Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

wkd001- Editing advice

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    Dana, thank you for your words. Do understand what you're saying, Don't know how to fix everything properly.
    Having issues with several pre-screened and rejected shots with casts
    Has it something to do with white balance.
    With the KLM 789, could desaturate the green colours, and also gave it more contrast, but for my idea, it doesn't care
    As earlier mentioned, i could play with midtones/shadows, but with the low sun, I don't think will help, because the histogram will fall too far to the right.
    It's included again

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]12198[/ATTACH]

    For comparison I include another KLM shot of a T7, (also for pre-screen) but I think it will suffer the same fate. It has for me the same story as the 789.

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]12199[/ATTACH]

    I will re-work the TK A320, later to remove the dust-spot properly I deerly forgot ( )and the other mentioned points.:
    The TAP A319 will remain personal As I don't know how to remove the noise field properly in only lightroom. ( I don't have PS)
    Just needs some (minor) tweaking. See left side here:

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0113 (1).JPG
Views:	1
Size:	1,021.0 KB
ID:	1021046

    Contrast also low on the 777.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
      Just needs some (minor) tweaking. See left side here:

      [ATTACH=CONFIG]12205[/ATTACH]

      Contrast also low on the 777.
      Dana, thank you for your explanation.

      Tried to work with your advice, think I made improvements, but not sure at all, if it's a;; good as it's diffcult for me and a new add to editing process for me.

      Include three shots,

      Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0113-3.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	925.6 KB
ID:	1021085
      Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0128-3.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	1.15 MB
ID:	1021086
      Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0150-2.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	1,005.8 KB
ID:	1021087

      The TK A320 is re-edited with at least removing the dust spot.
      The KLM 777 is taken seconds earlier as the previous shot in this thread, as with the previous with the light was against me, with the sun in a worser postion as this one.
      Tried to remove the green tint in all the edits and also to add contrast in two different ways.

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
        Dana, thank you for your explanation.

        Tried to work with your advice, think I made improvements, but not sure at all, if it's a;; good as it's diffcult for me and a new add to editing process for me.

        Include three shots,

        [ATTACH=CONFIG]12245[/ATTACH]
        [ATTACH=CONFIG]12246[/ATTACH]
        [ATTACH=CONFIG]12247[/ATTACH]

        The TK A320 is re-edited with at least removing the dust spot.
        The KLM 777 is taken seconds earlier as the previous shot in this thread, as with the previous with the light was against me, with the sun in a worser postion as this one.
        Tried to remove the green tint in all the edits and also to add contrast in two different ways.
        Color looks fine, but I'd add a bit more contrast to the KLs.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
          Color looks fine, but I'd add a bit more contrast to the KLs.
          Dana , happy with your answer about the color. The right contrast remains difficult for me.
          Tried something about the 789, I'll include it again.
          Will keep the 777 at bay for this moment as a big part of the aircraft is in the dark and as I'm not sure if that can be properly fixed.

          This is the 789 again.

          Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0113-3.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	933.4 KB
ID:	1021095

          Also two more for pre-screen

          Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0102.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	1.37 MB
ID:	1021096
          Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0124.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	777.4 KB
ID:	1021097

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
            Dana , happy with your answer about the color. The right contrast remains difficult for me.
            Tried something about the 789, I'll include it again.
            Will keep the 777 at bay for this moment as a big part of the aircraft is in the dark and as I'm not sure if that can be properly fixed.

            This is the 789 again.

            [ATTACH=CONFIG]12263[/ATTACH]

            Also two more for pre-screen

            [ATTACH=CONFIG]12264[/ATTACH]
            [ATTACH=CONFIG]12265[/ATTACH]
            Contrast still much too low. Given the light conditions should cause such weak shadows, I'd bet it's being caused by your processing, possibly by using the shadow/highlight, clarity, or other such tool.

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
              Contrast still much too low. Given the light conditions should cause such weak shadows, I'd bet it's being caused by your processing, possibly by using the shadow/highlight, clarity, or other such tool.
              Dana,

              Due to your words, my workflow normally contains, to keep white tones,and highlights at zero. Normally I don't even use higlights as they could cause halos way too easy in my opinion.
              I don't use the clarity tool as well ,as it gives really strange effects to photos and with the overprocessed-reject posibility in mind.
              I do have a vivacity tool in my lightroom. I used it a little on my photos. It couldn't be a big problem to me, but maybe I'm wrong.
              Normally I add maximum +25 to the contrast when necessary in my opinion. Maybe I should do more sometimes?
              The problem seems to me , I've used the shadows tool way too much to remove almost all the shadows. It wasn't necessary indeed.
              Also my apologies not using your example of the KL 789 properly. I think this is the closest I've reached to it right now.
              Noticed at all that the histograms are stretching far more out as one the previous posts

              Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0113-3.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	928.4 KB
ID:	1021129

              Will also include the Pegasus 738 once more. Will keep the Etihad at bay, but both received a similar treat as the KL789, but the Etihad gives me a lot of doubts

              Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0124.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	768.0 KB
ID:	1021130

              Comment


              • #67
                Got this one also rejected https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6248934

                Added some sharpening to it. Want to know if it's good right now.

                Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_8751-2.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	1.11 MB
ID:	1021131

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
                  Got this one also rejected https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6248934

                  Added some sharpening to it. Want to know if it's good right now.

                  [ATTACH=CONFIG]12300[/ATTACH]
                  To me there is a lot of compression going on there and also needs some more contrast.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by B7772ADL View Post
                    To me there is a lot of compression going on there and also needs some more contrast.
                    James, due to the compression noticed by you (I can't find it but that's my problem) this one will remain personal.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
                      Dana,

                      Due to your words, my workflow normally contains, to keep white tones,and highlights at zero. Normally I don't even use higlights as they could cause halos way too easy in my opinion.
                      I don't use the clarity tool as well ,as it gives really strange effects to photos and with the overprocessed-reject posibility in mind.
                      I do have a vivacity tool in my lightroom. I used it a little on my photos. It couldn't be a big problem to me, but maybe I'm wrong.
                      Normally I add maximum +25 to the contrast when necessary in my opinion. Maybe I should do more sometimes?
                      The problem seems to me , I've used the shadows tool way too much to remove almost all the shadows. It wasn't necessary indeed.
                      Also my apologies not using your example of the KL 789 properly. I think this is the closest I've reached to it right now.
                      Noticed at all that the histograms are stretching far more out as one the previous posts

                      [ATTACH=CONFIG]12298[/ATTACH]

                      Will also include the Pegasus 738 once more. Will keep the Etihad at bay, but both received a similar treat as the KL789, but the Etihad gives me a lot of doubts

                      [ATTACH=CONFIG]12299[/ATTACH]
                      If some of you got time, during these period.....

                      But more important at the moment.

                      Merry Christmas to all involved accepting, rejecting, trying to help me improving my photos, viewing and liking my photos.

                      Thank you all for getting around 160 photos accepted in about eight monts at this website, as I started uploading already two years ago, but kept it at bay for around 1,5 years.
                      Feeling at home here, will try to improve and keep on uplading photos when necessary with help from all of you.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Thanks and Merry Xmas to you too !!!!

                        Alex

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
                          Dana,

                          Due to your words, my workflow normally contains, to keep white tones,and highlights at zero. Normally I don't even use higlights as they could cause halos way too easy in my opinion.
                          I don't use the clarity tool as well ,as it gives really strange effects to photos and with the overprocessed-reject posibility in mind.
                          I do have a vivacity tool in my lightroom. I used it a little on my photos. It couldn't be a big problem to me, but maybe I'm wrong.
                          Normally I add maximum +25 to the contrast when necessary in my opinion. Maybe I should do more sometimes?
                          The problem seems to me , I've used the shadows tool way too much to remove almost all the shadows. It wasn't necessary indeed.
                          Also my apologies not using your example of the KL 789 properly. I think this is the closest I've reached to it right now.
                          Noticed at all that the histograms are stretching far more out as one the previous posts

                          [ATTACH=CONFIG]12298[/ATTACH]
                          Better, but maybe still a touch weak. Borderline for acceptance, but it'd be ok for me.

                          Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
                          Will also include the Pegasus 738 once more.
                          [ATTACH=CONFIG]12299[/ATTACH]
                          Same as above: better, but maybe a touch dark. Borderline, but would be acceptable for me.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                            Better, but maybe still a touch weak. Borderline for acceptance, but it'd be ok for me.

                            Could add a little more exposure and extra shadows, so will include it in the queue

                            Same as above: better, but maybe a touch dark. Borderline, but would be acceptable for me.
                            It's in the queue. Can't add more exposure due to the angle and a highlight warning I receive while attempting.

                            Three more for check up

                            Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0102.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	1.37 MB
ID:	1021235
                            Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0134.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	955.0 KB
ID:	1021236
                            Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0170.JPG
Views:	2
Size:	1.37 MB
ID:	1021237

                            What can I do to improve these ones if necessary ( I expect it is)

                            Thank you again

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
                              It's in the queue. Can't add more exposure due to the angle and a highlight warning I receive while attempting.

                              Three more for check up

                              [ATTACH=CONFIG]12420[/ATTACH]
                              [ATTACH=CONFIG]12421[/ATTACH]
                              [ATTACH=CONFIG]12422[/ATTACH]

                              What can I do to improve these ones if necessary ( I expect it is)

                              Thank you again
                              1. I like! Should be ok
                              2. Should be ok, maybe just watch the horizon (but I don't have any screening tools here to verify) also starting to verge on backlit.
                              3. Contrast is off/overprocessed. Looks like excessive shadows use.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by B7772ADL View Post
                                1. I like! Should be ok
                                2. Should be ok, maybe just watch the horizon (but I don't have any screening tools here to verify) also starting to verge on backlit.
                                3. Contrast is off/overprocessed. Looks like excessive shadows use.
                                James thank you for reply.

                                The Etihad Cargo is in the queue as also the Easyjet with slight modifications.
                                Keep the KL E175 at bay for at least a while

                                Three more for corrections.

                                Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0131.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	925.8 KB
ID:	1021297
                                Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0137.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	655.0 KB
ID:	1021298
                                Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_0128-3.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	1.15 MB
ID:	1021299

                                Note to nr 2. Different shot as earlier shown in this thread.
                                Note to nr 3. Re-edit of this reject. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6262059

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X