Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reject for Oversharpening...

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

  • Reject for Oversharpening...

    ...And Niose

    I honestly cant see any noise or jaggies on this on my pc could someone please point them out to me

    http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=1561703

    thx
    Alan

  • #2
    there aren't really any jaggies but the pixels stand out a bit. you can try and soften it up a tad and try it again. good luck.

    -Chris

    Comment


    • #3
      It is oversharpened, you can clearly see it at the registration! the hor. Stab and the complete wing, cockpit windows, engine also. This in particular, but the overall impression is that it is oversharpened.

      As for the noise. Just have a look at the sky
      It looks like it is sharpened with the rest if the picture...

      Hope this helps!

      Cheers
      Björn
      "Light thinks it travels faster than anything but it's wrong. No matter how fast light travels it finds the darkness has always got there first, and is waiting for it."

      Terry Pratchet

      Comment


      • #4
        The easiest place to see the jaggies from over sharpening is on the trailing edge of the wings, and the reg.

        The sky has lots of noise in it all over and its from sharpening the whole image instead of just the plane.

        Comment


        • #5
          so would you call these oversharpened as well?

          http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6045529

          http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6034230

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kevin
            Yes, I would. It appears that both pics would have been blurry in the beginning, resulting in over-compensating with the sharpening creating an ovesharpened pic.

            Just my 2p.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by NeilA330
              Yes, I would. It appears that both pics would have been blurry in the beginning, resulting in over-compensating with the sharpening creating an ovesharpened pic.

              Just my 2p.
              I agree and i probably would have rejected them... but hey i'm not a screener nor do i want to be.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by AlanF
                ...And Niose

                I honestly cant see any noise or jaggies on this on my pc could someone please point them out to me

                http://www.jetphotos.net//viewreject_b.php?id=1561703

                thx
                Alan
                Marginally oversharpened Alan.....you may just have got away with it if the picture was better quality... you've gone a step too far trying to overcome an underexposed and hence soft photo.
                My contribution to JetPhotos

                Comment


                • #9
                  Quoting Kevin....
                  I'm a little bemused as to why you chose to post those two pictures, and make the comment that you made Kevin ? Doing so merely brings into question the abilities of the photographers concerned and the screeners who passed them into the database, with no useful input to the original question.

                  Their inclusion in this thread has no bearing on the photograph originally in question, which has a definitely noisy sky. The oversharpening is visible as fine jaggies in the tail stripes and haloes around the gear, registration and fine text on the nose. The picture may be salvageable with judicious use of layers and selective sharpening. As others have said, exclude the sky from the processing as sharpening and shadow/highlight use will rapidly destroy it, and the picture as a result.
                  If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Kevin There was no need to post other peoples photos in my thread i just asked for advice on my shot.

                    To all that replied i cant see any of that on my monitor but loaded on to my sons pc and looked there and i can now see it all thx for the replies i have filed it under P for personal

                    Alan

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      There are others that I think are not good enough. What I was trying to show is that the standard varies greatly, and this is problem, definitely.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by brianw999
                        Quoting Kevin....


                        I'm a little bemused as to why you chose to post those two pictures, and make the comment that you made Kevin ? Doing so merely brings into question the abilities of the photographers concerned and the screeners who passed them into the database, with no useful input to the original question.

                        Their inclusion in this thread has no bearing on the photograph originally in question, which has a definitely noisy sky. The oversharpening is visible as fine jaggies in the tail stripes and haloes around the gear, registration and fine text on the nose. The picture may be salvageable with judicious use of layers and selective sharpening. As others have said, exclude the sky from the processing as sharpening and shadow/highlight use will rapidly destroy it, and the picture as a result.
                        I couldn't have said it better !!

                        Kevin you can realise that we are just human and that as screeners we are looking for reasons to accept pics and not reject them... So I will just give you some good reasons to accept those slightyly oversharpened pics...

                        http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6045529 Gorgeous light

                        http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6034230 Very impressive angle !!

                        With all respect due, a side on shot of an AF A319 at MAN is not that rare...
                        Alan, always look at the reg, it's usually a good place to realise if a shot is oversharpened or not, that's what we screeners do...

                        Best regards
                        Alex

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Kevin
                          There are others that I think are not good enough. What I was trying to show is that the standard varies greatly, and this is problem, definitely.
                          As soon as we have a clear cut defition for "sharp", there won't be no consistency issues anymore. Promised!

                          Or, we just reduce the screening team to one member. He or she will have his/her personal standards and there won't be much inconsistency issues anymore. But I fear for the worst regarding screening times ....
                          My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X