John Fitzpatrick (Akerosid) - Editing advice

[brianw999]

Casa 235’s were produced primarily as cargo aircraft which I would think is the required category.

[akerosid]

Hi folks, got a few rejections from my recent LHR visit, mostly for sharpness. I attach one of these and maybe someone in the crew could advise the appropriate level of sharpness to make this acceptable.

Aviation photos - 4 million+ on JetPhotos

[B7772ADL]

That's actually not too far off the mark. Maybe another pass or two of USM but you'd have to make sure the blue cheat line on the livery doesn't become over-sharp (sharpen on layer then erase the jaggies). I'm sensing some slight heat distortion also which might lead to softness issues. It's that time of year unfortunately aready.

[akerosid]

Just processing some photos from a recent photo mission and I am just wondering what is (a) the best and (b) the most acceptable method of dealing with shadows, using photoshop.

I am noticing that on some of my photos, taken from, say, 4.30 on, there's a noticeable shadow at the front of the some of the aircraft, which gets more noticeable as the sun moves around to the west. By using the "shadow/highlights" tab under "adjustments, I can remove shadows, but it looks like the use of this immediately gives a photo a brighter tint and I am concerned that this might be acceptable, although when I process photos, they come out pretty well, with the shadows fully removed.

So, I guess my question would be: is the use of the shadow/highlights tab acceptable and if not, what is the preferred alternative for dealing with shadows?

Many thanks

[B7772ADL]

It is acceptable as it is an editing technique, but it needs to be used with extreme care as it is one of the key causes to creating the dreaded editing halos around the aircraft. I use it mainly with RAW images in Adobe Camera Raw rather than in Photoshop itself. ACR is far kinder but halos easily pop up. Using Shadow/highlights with in PS itself is an extremely fine line. It can cause halos with the tiniest amount of use.

So, basically, yep fine to use but take care to not make it look unnatural or create editing halos.

[akerosid]

This is one of several that were rejected for "bad/over post-processing"; I don't understand this, because all of my photos are processed the same way and every so often they pick on one for this reason. I'd like to understand what the issue is. I have a few more for this issue, but I would like to know why this issue is arising more regularly as the sole reason for rejection.

[akerosid]

Here's the link to it, apologies!

[akerosid]

Sorry, I can't post a link to the rejected photo from my list, but here is the photo below anyway.

[dlowwa]

Sorry, I can't post a link to the rejected photo from my list, but here is the photo below anyway.

There is faint banding visible in the sky in all/most of your images. This could be a result of processing or how you are saving/compressing your files. WIthout knowing all of the steps in your process, I couldn't speculate as to the exact cause.

I've tried to illustrate/highlight it here:



Also, as I asked previously, it would be appreciated if you could post any future questions in the same thread, else I need to spend time tracking them all down and merging them.

[akerosid]

Hi, this was one of two rejected for contrast, with a screener's comment saying that there was a lack of dark tones. How can I deal with this?

[dlowwa]

Hi, this was one of two rejected for contrast, with a screener's comment saying that there was a lack of dark tones. How can I deal with this?

Increasing the contrast. I'd brighten it a bit too.