Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

A few puzzling rejects...

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

  • A few puzzling rejects...

    This one, along with others, were rejected for underexposed and soft. I am not clear how this could considered underexposed, unless I am missing something. Also regarding softness, where is it soft? Maybe I have a monitor or eyeball problem.

    http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=1095112

    Pete

    Here is a soft and backlit rejection. I understand the backlit, but I thought it "worked" with the lighting effect on the engines. But the soft?

    http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=1095120

  • #2
    "No image matches that id number", that's all I get for the first link. Did you perhaps miss-type the first ID?

    Comment


    • #3
      The first one was accepted upon appeal. Here is the link

      http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=5789800

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by psyops
        Here is a soft and backlit rejection. I understand the backlit, but I thought it "worked" with the lighting effect on the engines. But the soft?
        Doesn't look soft to me either. If anything I would say slightly oversharpened. I suspect the screener was referring to the Air Canada titles, but I would think they look soft because of the reflections on the upper fuselage.


        Comment


        • #5
          I see your point about the engines and personally agree that they balance the backlit element of the fuselage but must also agree that the logo and airline name, which are smack in the middle of the frame and therefore catch the eye first, seem to be soft. The same applies to the cabin windows.

          The Air Canada colours are a bitch to portray in this kind of light. I don't think AC could have got a body colour closer to "light sky" if they tried ???

          A bit of playing around with PS CS2 .....Your original....






          In PS CS2, 3 passes of USM at 100, 0.2, 0. and 20% shadow..5% highlight.








          As always, I'm no PS expert but this version seems more balanced....but could still fail on "backlit", which is a shame as I rather like this shot.

          Screener comments perchance ??
          If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

          Comment


          • #6
            Brian - nicely done! Thanks for the efforts. I would say your PSskills are better than average easily.

            I agree, AC could not have picked a color better to blend in with the sky.

            Comment

            Working...
            X