Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bingolancer - Editing advice

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

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bingolancer View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • bingolancer
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bingolancer View Post
    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.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4201s-curve.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	674.4 KB
ID:	1095242
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • bingolancer
    replied
    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.

    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4201s-curve.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	674.4 KB
ID:	1095242

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bingolancer View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • bingolancer
    replied
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bingolancer View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • bingolancer
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • bingolancer
    replied
    Originally posted by bingolancer View Post

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • bingolancer
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bingolancer View Post
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • bingolancer
    replied
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bingolancer View Post
    Hi Guys,
    It would be great if you can pre-screen following two photos for me. I assume the second one should have its "Night shot" box checked for its sunset light. Your help will be highly appreciated!
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4172s-lr-downsized.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	440.8 KB
ID:	1094247
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4097m2.jpg
Views:	18
Size:	1.03 MB
ID:	1094248
    1. blurry, compression/noise, contrast
    2. soft, noise, contrast

    Leave a comment:


  • bingolancer
    replied
    Hi Guys,
    It would be great if you can pre-screen following two photos for me. I assume the second one should have its "Night shot" box checked for its sunset light. Your help will be highly appreciated!
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4172s-lr-downsized.jpg
Views:	23
Size:	440.8 KB
ID:	1094247
    Click image for larger version

Name:	DSC_4097m2.jpg
Views:	18
Size:	1.03 MB
ID:	1094248

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by bingolancer View Post
    Hey crews, Somehow I couldn't find why this photo was rejected because of being over-sharpened and heat haze. I could use some explanations, thanks.
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8266557
    Sharpening looks acceptable, but heat haze is indeed visible on wing/wheels.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X