Who needs help with their scans / rejects?? We can help you!

[mnazarinia]

Hi Greg,

Thanks for your comments. That's fine. I am not a professional photographer. I have just started a year ago and am here just to learn, so I definitely don't mind you mentioning all you think is wrong here.
What I have included in the above thread is just the actual photo from my camera. It hasn't been touched.
So do you think my white balance is not what it should be? or what other sort of settings you think I should confirm?
So what are your other suggestions?

By the way thanks a lot for your comments.

Cheers,
Mehdi.

[Greg Wilson]

You don't need to be a pro photographer (and nor am I ) to enjoy it, and there is not a lot wrong with what you are doing. Remember light conditions are a big factor in a good photo. The photo in question is toplit and you stand no chance of correctly exposing to capture the full detail of that aircraft. As you can see with the toplit ones you have on the DB there is a dark shadow area below the window line.......not bad photos...but not ideal. And a lot of yours seem to be taken at the same time of day....lunch time eh
I just think you can get more "punch "out of your photos...better lighting to start with. I do see you use manual white balance....is that the sunny/cloudy settings. If so I would recomend you use auto...unless I custom set it is all I ever use. Make sure you have no in-camera processing ( saturation etc ) happening. Even things such as using a hood or a filter can affect a photo.
Snap some shots around 0800hrs and 1600hrs and see the difference.

[pilotgolfer]

I can live with the undersharpened on this one, but I don't really get the part of aircraft cut off?

http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=1673755

[z740]

It's just a way too close up. Needs to be backed up a tad. You can't see the bottom of the A/C.

-Chris

[tommyalf]

I can live with the undersharpened on this one, but I don't really get the part of aircraft cut off?
http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=1673755

If you have another shot of it where your standing farther back I think it would work well. I would also apply more USM to it, I think you'll be safe from jaggies. Good motive though and nothing wroing with shooting those old warbirds.

[Will_Power]

Hi all, I have just had this rejected for being "soft." I always have trouble knowing how much to sharpen them. Could I get some advise?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=1681060

I uplaoded another sharper version, is it any better?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewqueued_b.php?id=1686871

Heres a different pic, how is it?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewqueued_b.php?id=1686869

Thanks for your help.

[brianw999]

Will,

Your second version of Skywest looks ok to me.

The Delta MD 90 is soft and is not going to be easy to fix. However, remembering that I'm working on your posted copy and not the original, I came up with this using the following flow...

1 x pass overall sharpening at 50_0.3_0

Create layer. 1 x pass 50_0.3_0. Erase jaggies from Delta name and logo. Flatten.

Create layer. 1 x pass 50_0.3_0. Erase jaggies from Delta name and logo and top edge of engine cowl. Flatten.

1 x shot of USM at 50_0.3_0. to the cockpit area and front door, registration and flag and engine cowl detail but not the edges of the cowl.

[KLM772ER]

Hello,


I had this shot rejected for Digital manipulation:

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=1681765

On the appeal I got the message: the photo looks manipulated. If you equalize the photo you will see, what I mean.

Here is the equalized version

I still don`t see where it is supposed to be manipulated..

All I did was the normal stuff I do with my photos..

It was taken at 1/30s ISO100 F11 at 130mm

Thanks for your help!!

Björn

[magic48]

Hi all, I have just had this rejected for being "soft." I always have trouble knowing how much to sharpen them. Could I get some advise?

Hi Will,

Sharpness on the CRJ-900 is indeed improved. However, the sharpening process caused the noise to become much more visible which is not going to be easy to fix. Same goes for the MD-90 shot, as can be seen in Brian's edit (sorry Brian ).....

If you don't mind, send copies of both originals to [email protected] and I'll see what I can do....

Gianluca

[Will_Power]

Thanks Gianluca, I sent you the email.

[brianw999]

........as can be seen in Brian's edit (sorry Brian )

No worries, I said it was a difficult one.

[mnazarinia]

Hi All,

I have recently had just this rejection due to "contrast" issue. Can you please help me how to make it right?

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=1685367

Cheers,
Mehdi.

[KLM772ER]

Hello Mehdi,

Your shot needs more contrast, as the complete fuselage looks grey and not white as it is supposed to be

In this case simply move the slider for the highlights to the start of the curve to get a better result, as the blacks are ok!

here is a how the result roughly should look like:


Hope this helps!
Bjorn

PS.: It would be nice if some of the screeners or someone else could enlighten me why my shot (posted earlier) got a manipulation rejection..

[jid]

PS.: It would be nice if some of the screeners or someone else could enlighten me why my shot (posted earlier) got a manipulation rejection..

I have looked but don't know sorry .. Jid

[KLM772ER]

I have looked but don't know sorry .. Jid

Thanks Jid! So at least I am not the only one not seeing it

Cheers
Bjorn