Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

wkd001- Editing advice

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

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    I've received this reject lately https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10630715 and especially the arifats are striking me.
    I've only added some contrast and a bit of saturation and saved twice on the highest quality
    Online jetliner photo database, featuring thousands of high-quality photographs of jet airliners, discussion forums, and more.

    I have really no idea how those white lines got there.
    I was shooting between the wires of a fence and the wires got some sharp ends at several points.
    If you were shooting through a fence, that's likely what was mistaken for compression.

    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    At second I would like prescrreen on some photos.
    1. soft, contrast horizon
    2. soft, contrast, borderline overprocessed
    3. soft

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    1-3. borderline soft (ok for me)
    4-5. soft

    Contrast a bit harsh on some of them, but ok for me.
    Thanks for that Dana,

    I've queued the first two after some slight rework.

    I've received this reject lately https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10630715 and especially the arifats are striking me.
    I've only added some contrast and a bit of saturation and saved twice on the highest quality
    Online jetliner photo database, featuring thousands of high-quality photographs of jet airliners, discussion forums, and more.

    I have really no idea how those white lines got there.
    I was shooting between the wires of a fence and the wires got some sharp ends at several points.
    Maybe it's something with the sun coming from the LH side here.
    At second step I've only added (apparently too much) sharpening and saved again on highest quality

    At second I would like prescrreen on some photos.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_5708.JPG
Views:	134
Size:	428.6 KB
ID:	1149878
    Potential issues are sharpness, horizon, glare, contrast, processing.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_5680.JPG
Views:	71
Size:	384.0 KB
ID:	1149879 I think it's too soft and the is some kind of glare/reflection on the LH-side of the photo. (taken from the terminal.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_6274.JPG
Views:	72
Size:	441.6 KB
ID:	1149880 Another original as the one from the previous batch.

    Thanks in Advance.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    I went to a new spot for me and got some photos which make me unsure and I would like a prescreen on these.
    1-3. borderline soft (ok for me)
    4-5. soft

    Contrast a bit harsh on some of them, but ok for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Borderline for me, but wouldn't necessarily recommend an appeal.
    Thanks for that Dana.
    As I found another layng of softness after another check, I will indeed refrain from appealing.

    I went to a new spot for me and got some photos which make me unsure and I would like a prescreen on these.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_6125.JPG
Views:	137
Size:	724.9 KB
ID:	1149209
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_6156.JPG
Views:	113
Size:	426.0 KB
ID:	1149210
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_6231.JPG
Views:	111
Size:	520.9 KB
ID:	1149211
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_6273.JPG
Views:	112
Size:	349.4 KB
ID:	1149212

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_6275-2.JPG
Views:	115
Size:	445.3 KB
ID:	1149213

    For all I could see potential issues with horizon, dust, and softness. With the China Cargo, the sun just popped out of the clouds and the grass still dark, so apparently also contrast/exposure issue.
    The final two were taken in very low light with long shadows of the fence, wires, and trees reflecting on the aircrafts, especially on the 77W so both could also have issues with that.
    And maybe there is more stuff II could have missed.

    Thanks in advance.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    Hello,

    I've received this reject today. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10576167.
    Compared to other soft reject I've had. I have serious doubt that this one is really soft.
    Hard lines are visible, ok a little less on the belly, due to a small reflection.
    Any extra guidance would be appreciated.
    Borderline for me, but wouldn't necessarily recommend an appeal.

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Hello,

    I've received this reject today. https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10576167.
    Compared to other soft reject I've had. I have serious doubt that this one is really soft.
    Hard lines are visible, ok a little less on the belly, due to a small reflection.
    Any extra guidance would be appreciated.



    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    A bit dark (histogram confirms this), but would have been ok for me.

    Thanks Dana, Could an appeal stand a chance for this one?



    A bit soft, and most of the frame is dark/in shadow, so likely an issue with that.
    Ok thanks, I've tried a lot of these shots, so I will look for another one.

    Best Regards


    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    Hello,

    I've received this reject today.https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10555143
    I can imagine it being soft. (I see good parts myself, but also soft important parts) But I disagree with the underexposed.
    In my eyes the tail and the left engine are close to being blown out already.
    A bit dark (histogram confirms this), but would have been ok for me.

    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    Also I would like a prescreen on some photos.
    A bit soft, and most of the frame is dark/in shadow, so likely an issue with that.

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Hello,

    I've received this reject today.https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10555143
    I can imagine it being soft. (I see good parts myself, but also soft important parts) But I disagree with the underexposed.
    In my eyes the tail and the left engine are close to being blown out already.

    Also I would like a prescreen on some photos.

    Same story as the rejected photo , I've just deleted this one out of my queue


    I think this one is soft too.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_5711-3.JPG
Views:	91
Size:	477.3 KB
ID:	1147963

    A total prescreen as I've never done something like this before.

    Thanks in advance

    ​​​​​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post

    For getting things better I made a re-edit of the rejected version again and I will show that now and ask for pre-screen.
    Again I did no heavy editing only adding some contrast, removing dust and adding sharpening (sensor is dirty unfortunately,and no time for cleaning yet)
    This one is soft.

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    1. borderline soft/dark/compression. If the original is good, something happening with your editing.
    2. soft
    3. technically not obstructed, but clutter is a bit distracting, so borderline.
    Thanks for that Dana,

    Apparently I've made a mistake and I want to apologise for that and for wasting your valuable time on that

    This edit of the Embraer E2 in the previous post was taken from a different RAW-file from the same aircraft as he rejected version and it took heavier cropping which would make clear at least partly the compression and softness issue.

    For getting things better I made a re-edit of the rejected version again and I will show that now and ask for pre-screen.
    Again I did no heavy editing only adding some contrast, removing dust and adding sharpening (sensor is dirty unfortunately,and no time for cleaning yet)

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4666-2.JPG
Views:	120
Size:	267.5 KB
ID:	1145676

    The RAW-file of the reject I can't upload here due to the size limitations here.

    Thanks in Advance

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post

    I've taken another snap of the rejected photo, edited it and want to offer it for prescreening now.,

    I would also like a prescreen on these two photos
    1. borderline soft/dark/compression. If the original is good, something happening with your editing.
    2. soft
    3. technically not obstructed, but clutter is a bit distracting, so borderline.

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    I don't really see any oversharpening, but there is some banding/compression faintly visible in the sky.



    1. borderline soft/noisy
    2. dark, borderline soft
    3-4. soft/heat haze
    Thank you for all Dana,

    I've taken another snap of the rejected photo, edited it and want to offer it for prescreening now.,

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4667.JPG
Views:	97
Size:	265.7 KB
ID:	1145641

    There were som ethin layers of clouds visible in the background, Maybe they are the issue for creating artefacts.
    Did not a lot of editing on this one, only adding some contrast and sharpening, but curious if it stands a chance now.

    I would also like a prescreen on these two photos

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4744-2.JPG
Views:	80
Size:	392.8 KB
ID:	1145642
    INew edit of this one where I've tried to adress the issues you've mentioned, but honestly I'm afraid that the conditions and the softness (I'm almost sure it's still there )
    will kill this one

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_5698-2.JPG
Views:	77
Size:	448.0 KB
ID:	1145643

    Curious if all the material is not too disturbing ( the aircraft should be unobstructed though) and at least the horizon/ softness and contrast.

    Thanks in advance

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post
    Hello,

    I got home from holiday this week and during my holiday I've received this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10425984
    I don't really see any oversharpening, but there is some banding/compression faintly visible in the sky.

    Originally posted by wkd001 View Post

    Also I would like prescreen on four photos.
    1. borderline soft/noisy
    2. dark, borderline soft
    3-4. soft/heat haze

    Leave a comment:


  • wkd001
    replied
    Hello,

    I got home from holiday this week and during my holiday I've received this reject https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=10425984
    The oversharpen I don;t really see tbh and jpg compression I've never had that one before,
    Now I do see some strange kind of almost horizontal lines in the check for dust tool, But i really don't know how they got there.
    I've only added some contrast and sharpening and nothing more.
    I also save the final jpg on the highest quality possible
    This photo was taken just after the rejected photo and got accepted https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10702643
    So, maybe someone could help me here, bacause I'm a litlle confused on this one,

    Also I would like prescreen on four photos.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4659-2.JPG
Views:	128
Size:	318.7 KB
ID:	1145420
    I've had this one queued, but deleted it because I think it's way too soft.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4744.JPG
Views:	89
Size:	393.3 KB
ID:	1145421
    Taken out of the window of my holiday charter, but thinking it's at leat too soft and dirty, and even thinking it;s unfixable
    But it was the only option to get an unobstructed view here.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4756.JPG
Views:	89
Size:	439.2 KB
ID:	1145422
    Possible issues for me here, soft, contrast, horizon, heathaze and maybe color

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4757.JPG
Views:	87
Size:	424.4 KB
ID:	1145423
    Same story as previous.

    Thanks in advance


    Leave a comment:

Working...
X