Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Majky737 - Editing Advice

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

  • Majky737
    replied
    Hello,

    I have received this reject:
    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    I made another edit of another image from same photos batch hoping to resolve compression issue.

    Is the new edit acceptable in therms of compression, colors and contrast?

    Thank you for your time.

    Kind regards
    Marian

    Click image for larger version

Name:	N711CL_II.jpg
Views:	97
Size:	696.8 KB
ID:	1161507

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    Hello screeners,

    today I have received photo reject due undersharpened and noise HERE

    I have added some extra sharpening and some noise reduction as well. Can you give me hint if there is any improvement visible on new edit and if it is maybe acceptable as - is now?
    Still lots of soft areas. Not sure the quality is there to make this workable.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Hello screeners,

    today I have received photo reject due undersharpened and noise HERE

    I have added some extra sharpening and some noise reduction as well. Can you give me hint if there is any improvement visible on new edit and if it is maybe acceptable as - is now?

    Thank you for your time.
    Marian

    Click image for larger version

Name:	P4-EYE_II.jpg
Views:	109
Size:	431.6 KB
ID:	1159409

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post

    I think that it is ok, as intentions of this question were to find noise areas, reprocess and queue again.

    However, I think problem was related to sky area, so I have applied some more noise reduction filter there. Can you prescreen new edit attached below?
    Sorry, I think I meant to post that reply in a different thread..though I think it mostly applies here. Wouldn't have been a rejection for me, but I can kind of see why it might have been for someone else. Newer version slightly soft, but also ok for me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Borderline for me, but enough for a rejection for the two screeners who screened it. Not much chance of a successful appeal.
    I think that it is ok, as intentions of this question were to find noise areas, reprocess and queue again.

    However, I think problem was related to sky area, so I have applied some more noise reduction filter there. Can you prescreen new edit attached below?

    Thank you.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	EC-MFE_VI.jpg
Views:	136
Size:	612.2 KB
ID:	1146081

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    Hi,

    I have received this reject for Noise/grain:

    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    In what areas of photo is noise visible? Will selective noise reduction help in this case?
    Borderline for me, but enough for a rejection for the two screeners who screened it. Not much chance of a successful appeal.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Hi,

    I have received this reject for Noise/grain:

    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    In what areas of photo is noise visible? Will selective noise reduction help in this case?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    Hello,

    thank you all for explanation and discussion. Unfortunately, rejected photos were shot direct to jpg, so I guess nothing I can do with them. I have made one more edit of ATR attached below, but I expect it is not better as rejected one.
    There is some blotchiness/compression visible, yes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Majky737
    replied
    Hello,

    thank you all for explanation and discussion. Unfortunately, rejected photos were shot direct to jpg, so I guess nothing I can do with them. I have made one more edit of ATR attached below, but I expect it is not better as rejected one.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	HA-KAN_III.jpg
Views:	147
Size:	665.3 KB
ID:	1145218

    Thank you.

    M.

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkLawrence
    replied
    Perfect!! Thank you Dana!!

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkLawrence View Post

    Dana - a question - I am guessing from raw/dng to 16-bit TIFF right?
    Yes, RAW -> 16-bit TIFF -> editing -> downsizing (usually 1600pix for me) -> convert to 8-bit -> save as jpeg -> upload.

    As I said, a bit cumbersome, so only done on certain images. Otherwise, much simpler RAW -> 8-bit jpeg -> editing -> downsize -> upload.

    It's the 16-bit vs. 8-bit that makes the difference.

    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10676481 -> subtle shift in brightness in the sky, so started with a 16-bit TIFF

    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10652851 -> uniform color/brightness in sky, so straight to jpeg

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkLawrence
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Best solution I've found is to start with a 16-bit TIFF and do all my editing on that, downsize to 1600-1280 whatever, then save as a jpg.
    Dana - a question - I am guessing from raw/dng to 16-bit TIFF right?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Majky737 View Post
    Hello,

    I want to ask for advice about these two rejects:

    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    JetPhotos.com is the biggest database of aviation photographs with over 5 million screened photos online!


    Is the problem in sky? Is it compression or somehow noise problem?
    Thank you.

    Marian
    Compression/blotchiness in the sky. In my experience it has to do with how software deals with color/brightness gradients in the sky when compressing large resolution jpgs. It tends to make the areas where there are gradients look blotchy or blocky. Best solution I've found is to start with a 16-bit TIFF and do all my editing on that, downsize to 1600-1280 whatever, then save as a jpg. There is a noticeable difference in the sky when following that workflow, but it's a bit more tedious so I only do it for images where you see big changes in color/brightness in a clear sky.

    Leave a comment:


  • 787Dream
    replied
    Originally posted by MarkLawrence View Post
    I have had this problem too (check for dust option on JP) - and - yes - it is the sky .. but.. I started to question my camera sensor too - mine was on a Nikon D3.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2022-09-11 at 12.08.53 PM.png
Views:	76
Size:	233.2 KB
ID:	1145087
    Same. I have been battling this issue in some of my photos. You have any advice other than requesting JP to accept PNGs? I did set the quality to 12 and don't know what I can do to make it better.

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkLawrence
    replied
    I have had this problem too (check for dust option on JP) - and - yes - it is the sky .. but.. I started to question my camera sensor too - mine was on a Nikon D3.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	Screen Shot 2022-09-11 at 12.08.53 PM.png
Views:	76
Size:	233.2 KB
ID:	1145087

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X