Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fabrizio Gandolfo - Rejected Photo/Editing Advice

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

  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by Gandalf View Post

    Thank You diowwa as always for your help in the forum.

    ...and now:

    ET-ALPFco2601008c by rafanass68, su Flickr

    The file has been edited from scratch. Any valuable improvement?

    Thanks,
    Contrast is still harsh.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gandalf
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    In this case, contrast too harsh (and noisy). Looks like there was a thin overcast layer, making the light hitting the aircraft a little diffuse. Possibly fixable, but likely to be a challenge.
    Thank You diowwa as always for your help in the forum.

    ...and now:

    ET-ALPFco2601008c by rafanass68, su Flickr

    The file has been edited from scratch. Any valuable improvement?

    Thanks,

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Gandalf View Post
    Hello!
    i had this shot rejected multiple times (unusual for me, if i can say...)
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8189299

    Every time the issue was the same: contrast (more, less, too more, too less: i tryed everything).

    It's an old photo and i'd like very much to see it in my folder. i do not want to give up. But now is the time i need to ask for an help: what's wrong with it? Which would be the correct way to set the contrast and make it accepted?

    I know the way exist, but i can't find it.
    Thanks for any hint.

    Fabrizio
    In this case, contrast too harsh (and noisy). Looks like there was a thin overcast layer, making the light hitting the aircraft a little diffuse. Possibly fixable, but likely to be a challenge.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gandalf
    replied
    Hello!
    i had this shot rejected multiple times (unusual for me, if i can say...)
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8189299

    Every time the issue was the same: contrast (more, less, too more, too less: i tryed everything).

    It's an old photo and i'd like very much to see it in my folder. i do not want to give up. But now is the time i need to ask for an help: what's wrong with it? Which would be the correct way to set the contrast and make it accepted?

    I know the way exist, but i can't find it.
    Thanks for any hint.

    Fabrizio

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Gandalf View Post

    Not sure if quality lack depends on Flickr
    Well, better to be sure, right?

    In any case, the it appears to be more noise than compression, and the contrast is not that great for a night shot, so I'd say overall probably not much chance.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gandalf
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    Might be better to attach the image you actually plan to upload. Far too much compression on the Flickr link to tell if the quality is good enough.
    Not sure if quality lack depends on Flickr

    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Gandalf View Post
    Hello!

    An old photo... worth an upload?

    VT-ALDFra240809 by rafanass68, su Flickr

    Thanks,

    Fabrizio
    Might be better to attach the image you actually plan to upload. Far too much compression on the Flickr link to tell if the quality is good enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gandalf
    replied
    Hello!

    An old photo... worth an upload?

    VT-ALDFra240809 by rafanass68, su Flickr

    Thanks,

    Fabrizio
    Last edited by Gandalf; 2020-05-02, 18:54.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Gandalf View Post
    Hello!

    can please the screener help me to understand what he/she means for Over Processed / Bad postprocessing here?


    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=8042390

    Thanks!
    Editing halos are visible around the wings and tail.

    In the future, please post any new questions in the same thread, no longer how much time has elapsed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gandalf
    replied
    Hello!

    can please the screener help me to understand what he/she means for Over Processed / Bad postprocessing here?


    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=8042390

    Thanks!

    Leave a comment:


  • LX-A343
    replied
    Originally posted by Gandalf View Post
    According to the Exif the 747 photo was taken on 22nd march at 11.00 am LT.

    According to Suncalc this is the sun position at that time:


    [ATTACH=CONFIG]14880[/ATTACH]

    i never understand how a photo can be backlit with the sun behind on me. Tail shade or not.
    We don't check EXIF, Suncalc, and so on. We simply check the photo. Both photos are borderline, but the rejected photo has overall a harsh contrast and the tail is partly in its own shadow, while the accepted photo looks just that tiny little bit better, which made the difference.

    BTW, the aircraft on the rejected photo landed 9:54, not 11:00 .... and now that I wrote this, I remember that I have to set the time on my camera to DST .
    Last edited by LX-A343; 2018-04-08, 08:57.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gandalf
    replied
    According to the Exif the 747 photo was taken on 22nd march at 11.00 am LT.

    According to Suncalc this is the sun position at that time:


    Click image for larger version

Name:	suncalc.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	9.6 KB
ID:	1023258

    i never understand how a photo can be backlit with the sun behind on me. Tail shade or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alex - Spot-This !
    replied
    We would miss you too

    Leave a comment:


  • Gandalf
    replied
    Originally posted by Alex - Spot-This ! View Post
    Hi,
    When considering backlit we check the tail. I'm sure you can notice how dark the tail is on the rejected shot, which means it's the shade side of it. On the 747 the tail is much lighter which, while it's borderline, was acceptable.
    Just remember that never anything good comes out of frustration, I know it sucks to have all the rejections you got there, but unfortunately, I'm afraid they were really too backlit

    Kind Regards
    Alex
    Thanks Alex for your replay.

    You're right: never anything good comes out of frustration...

    You won't miss me, i will miss You.

    Leave a comment:


  • Alex - Spot-This !
    replied
    Hi,
    When considering backlit we check the tail. I'm sure you can notice how dark the tail is on the rejected shot, which means it's the shade side of it. On the 747 the tail is much lighter which, while it's borderline, was acceptable.
    Just remember that never anything good comes out of frustration, I know it sucks to have all the rejections you got there, but unfortunately, I'm afraid they were really too backlit

    Kind Regards
    Alex

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X