Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Majky737 - Editing Advice

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

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    Hello,

    is photo attached below sharp enought? As I am unsure, can somebody confirm that correct reg is MM54505?

    Thank you.
    Kind regards
    Marian

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]19051[/ATTACH]
    Looks a bit soft. Not sure about the reg., but you can check Scramble.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Hello,

    is photo attached below sharp enought? As I am unsure, can somebody confirm that correct reg is MM54505?

    Thank you.
    Kind regards
    Marian

    Click image for larger version

Name:	MM54505.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	776.8 KB
ID:	1030680

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    Do you think it is passable due borderline contrast? Or does it depends on screener who will screen it?
    Probably ok, but that's not a certainty.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    Still borderline for contrast. Overcast skies, not much more you can do.
    Do you think it is passable due borderline contrast? Or does it depends on screener who will screen it?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    Hi Dana, thank you for your comment. Maybe this new version is a little better? I added some exposure and increased contrast a little.

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]18936[/ATTACH]
    Still borderline for contrast. Overcast skies, not much more you can do.

    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    I have one more picture - reedited after reject due softness and contrast.
    [ATTACH=CONFIG]18937[/ATTACH]
    Would again be rejected for soft and contrast.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Hi Dana, thank you for your comment. Maybe this new version is a little better? I added some exposure and increased contrast a little.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	RJF04_II.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	833.6 KB
ID:	1030586


    I have one more picture - reedited after reject due softness and contrast.
    Click image for larger version

Name:	SP-EED_2.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	534.9 KB
ID:	1030587

    Regards
    Marian

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    Hello,

    I seek for advice how to improve contrast on this photo. Any suggestion is more then welcome.

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]18920[/ATTACH]

    Regards
    Marian
    Contrast is too low. Also a bit dark.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Hello,

    I seek for advice how to improve contrast on this photo. Any suggestion is more then welcome.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	RJF04.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	807.9 KB
ID:	1030570

    Regards
    Marian

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    Hello,

    I want to ask question, which is more about correct data then prescreening... therefore I hope it will be ok if I have affected photo in queue. I have uploaded photo of req. 1014 (cn 361014). Aircraft type was selected by system. However, checking data in queue, aircraft type is now filed as:

    PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokó?

    Question mark was suspicious to me, so I checked this frame on JP and it was uploaded in the past as:

    PZL-Swidnik W3 Sokol
    PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokó?
    PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokół

    I made a little test and by selecting PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokół in form, I get PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokó? on "Manage queued photos" page. Should I leave type as PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokó? with question mark?

    Thank you for your advice.

    Marian
    I think that's just a little bug with the script. Non-English characters sometimes show up as such. If the system autofilled it that way, you should be safe.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Hello,

    I want to ask question, which is more about correct data then prescreening... therefore I hope it will be ok if I have affected photo in queue. I have uploaded photo of req. 1014 (cn 361014). Aircraft type was selected by system. However, checking data in queue, aircraft type is now filed as:

    PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokó?

    Question mark was suspicious to me, so I checked this frame on JP and it was uploaded in the past as:

    PZL-Swidnik W3 Sokol
    PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokó?
    PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokół

    I made a little test and by selecting PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokół in form, I get PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokó? on "Manage queued photos" page. Should I leave type as PZL-Swidnik W-3WA Sokó? with question mark?

    Thank you for your advice.

    Marian

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    Looks better I think.
    ok, I will give it a try.

    Thank you for your time and advices.

    Marian

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    Yes, I guess it is the same problem like taking photos through windows in terminal buildings.

    Anyway, I took one other photo from the same flight which was created earlier and processed it. Can you give me information if it is suffered by same problems like previous attempts?

    Thank you
    Marian

    [ATTACH=CONFIG]18155[/ATTACH]
    Looks better I think.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    Unless you get it perfect when you're taking them, window shots can be hard to fix after the fact, simply due to fact you're shooting through a (semi)transparent medium that refracts light in all sorts of strange ways.
    Yes, I guess it is the same problem like taking photos through windows in terminal buildings.

    Anyway, I took one other photo from the same flight which was created earlier and processed it. Can you give me information if it is suffered by same problems like previous attempts?

    Thank you
    Marian

    Click image for larger version

Name:	wing_new.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	452.0 KB
ID:	1029951

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    ok, I give up. Thanks.
    Unless you get it perfect when you're taking them, window shots can be hard to fix after the fact, simply due to fact you're shooting through a (semi)transparent medium that refracts light in all sorts of strange ways.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    A bit bright now, and starting to bring out the flaws/reflections in the window glass. Not sure this will be fixable.
    ok, I give up. Thanks.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X