Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

YanS - Editing Advice

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

  • YanS
    replied
    Hi again,

    A feedback on these two would be nice .
    I'm not sure about contrast on both as the light was pretty difficult that day in Stockholm...
    1.Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_4564v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.01 MB
ID:	1041442
    2.Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_4492v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.05 MB
ID:	1041443

    Thanks for your comments,
    Best regards,
    Yannick

    Leave a comment:


  • YanS
    replied
    Thanks a lot, dlowwa!
    I will try that.

    Regards
    Yannick

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    Thank you, Alex for your fast answer
    Yes, I seem to have an issue with compressed sky in pictures with much visible sky in the background. As I always save my pictures at the highest possible quality I don‘t know what is causing this at the moment but I will work on that for sure.
    Are there chances of acceptance for 1 and 2 (As compression is especially noticable in #3)?

    Thanks for your thoughts,
    All the best,
    Yannick
    If you are are getting excessive compression (banding in the sky) even though saving at full quality, try converting to a 16-bit tiff from raw before saving as a jpeg. Since 16-bit tiffs have a lot less compression than jpegs, images where that kind of compression is more visible (especially with fine gradients in the sky) will look better if all editing is done in the less-compressed format than if you did it all with an 8-bit jpeg.

    Leave a comment:


  • YanS
    replied
    Hi everyone,

    Thank you, Alex for your fast answer
    Yes, I seem to have an issue with compressed sky in pictures with much visible sky in the background. As I always save my pictures at the highest possible quality I don‘t know what is causing this at the moment but I will work on that for sure.
    Are there chances of acceptance for 1 and 2 (As compression is especially noticable in #3)?

    Thanks for your thoughts,
    All the best,
    Yannick
    Last edited by YanS; 2019-05-28, 18:18. Reason: Spelling mistake :)

    Leave a comment:


  • Alex - Spot-This !
    replied
    They look ok... except about the compressed sky. Specially noticeable on the 737 with visible pixels.

    Regards
    Alex

    Leave a comment:


  • YanS
    replied
    Hello again,

    some thoughts on these three would be very nice
    1.Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3264v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	869.8 KB
ID:	1035546
    2.Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3047v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	954.5 KB
ID:	1035547
    3.Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3283v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	760.3 KB
ID:	1035548

    Thanks for your answers,
    Kind regards,
    Yannick

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    Thanks LX-A343 for your helpful feedback .

    I tried to correct the TUI-issues. I think it's slightly better now but I don't know if it's enough. A feedback would be great.
    1.[ATTACH=CONFIG]24943[/ATTACH]

    This Piper would be new to the database but I'm not sure about the horizon.
    2.[ATTACH=CONFIG]24944[/ATTACH]

    Thanks for your time,
    All the best,
    Yannick
    1. borderline dark/contrast. horizon ok for me
    2. ok

    Leave a comment:


  • YanS
    replied
    Hi everyone,

    Thanks LX-A343 for your helpful feedback .

    I tried to correct the TUI-issues. I think it's slightly better now but I don't know if it's enough. A feedback would be great.
    1.Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3010v3.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.07 MB
ID:	1035523

    This Piper would be new to the database but I'm not sure about the horizon.
    2.Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2910v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	943.6 KB
ID:	1035524

    Thanks for your time,
    All the best,
    Yannick

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by YanS View Post
    Hello everyone,

    A feedback on these would very nice .
    1.[ATTACH=CONFIG]24855[/ATTACH] (borderline dark/contrast for me)
    2.[ATTACH=CONFIG]24856[/ATTACH] (not sure about color and compression in the sky here)

    Thanks for your answers,
    Best regards,
    Yannick
    1: soft, slightly leaning to the right (using verticals as reference)
    2: slightly soft, noisy background, verticals seem slightly leaning to the right.

    Leave a comment:


  • YanS
    replied
    Hello everyone,

    A feedback on these would very nice .
    1.Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3010v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	913.9 KB
ID:	1035454 (borderline dark/contrast for me)
    2.Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_3227v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	923.6 KB
ID:	1035455 (not sure about color and compression in the sky here)

    Thanks for your answers,
    Best regards,
    Yannick

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    A feedback on these would be great .
    1. [ATTACH=CONFIG]23738[/ATTACH]
    2. [ATTACH=CONFIG]23737[/ATTACH] (not sure about exposure and horizon here and if it's too similar to this one: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8959388 )
    3. [ATTACH=CONFIG]23736[/ATTACH] (not sure about exposure here aswell and if it is too soft)

    Thanks for your time,
    Best regards,
    Yannick
    1. blurry/heat hazed, borderline centering
    2. blurry, compression
    3. ok

    Leave a comment:


  • YanS
    replied
    Hi everyone,

    A feedback on these would be great .
    1. Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_1915v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.08 MB
ID:	1034511
    2. Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2185v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.07 MB
ID:	1034510 (not sure about exposure and horizon here and if it's too similar to this one: https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/8959388 )
    3. Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_2356v2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.06 MB
ID:	1034509 (not sure about exposure here aswell and if it is too soft)

    Thanks for your time,
    Best regards,
    Yannick
    Last edited by YanS; 2019-04-22, 16:43. Reason: problems with the links

    Leave a comment:


  • YanS
    replied
    Hello,

    Thanks dlowwa!

    Have a nice day
    Yannick

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by YanS View Post
    Hi everyone,

    Today these pictures were rejected for being backlit:
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7158226
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7158222

    The first one is borderline for me too but as pretty much of the fuselage is lit and as it was OK in pre-screening (which is no guarantee of course) it would be discussable in my eyes.

    The second one looks ok in terms of light in my opinion.

    But of course these are only personal views so I ask here if one of them (or both) would be worth an appeal.

    Thanks for your help,
    Best regards
    Yannick
    I agree the first is borderline backlit, and while I personally disagree whether it's bad enough to be a rejection, I will leave it be. The second is clearly not, and I have accepted it into the DB.

    Leave a comment:


  • YanS
    replied
    Hi everyone,

    Today these pictures were rejected for being backlit:
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7158226
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7158222

    The first one is borderline for me too but as pretty much of the fuselage is lit and as it was OK in pre-screening (which is no guarantee of course) it would be discussable in my eyes.

    The second one looks ok in terms of light in my opinion.

    But of course these are only personal views so I ask here if one of them (or both) would be worth an appeal.

    Thanks for your help,
    Best regards
    Yannick

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X