Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

pre-screen photos at dawn

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

  • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
    Now, on the other side of trying to improve the quality...
    What would "radically" improve image quality ? Full Frame or a good lens ?
    Rational says lens... but I've several lens....fix, zoom, prime....and can't see the difference... so the sensor, should be the key to get sharp photos like yours.

    In order of importance: knowledge/technique, lens, editing, camera. More pixels will only make a difference if you're cropping your images significantly. Different sensor will only make a difference if you're shooting at higher ISO. If neither of those cases apply, then camera is the lowest priority. Knowledge/technique means knowing how and when to use your gear properly. The best pro will not be able to get perfect results if he is too far or there is too much haze, nor is a novice likely to achieve great results even at close range with perfect conditions.

    Originally posted by a.m. View Post
    What do you recommend/would you choose ?
    6D MKII, D750, A7III ? ( sure, old gear.... but prices are reaching my buying line )
    All high-end cameras are likely to achieve the same results (good or bad) with the same user under similar conditions, so I can't answer that question for you.

    Originally posted by a.m. View Post
    Is it me....or the 6DMKII, is used to take the best photos in JP ?
    My not-so-sarcastic answer is the best photographers are used to take the best photos on JP Give a good photographer a lower-end camera, they'll still likely come up with good results. Give a poor photographer a high-end camera, and I'd say they'd be much less likely to achieve those decent results.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
      In order of importance: knowledge/technique, lens, editing, camera. More pixels will only make a difference if you're cropping your images significantly. Different sensor will only make a difference if you're shooting at higher ISO. If neither of those cases apply, then camera is the lowest priority. Knowledge/technique means knowing how and when to use your gear properly. The best pro will not be able to get perfect results if he is too far or there is too much haze, nor is a novice likely to achieve great results even at close range with perfect conditions.
      Understand and agree with your points. For sure I need to know and proper use the gear I have. I've a 10Mpx and a 24Mpx camera... I've been able to take some photos from both. But I see that the 24Mpx does have a better level of sharpness.
      That's the reason I was trying to understand if a higher level can be a achieved by a different sensor/gear.
      I'm not being lazy here... I'm just trying to max out what the HW can provide... just like a good out focus and or ibis system.


      All high-end cameras are likely to achieve the same results (good or bad) with the same user under similar conditions, so I can't answer that question for you.
      ah.. ok, I understand the "political correct" answer


      My not-so-sarcastic answer is the best photographers are used to take the best photos on JP Give a good photographer a lower-end camera, they'll still likely come up with good results. Give a poor photographer a high-end camera, and I'd say they'd be much less likely to achieve those decent results.
      Again, agree. Gear are gear, and.. not everyone can be artists/pro grade photographs.
      I would prefer to focus myself ...on good angles, framing, light,... instead on the processing side.
      But I understand that the minimum acceptable photo quality ..do involve very specific parameters like : sharpness, exposure, level, etc.

      Isn't every day that a photo that misses all these parameters is acceptable. And usually when it misses ... its an extraordinary GOOD photo

      Well, maybe I'm expecting to much from my photos.. maybe I'm expecting that all came out sharp and or align and or well exposed... with no flaws.
      Probably I should filter even more them. Since I started posting...I've reduce the processing workflow...just to a single (minimum) high pass sharpening filter.
      I notice however, that a few images... are good enough with no high pass processing... so maybe I should just focus on these.


      In the meantime and taking the opportunity of a short vacations period, I've change a couple of camera parameters and tried it on this new location.
      At my eyes, they look a bit sharper (no additional SW processing, just different HW capture)...
      ... as such I've edit them at 1920... to confirm the "improvement" and/or the "normal" flaws.

      Can you please have a look at them ?

      Thanks again for your comments, insights , recommendations and extended chat, appreciated it.
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
        In the meantime and taking the opportunity of a short vacations period, I've change a couple of camera parameters and tried it on this new location.
        At my eyes, they look a bit sharper (no additional SW processing, just different HW capture)...
        ... as such I've edit them at 1920... to confirm the "improvement" and/or the "normal" flaws.

        Can you please have a look at them ?
        If you're asking for prescreening:

        1. soft, noisy, compression, centering, contrast
        2. soft/blurry, noisy, compression
        3. soft, compression, color, contrast
        4. soft, compression, centering, contrast
        5. soft, compression, contrast

        All of these images are severely compressed.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
          If you're asking for prescreening:

          1. soft, noisy, compression, centering, contrast
          2. soft/blurry, noisy, compression
          3. soft, compression, color, contrast
          4. soft, compression, centering, contrast
          5. soft, compression, contrast

          All of these images are severely compressed.
          Ah.. definitively, I don't have the touch, the feeling, the art, 1920 it's out of limits for me.
          Maybe I can have a chance at 1280, just maybe, who knows.

          thx again for your time and help

          Comment


          • Hi dlowwa

            Can you please review this one, specially regrading obstruction ?
            For a different situation : Similarly photos: if the photo is taken on a different airport .. and resembles a "similarly" photo... will it be also rejected ?
            or for a different airport "the counter is reset" ?

            thx

            Click image for larger version

Name:	D2-TEG 1600 DSC_7400 (2).jpg
Views:	1
Size:	287.0 KB
ID:	1041389

            Comment


            • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
              Hi dlowwa

              Can you please review this one, specially regrading obstruction ?
              For a different situation : Similarly photos: if the photo is taken on a different airport .. and resembles a "similarly" photo... will it be also rejected ?
              or for a different airport "the counter is reset" ?

              thx

              [ATTACH=CONFIG]26980[/ATTACH]
              Yes, obstructed (also soft). Different airports are not similar.

              Comment


              • Yes, obstructed (also soft). Different airports are not similar.
                thx

                Can you please review this one ? thx
                Attached Files

                Comment


                • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
                  thx

                  Can you please review this one ? thx
                  Borderline dark/color (green tint).

                  Comment


                  • Hi dlowwa

                    another question on "Similarly"

                    does a "name change" still lets a photo similarly ?
                    I've this one published where the plane had no name... https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9369161

                    Is then this one , where the plane got a name, similarly ?

                    Photo wise... they look like twins... so they should be similarly.... but since the name changed.... maybe the rule is different.

                    /thx for your time and help
                    a.m.
                    Attached Files

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
                      Hi dlowwa

                      another question on "Similarly"

                      does a "name change" still lets a photo similarly ?
                      I've this one published where the plane had no name... https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9369161

                      Is then this one , where the plane got a name, similarly ?

                      Photo wise... they look like twins... so they should be similarly.... but since the name changed.... maybe the rule is different.

                      /thx for your time and help
                      a.m.
                      Technically not similar, but really pushing against the 'spirit' of the guidelines. If you're desperate to have the newer version accepted, you can point out when uploading the addition of the small sticker when uploading.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                        If you're desperate to have the newer version accepted, you can point out when uploading the addition of the small sticker when uploading.
                        Thx dlowwa

                        No big deal then. I've "found" this situation went uploading the new photo... I notice the similarly and cancelled the upload, but then I realized that the first photo hasn't a name. So I ask.

                        Anyway, this is being the norm this year @TAP for the couple of dozens new planes they are receiving. Planes enter service without a name, then some weeks later they add the name.

                        thx
                        a.m.

                        Comment


                        • Hi dlowwa

                          Trying for the first time night shots, is this one acceptable ?
                          thx
                          Attached Files

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
                            Hi dlowwa

                            Trying for the first time night shots, is this one acceptable ?
                            thx
                            Would be rejected for soft, noise, glare, and possibly contrast.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                              Would be rejected for soft, noise, glare, and possibly contrast.
                              Thx dlowwa

                              Not having a directly light source probably forces/augments all of these issues. Back to the drawing board then.

                              /rgds
                              a.m.

                              Comment


                              • Hi dlowwa

                                Will these two be considered similarly ?
                                Apart the angle , one is taxiing, the other is taking off.

                                https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9369162

                                thanks for your time and help
                                a.m.
                                Attached Files

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X