places.

[Lovenir]

Less sharpening, so no longer oversharpened, but soft in more places.

Well, yea that is something at least, does this look like a sharpness slider issue (editing wise) or do you believe this is unfxable due to some issue in the photo it selfe?

I brought the sharpness up a bit but I don't know if it fixed it or made it even worse, I'm sorry for spamming you with all these attempts but I clearly doesn't know how to judge this my selfe yet, to me it looks pretty good now.

[dlowwa]

Well, yea that is something at least, does this look like a sharpness slider issue (editing wise) or do you believe this is unfxable due to some issue in the photo it selfe?

Don't know without seeing the original.

I brought the sharpness up a bit but I don't know if it fixed it or made it even worse, I'm sorry for spamming you with all these attempts but I clearly doesn't know how to judge this my selfe yet, to me it looks pretty good now.

Better, but still soft towards the edges.

[Lovenir]

Don't know without seeing the original.



Better, but still soft towards the edges.

Do you think bringing the resolution down would help? Maybe even 1024px would make it way less noticeable?


The original is too big for the forum to handel but here is one version with 2000px resolution, I don't know if that helps you:



Here it is with 1024 px as well, I don't know if that hides the softness issue? To me it looks better but I don't know I thought the ones before looked good as well.



Or I switch to this image, It is hard to edit this without the norwegian being over exposed but I think this one is way sharper, especially at the nose/cockpit part of the aircraft where it might have been a bit soft.

[dlowwa]

Do you think bringing the resolution down would help? Maybe even 1024px would make it way less noticeable?

The original is too big for the forum to handel but here is one version with 2000px resolution, I don't know if that helps you:

Here it is with 1024 px as well, I don't know if that hides the softness issue? To me it looks better but I don't know I thought the ones before looked good as well.

Or I switch to this image, It is hard to edit this without the norwegian being over exposed but I think this one is way sharper, especially at the nose/cockpit part of the aircraft where it might have been a bit soft.

2000pix version looks extremely soft/blurry, so guessing that's your real problem. 1024pix barely hides it, and yes overexposed aircraft in background may be an issue too. Will not comment on this one again.

[Lovenir]

2000pix version looks extremely soft/blurry, so guessing that's your real problem. 1024pix barely hides it, and yes overexposed aircraft in background may be an issue too. Will not comment on this one again.

Yea, can understand you wont continue, thanks for the guidens!

[Lovenir]

Dana, I got this one rejected for contrast which I was definitely not expecting. I asked you for pre-screening on this one before (as shown in the screenshot below and BTW I asked for pre-screening on 3 photos back then so this is not the one you commented soft on), my question is what kind of contrast rejection this is (weather/light or the amount of contrast between the darks and brights)? And do you think this is worth an appeal?

[dlowwa]

Dana, I got this one rejected for contrast which I was definitely not expecting. I asked you for pre-screening on this one before (as shown in the screenshot below and BTW I asked for pre-screening on 3 photos back then so this is not the one you commented soft on), my question is what kind of contrast rejection this is (weather/light or the amount of contrast between the darks and brights)? And do you think this is worth an appeal?

You'll need to remember my opinion is just that, and others might not agree. An appeal may or may not be successful.

[Lovenir]

You'll need to remember my opinion is just that, and others might not agree. An appeal may or may not be successful.

Well yea, I get that but based on my experience of what gets rejected due to contrast and not made me chocked. I have never had a photo of an aircraft with a clear sky rejected for a contrast issue so I just wonder if you think it was rejected for light contrast och "normal" contrast but well, I submitted an appeal so we'll see how it goes. Thanks!

[Lovenir]

Could someone help me with a pre-screen on these ones please?


(the ATR photos are 1280px and the m600 is 1024px)

[dlowwa]

Could someone help me with a pre-screen on these ones please?

1-2. ok for me
3. soft/blurry. not fixable.

[Lovenir]

1-2. ok for me
3. soft/blurry. not fixable.

thanks!

[Lovenir]

Could someone help me with pre-screening on this one please?