Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Wheat - rejection and editing advice

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

  • Wheat
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Doesn't necessarily hide them, but will make them less obvious than a higher resolution.
    Thank you

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Wheat View Post
    Good afternoon, when it comes to sharpening and softness does saving a photo as 1200 pixels really hide the soft parts?
    Doesn't necessarily hide them, but will make them less obvious than a higher resolution.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wheat
    replied
    Good afternoon, when it comes to sharpening and softness does saving a photo as 1200 pixels really hide the soft parts?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Wheat View Post

    I took it out of the queue and lowered the exposure and raised the sharpening though I already know the damage has been done
    Exposure was unchanged (histograms identical), I would not have claimed so unless I had checked carefully. And if the sharpening was adjusted, it also was imperceptible. It's more of a pattern of behavior from you that makes me lose interest in offering any more help. How many times has that close up of the Aeroflot at LAX been rejected for soft (after I told you it was much too soft, even blurry)? And yet it's back in the queue? You are allowed to do submit it as many times as you want, of course, but what's the point of me (or anyone) offering advice if you're going end up doing your own thing anyway? And then the appeals - you appeal things that are not even close to acceptable, without checking here first, which is one of the things we ask you to do if you'd like to benefit from direct feedback from the crew.

    If you haven't already, please read here, especially #9, and the general requests that are made:

    https://forums.jetphotos.com/forum/a...ning-from-crew

    Might help you figure out where we're coming from.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wheat
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    I think I'm done offering advice to you. Made it pretty clear here if you decided to ignore my advice, it won't be available any more:



    That DL 350 is in the queue with no change to the exposure or softness to the one I told you would be rejected. Your call of course, but also my call to bail out at this point. Good luck.
    I took it out of the queue and lowered the exposure and raised the sharpening though I already know the damage has been done

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    I think I'm done offering advice to you. Made it pretty clear here if you decided to ignore my advice, it won't be available any more:

    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    I might comment, but I've found you tend to ignore such advice anyway. I'd be willing to try again, on the condition that you actually follow the recommendations,
    That DL 350 is in the queue with no change to the exposure or softness to the one I told you would be rejected. Your call of course, but also my call to bail out at this point. Good luck.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wheat
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Soft, overexposed, and part of dust spot below the tail.
    Thank you,now with that can you please take a look at these photos
    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0312-2.jpg
Views:	55
Size:	415.6 KB
ID:	1092719
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Wheat View Post
    I've edited it more can you please take a look

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0278-9.jpg
Views:	94
Size:	456.4 KB
ID:	1092661
    Soft, overexposed, and part of dust spot below the tail.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wheat
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Not really, and honestly 1 & 3 are not really fixable, so maybe better to give up on those two. #2 is still soft, overexposed, and with a slight red/orange tint.
    I've edited it more can you please take a look

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_0278-9.jpg
Views:	94
Size:	456.4 KB
ID:	1092661

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Wheat View Post

    Are these edits any better?

    Click image for larger version  Name:	IMG_9823-9.jpg Views:	0 Size:	651.9 KB ID:	1092624
    Not really, and honestly 1 & 3 are not really fixable, so maybe better to give up on those two. #2 is still soft, overexposed, and with a slight red/orange tint.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wheat
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    2-3. color, soft, overexposed, contrast
    4. color, soft, overexposed, dirty
    Are these edits any better?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_9823-9.jpg
Views:	68
Size:	651.9 KB
ID:	1092624
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Wheat View Post

    Oh well, thanks for taking a look I'll look back at it tomorrow with that being said can I get a pre-screening for these images too?

    Click image for larger version Name:	IMG_0047-2.jpg Views:	0 Size:	1.49 MB ID:	1092583
    2-3. color, soft, overexposed, contrast
    4. color, soft, overexposed, dirty

    Leave a comment:


  • Wheat
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Unfortunately, not much. All of the same issues are still present.
    Oh well, thanks for taking a look I'll look back at it tomorrow with that being said can I get a pre-screening for these images too?

    Click image for larger version  Name:	IMG_0047-2.jpg Views:	0 Size:	1.49 MB ID:	1092583
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Wheat View Post

    Is this better?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_9974-6.jpg
Views:	63
Size:	608.3 KB
ID:	1092507
    Unfortunately, not much. All of the same issues are still present.

    Leave a comment:


  • Wheat
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Both images have very weak contrast (due to the overcast conditions) and are somewhat soft. The second may be fixable with a better edit (also needs a little CCW rotation); the first is not fixable.
    Is this better?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_9974-6.jpg
Views:	63
Size:	608.3 KB
ID:	1092507

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X