Bingolancer - Editing advice

[Felipe Garcia]

Hi! Yes noise reduction had been applied. There were window reflections and huge blue color tints because I was inside the terminal, so it took many file saves to clean it up. Will try starting a new edit and be more careful about the color and number of saves.

Unfortunately the photo is beyond repairable then. The color tint is fixable, but the guidelines do not allow cloning things out other than dust spots.

[bingolancer]

Hi! Yes noise reduction had been applied. There were window reflections and huge blue color tints because I was inside the terminal, so it took many file saves to clean it up. Will try starting a new edit and be more careful about the color and number of saves.

[Felipe Garcia]

Hi there, just got this over-processing rejection but not quite sure how to improve this one. Halo seems to be minimal to me. Any idea? Thanks.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8568396

The sky looks quite odd, almost like it was saved with too much compression (which is not the case) and the colors/detail degraded. Did you apply any noise reduction to it?

[bingolancer]

Hi there, just got this over-processing rejection but not quite sure how to improve this one. Halo seems to be minimal to me. Any idea? Thanks.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8568396

[dlowwa]

Good morning,
Just got a rejection I couldn't quite understand because the contrast looks fine. Could use your suggestions. Thanks a lot.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8317282

Contrast is too low.

[bingolancer]

Good morning,
Just got a rejection I couldn't quite understand because the contrast looks fine. Could use your suggestions. Thanks a lot.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8317282

[dlowwa]

Hi!
It would be great if you can pre-screen this one for me. Need a little more cw rotation maybe? How about the noise on the ground(ramp) - there's rich detail on it, which on the other hand might also be treated as noises - You comments are appreciated.

I think that's probably the best you could have done, given the conditions. There's normally a little inclination at the edges with wide angles, so I'd be ok with the horizon as it is.

[bingolancer]

Hi!
It would be great if you can pre-screen this one for me. Need a little more cw rotation maybe? How about the noise on the ground(ramp) - there's rich detail on it, which on the other hand might also be treated as noises - You comments are appreciated.

[dlowwa]

Hi! About a recent rejection, would you mind telling me the part of the aircraft that's unsharp, so I can fix it?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8293496

About the second one, maybe you mean the head is soft?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8293482

Thank you.

Whole aircraft soft for both. You might want to try uploading at a lower resolution (~1280) for better results.

[bingolancer]

Hi! About a recent rejection, would you mind telling me the part of the aircraft that's unsharp, so I can fix it?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8293496

About the second one, maybe you mean the head is soft?

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8293482

Thank you.

[dlowwa]

Hi there, From this rejection, do you suggest more ccw rotation? Need your comment because I'm not sure about how to improve this one. Verticals look upright to except some minor lens distortion. Thanks.
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8278176

Yes, needs a little CCW rotation.

[bingolancer]

Hi there, From this rejection, do you suggest more ccw rotation? Need your comment because I'm not sure about how to improve this one. Verticals look upright to except some minor lens distortion. Thanks.

https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8278176

[bingolancer]

Yes, The original isn't soft as the aircraft wasn't moving so I wasn't panning the camera.

My previous edit had more details/noise. The noise reduction weakened both and that's why the photo look somewhat blurry I guess.

[bingolancer]

Whole image seems to be somewhat soft/blurry. Are you saying the original viewed at 100% will not be soft?

Yes, The original isn't soft as the aircraft wasn't moving so I wasn't panning the camera.

[dlowwa]

Good morning! Previously I had this one rejected but later fixed the softness. This time still got a softness rejection which I have no clue about. Can anyone show me why please?
https://www.jetphotos.com/viewreject_b.php?id=8275320

Whole image seems to be somewhat soft/blurry. Are you saying the original viewed at 100% will not be soft?