LAP - Editing advice

[LAP]

Hello Screeners! I would like to ask you about the undersharpened rejection, I use lightroom as my editor, but sometimes its kind of difficult to know if a picture its sharp for the database. For example in this picture. How can I identify the right sharpness with the magnify tool?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6303326

Thanks for your help

[Pta Aviation]

It does looks quite undersharpened, especially the cars on the right of the photo and what I'm assuming is the main terminal building in the centre. Use the masking slider (I use Lightroom too btw) to isolate the areas you want to be sharpened and then go from there.

Though it wasn't given as a reason for the rejection, I do also notice there is very little contrast in the photo.

[dlowwa]

Hello Screeners! I would like to ask you about the undersharpened rejection, I use lightroom as my editor, but sometimes its kind of difficult to know if a picture its sharp for the database. For example in this picture. How can I identify the right sharpness with the magnify tool?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6303326

Thanks for your help

We don't use any magnify tool to determine sharpness, we simply look at the image. Certain areas we would expect to see sharp detail and contrast between transitions, and if there is not, then the image is probably soft. In your image, the two areas that jump out as being soft area the large tree in the foreground, and the terminal signage on the left. All the fine lines should be sharp and highly-contrasted, but instead do not have a clear edge and blend into each other - a clear sign of softness.

[LAP]

Thank you for all the replies.

[Oleksiy Naumov]

Hi.
I am a bit lost here with this one: https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6301679
Rejection claims it's under sharpened, but the comment on the appeal indicates it's over sharpened?
This is quite conflicting and I can't figure out what exactly I need to fix to re-upload it
thank you

[Alex - Spot-This !]

Hi,
actually the comment on appeal was "Looks like out of focus and oversharpened to compensate"
It has a soft appearance due to OOF issue, that you tried to compensate with sharpening but it didn't help

Regards
Alex

[Oleksiy Naumov]

Hi,
actually the comment on appeal was "Looks like out of focus and oversharpened to compensate"
It has a soft appearance due to OOF issue, that you tried to compensate with sharpening but it didn't help

Regards
Alex

This is still not very clear, Alex.
I was not trying to compensate for anything here as it did not and still does not seem to me that anything is out of focus. So I was just applying the amount of sharpening needed to make it look sharp. I think it's borderline - as I stated in my appeal, but I still don't seem to understand whether it's borderline over or under sharpened.
Thank you

[dlowwa]

This is still not very clear, Alex.
I was not trying to compensate for anything here as it did not and still does not seem to me that anything is out of focus. So I was just applying the amount of sharpening needed to make it look sharp. I think it's borderline - as I stated in my appeal, but I still don't seem to understand whether it's borderline over or under sharpened.
Thank you

Hi, I actually handled that appeal. The aircraft does indeed look extremely soft/blurry (with the most logical explanation being that it's out of focus, as this doesn't look like motion blur), with sharpening applied to try and compensate for this fact. I'd be happy to take a look at the original image if you claim that this is not the case, and try to help you sort out what is causing the problem.

[Oleksiy Naumov]

Hi, I actually handled that appeal. The aircraft does indeed look extremely soft/blurry (with the most logical explanation being that it's out of focus, as this doesn't look like motion blur), with sharpening applied to try and compensate for this fact. I'd be happy to take a look at the original image if you claim that this is not the case, and try to help you sort out what is causing the problem.

Hi Alex,
Thanks for willing to help out. I've been a bit busy, but now have tried to fix the sharpening and have re-submited the images. I hope this has worked, otherwise I will share the original in case this is rejected again.

[dlowwa]

Hi Alex,
Thanks for willing to help out. I've been a bit busy, but now have tried to fix the sharpening and have re-submited the images. I hope this has worked, otherwise I will share the original in case this is rejected again.

Sure, no problem.. but my name is not Alex

[Oleksiy Naumov]

Sure, no problem.. but my name is not Alex

I thought I was taking to Alex. Sorry

[LAP]

Dear Screeners:

I would like to know about this rejection, I have based my horizon on the lamp posts on the back of the plane, also you can notice that this plane has flat tires, so I cannot be completely level..Please Let me know.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6329247

Thanks for your help!

[dlowwa]

Dear Screeners:

I would like to know about this rejection, I have based my horizon on the lamp posts on the back of the plane, also you can notice that this plane has flat tires, so I cannot be completely level..Please Let me know.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=6329247

Thanks for your help!

Looks like it needs a little CW rotation. At wide angles like this, barrel distortion should cause the lamp posts toward the edges to lean in toward the center a bit.

[LAP]

Thank you very much for your quick response!

[LAP]

Dear Brian:

Regards! would you help me pre-screen this picture, and also I have another question, the correct model of that Socata is MS893-235GTA ( I used the form to add this type of model but it was rejected. Or it can be upload just as Socata Rallye 235GT?



Thank you for your help!