Uploadable at 1600 wide

[pavvyben]

Hello,

http://img82.imageshack.us/img82/4417/bcc0247in6.jpg

Thoughts on this please, im thinking of sticking it up at 1600, showing all the detail of the aircraft.

Im trying to get my bearings right with what is good enough and what isn't

Cheers

Ben

[brianw999]

It seems soft to me. I gave it 6 passes of usm at 100, 0.2, 0 and it looks much sharper without any jaggies that I can see.


However, like I always say, I 'aint no expert. It needs some crew input here.

BTW, nice pic.

[pavvyben]

That is a lovely edit Brian, looking much sharper

[Billsville]

Looks okay to me. Maybe a bit more of a play with the levels/brightness-contrast. Colour balance tending a little towards blue/green. Make sure the horizon is okay and you'll be okay.

And don't forget to check special scheme on the upload (as many many many people are not doing lately).

Panning shots are hard at the best of times. you seem to have got it right. Congrats

[seahawk]

I think there is minimal blurr, would look crisper at 1280 imho.

[brianw999]

Two more versions for you Ben, first at 1280 wide, second at 1600 wide. Both have had white balance modification. Use as you wish.

[egll]

I would go with the 1280 version, 1600 shots really need to be very high quality to be accepted, and there is a little bit of softness on the larger one......but that is a great shot nonetheless.




Matt

[LHR-Domi]

Yup 1280, jus tlooks better, with grain looking less etc...

[brianw999]

I'd agree with the other guys on 1280 Ben. The words " One million UK Hawk hours" are still a little soft and especially so in the 1600 version.

Cracking pic by the way. I need some panning practise to get that good.