NEW Editing advice thread

[dlowwa]

Hi there,
I've had a couple of photos rejected due to poor framing. For the BA is there a better crop or is it simply the angle of the shot doesn't really lend itself to cropping this way. For the United is the aircraft too high in the frame? Thank you very much for any advice offered

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6080957

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6082241

The BA rejection I agree with, the crop is poorly motivated at this angle. The UA, on the other hand, looks well balanced to me, though I would guess whoever rejected it thought it was too high.

[Julian S.]

Hi there,
I've had a couple of photos rejected due to poor framing. For the BA is there a better crop or is it simply the angle of the shot doesn't really lend itself to cropping this way. For the United is the aircraft too high in the frame? Thank you very much for any advice offered

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6080957

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6082241

Hey Bob.

For the BA - best wait for a screener.
For the UA - Yes, looks like too high in frame du to the tail, try a crop like this.


I have similar shots in db too, for example this one: A6-AFD
Hope this helps, have a nice day and always happy spottings.

[bobh]

Hi there,
I've had a couple of photos rejected due to poor framing. For the BA is there a better crop or is it simply the angle of the shot doesn't really lend itself to cropping this way. For the United is the aircraft too high in the frame? Thank you very much for any advice offered

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6080957

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6082241

[dlowwa]

Thanks for the response!

Less than optimal? The sun was shining from behind me, at around 4 PM, through a very thin layer of clouds (quite like a thin curtain). Would you consider that a "less than optimal light"? I might add that I always shot with exp. -1/3 to enable shorter exp. times, hence the correction at brightness. +20 or +25 at contrast is pretty much standard during my LR workflow, although I have to admit that I use that slider more instinctively than looking at the histogram.

Yes, the 'very thin layer of clouds' is what is causing you problems with the image. It's making the background as bright or brighter than your subject. I'm not saying the light was poor, just that it could have been better (for aviation photography anyway).

[Pta Aviation]

Yes, looks better.



Indeed 'Special Scheme' is needed. If you check the upload guideline, it is clearly stated that "Aircraft with large stickers to celebrate the 100th or 500th plane delivered, also count. Same with advertising stickers if large or advertising schemes, these do qualify for Special Scheme selection."

Thank you.

[Vic Diesel]

You went wrong not with the editing, but simply trying to submit an image taken in less than optimal light. You can try to brighten it a bit and add more contrast, but no guarantee that will work.

Thanks for the response!

Less than optimal? The sun was shining from behind me, at around 4 PM, through a very thin layer of clouds (quite like a thin curtain). Would you consider that a "less than optimal light"? I might add that I always shot with exp. -1/3 to enable shorter exp. times, hence the correction at brightness. +20 or +25 at contrast is pretty much standard during my LR workflow, although I have to admit that I use that slider more instinctively than looking at the histogram.

[dlowwa]

Hi there. I managed to add some red hues to the pic. Is it better now?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]8998[/ATTACH]

Yes, looks better.

I got this one rejected; the "technical issues" - darkness, sharpness etc, I've dealt with separately, but the "categories wrong or missing" one confused me a bit. I presume this relates to the comments on the fuselage - first to fly A320 Neo etc, but surely these would be classed as decals rather than a special livery.

Can you tell me what category needs to be ticked?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6074041

Indeed 'Special Scheme' is needed. If you check the upload guideline, it is clearly stated that "Aircraft with large stickers to celebrate the 100th or 500th plane delivered, also count. Same with advertising stickers if large or advertising schemes, these do qualify for Special Scheme selection."

[dlowwa]

Hi guys,

obviously my previous successful uploads did succeed without me having proper knowledge of how to utilize the histogram to adjust contrast properly. Recently some pics were rejected on "too much or too little contrast" (should that be a single rejection reason?) - turned out the contrast was indeed too low.

Here is one of them:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]8980[/ATTACH]

And here's a screenshot of how it looks like in LR5:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]8981[/ATTACH]

Could you pls tell me what I did wrong?

Yes, I do not know how to use the histagram properly, never learnt it - so if you know of a decent online tutorial (the one in Brian's otherwise nice list in "Processing tips and tricks" is unfortunately broken), I'd be thankful for that as well.

You went wrong not with the editing, but simply trying to submit an image taken in less than optimal light. You can try to brighten it a bit and add more contrast, but no guarantee that will work.

Hi,
Please help me with these tow framings

Does this framing look ok? I donīt have more room below to maneuver out of the 4:3.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]8983[/ATTACH]


This one looks more balanced, but still I would like your opinion.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]8984[/ATTACH]

Thank you!

Framing on the second is better.

[akerosid]

I got this one rejected; the "technical issues" - darkness, sharpness etc, I've dealt with separately, but the "categories wrong or missing" one confused me a bit. I presume this relates to the comments on the fuselage - first to fly A320 Neo etc, but surely these would be classed as decals rather than a special livery.

Can you tell me what category needs to be ticked?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6074041

[Pta Aviation]

Hi there. I managed to add some red hues to the pic. Is it better now?

[Julian S.]

A bit soft in spots, but overall not that bad imho. Contrast is poor, however.

Okay, thanks a lot.
I'll try to fix the contrast issue and add a bit sharpening before i'll re upload.

[crisquijano]

Hi,
Please help me with these tow framings

Does this framing look ok? I donīt have more room below to maneuver out of the 4:3.



This one looks more balanced, but still I would like your opinion.


Thank you!

[Vic Diesel]

Hi guys,

obviously my previous successful uploads did succeed without me having proper knowledge of how to utilize the histogram to adjust contrast properly. Recently some pics were rejected on "too much or too little contrast" (should that be a single rejection reason?) - turned out the contrast was indeed too low.

Here is one of them:



And here's a screenshot of how it looks like in LR5:



Could you pls tell me what I did wrong?

Yes, I do not know how to use the histagram properly, never learnt it - so if you know of a decent online tutorial (the one in Brian's otherwise nice list in "Processing tips and tricks" is unfortunately broken), I'd be thankful for that as well.

[Pta Aviation]

A bit soft in spots, but overall not that bad imho. Contrast is poor, however.



Adjust the color to remove the cyan/green cast by adding red/magenta. See right side:

[ATTACH=CONFIG]8952[/ATTACH]

Okay. Will do that. Thank you so much for the tip.

[dlowwa]

Hey,

is the contrast and the sharpness really that bad here?
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6075428

Thanks a lot

A bit soft in spots, but overall not that bad imho. Contrast is poor, however.

Hi there. I sent this image to the pre-screening thread and was told that it has a blue cyan tint that needed to be corrected. I have tried to correct it but nothing I try seems to work. Can you please advice on how I can correct it.

Thank you

[ATTACH=CONFIG]8912[/ATTACH]

Adjust the color to remove the cyan/green cast by adding red/magenta. See right side: