Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sergio - Editing advice

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

  • #16
    Hello. I got this photo rejected:

    Click image for larger version

Name:	40997_1537465820.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	1.02 MB
ID:	1030538

    with the following reason: "Part of aircraft cut off"

    I already uploaded successfully a couple of other "wing view" photos, with a lesser amount of wing visible:

    Click image for larger version

Name:	24292_1536315463.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	926.5 KB
ID:	1030539 Click image for larger version

Name:	36127_1537443890.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	887.0 KB
ID:	1030540

    Is the problem keyed to the fact that the winglet is cut off? In a broader sense, is there anywhere in the forum a topic about rules such as "at least 3 aircrafts on a ramp" or "the winglet must not be cut off in a wing view" which are not included in the guidelines? Thank you for your help.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
      Hello. I got this photo rejected:

      [ATTACH=CONFIG]18883[/ATTACH]

      with the following reason: "Part of aircraft cut off"

      Is the problem keyed to the fact that the winglet is cut off?
      Yes.

      Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
      In a broader sense, is there anywhere in the forum a topic about rules such as "at least 3 aircrafts on a ramp" or "the winglet must not be cut off in a wing view" which are not included in the guidelines?
      You will not find any guidelines for such things, as they are subjective, just as you will not find any guidelines on exactly how much contrast is correct.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
        Yes.
        You will not find any guidelines for such things, as they are subjective, just as you will not find any guidelines on exactly how much contrast is correct.
        Thank you, dlowwa, for the explanation. This make sense.

        In your opinion, would the photo work, if I crop out the upper and left sides so that the visible part of the wing is only the rear one?

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
          Thank you, dlowwa, for the explanation. This make sense.

          In your opinion, would the photo work, if I crop out the upper and left sides so that the visible part of the wing is only the rear one?
          I'm not sure any crop of the end of the wing that doesn't include the winglet completely would work, but I'd need to see to be more certain.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
            I'm not sure any crop of the end of the wing that doesn't include the winglet completely would work, but I'd need to see to be more certain.
            Yes, sorry about not thinking of showing you the idea. BTW, I would like to say that your assiduous help is really really really appreciated. Thank you.

            Click image for larger version

Name:	1200b ZS-SJE window megaliesberg.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	968.7 KB
ID:	1030602

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
              Yes, sorry about not thinking of showing you the idea. BTW, I would like to say that your assiduous help is really really really appreciated. Thank you.

              [ATTACH=CONFIG]18952[/ATTACH]
              That crop doesn't work for me personally, but I can't speak for everyone. If I had to guess, I'd say most likely it would be a cut off/motive rejection.

              Comment


              • #22
                I'm sorting out my old photos.

                Would these be ok? I thought about "terminal" for photos 1 and 2; "cabin" for 3 (DPRK crew in a Tu-204) and the plane for 4.

                Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 DSC_4380 EDDF.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	794.1 KB
ID:	1030736 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 FYWH Windhoek DSC_3860.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	726.1 KB
ID:	1030738 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 DSC_2660 P-632 ZKPY.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	585.2 KB
ID:	1030737 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 DSC_0739 HL7460 RKSS.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	665.9 KB
ID:	1030739

                Thank you in advance for the help.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
                  I'm sorting out my old photos.

                  Would these be ok? I thought about "terminal" for photos 1 and 2; "cabin" for 3 (DPRK crew in a Tu-204) and the plane for 4.

                  [ATTACH=CONFIG]19123[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]19125[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]19124[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]19126[/ATTACH]

                  Thank you in advance for the help.
                  Most, if not all, would be a motive or obstruction rejection.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Hello! I'm back with some new photos, thank you for the nice help & advice!

                    Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 CS-TJF DSC_3741.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	769.5 KB
ID:	1032390 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 EC-LVP DSC_3810.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	835.5 KB
ID:	1032391 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 EI-GGN DSC_3835.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	967.8 KB
ID:	1032392 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 A6-EOB DSC_3848.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	962.8 KB
ID:	1032393 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 D-AEWF DSC_3750.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	818.0 KB
ID:	1032394

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
                      Hello! I'm back with some new photos, thank you for the nice help & advice!

                      [ATTACH=CONFIG]21140[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21141[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21142[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21143[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21144[/ATTACH]
                      1. blurry, oversharpened
                      2. blurry, heat haze
                      3. blurry, backlit, heat haze
                      4. blurry, backlit, oversharpened, heat haze, obstruction, noisy
                      5. blurry, oversharpened

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                        1. blurry, oversharpened
                        2. blurry, heat haze
                        3. blurry, backlit, heat haze
                        4. blurry, backlit, oversharpened, heat haze, obstruction, noisy
                        5. blurry, oversharpened
                        Thank you, dlowwa!

                        Wow, this is bad news indeed, I applied the same workflow I used for my photos in ZRH that got accepted, and used a sharper lens this time

                        I can easily fix the oversharpen issue, but is the blurry issue fixable in your opinion? I thought I used a good exposure time (1/250 - 1/320)... Too bad.
                        Would you also, please, teach me the way you use to check if a photo is blurred? Some of them seemed good to me (not the A380, to be honest).

                        Thank you for your patience.
                        Attached Files

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post

                          Wow, this is bad news indeed, I applied the same workflow I used for my photos in ZRH that got accepted, and used a sharper lens this time

                          I can easily fix the oversharpen issue, but is the blurry issue fixable in your opinion? I thought I used a good exposure time (1/250 - 1/320)... Too bad.
                          Would you also, please, teach me the way you use to check if a photo is blurred? Some of them seemed good to me (not the A380, to be honest).

                          #5 might not be blurry, but it's hard to tell with the oversharpening. The A380 would have no chance at acceptance (due to obstruction), but in that case the blur is caused by heat haze, and not any technique/hardware problems like the other images.


                          Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
                          What do you think of these other photos?

                          [ATTACH=CONFIG]21167[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21168[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21169[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21170[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21171[/ATTACH]
                          Please see #3

                          https://forums.jetphotos.com/showthr...ning-from-crew

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                            Sorry, it is another day here and I did not realize it was not 24h yet.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Hello dlowwa and crew. Sorry again for not having checked the time yesterday.

                              I tried to enhance the workflow, and I saw that one way to lessen the amount of oversharpening and jaggies is not to apply the presharpening before downsizing. What do you think of the photos shown at the bottom of this message? Are they better if compared to the one you had a look the they before yesterday and, btw, are they acceptable for submission?

                              Also, do you have a tric to understand if a photo is too much blurry before starting the postproduction? i usually look to the serial numbers and windows, but it does not seem I managed to understand properly if a shot has too much blur

                              Thank you in advance for your opinion and suggestions.

                              Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 c D-AEWF DSC_3750.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	641.3 KB
ID:	1032435 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 c G-EUYE DSC_3629.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	412.4 KB
ID:	1032436 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 c G-EZDM DSC_3746.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	654.9 KB
ID:	1032437 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 c OE-IZE DSC_3568.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	553.2 KB
ID:	1032438 Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 c OY-KBT DSC_3574.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	608.4 KB
ID:	1032439

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
                                Hello dlowwa and crew. Sorry again for not having checked the time yesterday.

                                I tried to enhance the workflow, and I saw that one way to lessen the amount of oversharpening and jaggies is not to apply the presharpening before downsizing. What do you think of the photos shown at the bottom of this message? Are they better if compared to the one you had a look the they before yesterday and, btw, are they acceptable for submission?

                                Also, do you have a tric to understand if a photo is too much blurry before starting the postproduction? i usually look to the serial numbers and windows, but it does not seem I managed to understand properly if a shot has too much blur

                                Thank you in advance for your opinion and suggestions.

                                [ATTACH=CONFIG]21185[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21186[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21187[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21188[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]21189[/ATTACH]
                                1-2 borderline soft
                                3. soft. not sure if cloud or bad edit above titles.
                                4. dirty
                                5. borderline dark/overprocessed (lines in sky)

                                No trick for determining if an image is too soft/blurry, just use my eyes

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X