Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AndrewL - editing advice

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

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by AndrewL View Post
    My question: is the picture salvageable
    When the exterior is that badly blown out, probably not

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewL
    replied
    Hi All

    I have had this picture rejected 3 times for over exposure. Each submission i have reduced the exposure.

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8534162

    Not sure if i used a flash but i believe the glare/brightness from outside is affecting the histogram. I have now cropped most of the windows away and adjusted the histogram for best fit but still have spikes at either end. I have also attached my next attempt after editing. My question: is the picture salvageable?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	BA VC-10 G-ARVM #4A 0705 EGLB.jpg
Views:	9
Size:	1.09 MB
ID:	1101411

    TIA
    Andrew
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by AndrewL View Post
    Hi All

    I had this picture rejected for Too much or too little contrast. I used the same contrast levels as all other aircraft taken about the same time but it needs more contrast?

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8527311

    TIA
    Andrew
    Contrast is a bit flat, yes. Also seems to be a light blue tint.

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewL
    replied
    Hi All

    I had this picture rejected for Too much or too little contrast. I used the same contrast levels as all other aircraft taken about the same time but it needs more contrast?

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8527311

    TIA
    Andrew

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by AndrewL View Post
    Hi All

    I had this picture rejected for Over/Bad Processing. I applied my normal workflow so not sure what needs to be done to fix it.

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8487560

    TIA
    Andrew
    Editing halos are visible. You should process the image so that there are no halos.

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewL
    replied
    Hi All

    I had this picture rejected for Over/Bad Processing. I applied my normal workflow so not sure what needs to be done to fix it.

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8487560

    TIA
    Andrew

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewL
    replied
    Hi All

    Regarding my previous post, I too thought it was part of the stabilizer (and missed it) but it was a dust spot. I am guessing that was the problem.

    Andrew

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by AndrewL View Post
    Hi All

    This picture was rejected for Dust spots and Digital manipulation. The dust spot is easily enough removed but i am unsure about the digital manipulation.
    I only have Light Room. After the lens correction my process is white balance, exposure, contrast, light tones and sharpening.

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8446925

    TIA
    Andrew
    Appears to be poor dust removal, but if that's a natural effect on the stabilizer let me know, and I will see that the rejection is overturned.

    Leave a comment:


  • MQ1131
    replied
    Originally posted by AndrewL View Post
    Hi All

    This picture was rejected for Dust spots and Digital manipulation. The dust spot is easily enough removed but i am unsure about the digital manipulation.
    I only have Light Room. After the lens correction my process is white balance, exposure, contrast, light tones and sharpening.

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8446925

    TIA
    Andrew
    Hi, I noticed that there are something unusal on the horizontal stabilizer. You might want to avoid that next time.

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewL
    replied
    Hi All

    This picture was rejected for Dust spots and Digital manipulation. The dust spot is easily enough removed but i am unsure about the digital manipulation.
    I only have Light Room. After the lens correction my process is white balance, exposure, contrast, light tones and sharpening.

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8446925

    TIA
    Andrew

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by AndrewL View Post
    HI All

    I have had this picture rejected twice for over exposure. The histogram looks OK (spread over full length) but it needs less exposure?
    Correct. Most of the aircraft is nearly blown out.

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewL
    replied
    HI All

    I have had this picture rejected twice for over exposure. The histogram looks OK (spread over full length) but it needs less exposure?

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8382997

    TIA
    Andrew

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by AndrewL View Post
    Hi all

    I have had this picture rejected twice for too much too little contrast. Last time I increased the contrast but it still needs more?

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8325159

    TIA
    Andrew
    Close to acceptable for me, though yes, the contrast is a bit weak - look at the shadows below the aircraft.

    Leave a comment:


  • AndrewL
    replied
    Hi all

    I have had this picture rejected twice for too much too little contrast. Last time I increased the contrast but it still needs more?

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8325159

    TIA
    Andrew

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by AndrewL View Post
    Hi all

    I had the two following pictures rejected for horizontal unlevel. I used the corners of the buildings to get the vertical as the lamp posts are all over the place. I have checked my source pictures and the building corners are vertical. What am i supposed to reference too?

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8203970
    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=8203983

    Thanks in advance.
    Andrew
    ALL verticals (lamp posts and buildings) are leaning right. Both need CCW rotation.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X