Sergio - Editing advice

[dlowwa]

Could you point out the reasons? Thank you in advance.

It would be rejected for color (orange tint), contrast (too harsh), and overprocessed (editing halos visible).

[Sergio Canobbio]

It would not be acceptable.

Could you point out the reasons? Thank you in advance.

[dlowwa]

Hello!
I'd like to know if this photo can be acceptable. Thank you in advance!

It would not be acceptable.

[Sergio Canobbio]

Hello!
I'd like to know if this photo can be acceptable. Thank you in advance!

[dlowwa]

Hello!
May I ask for a prescreening for these photos?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]29323[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]29324[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]29325[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]29326[/ATTACH]

Moreover, would it be ok to post both .1 and .2 even if they are taken during the same flight?

For .1 it is correct that I should flag both "wing view" and "airport overview"?

Many many thanks in advance!

1-2 would be considered similar, and all images would be rejected for contrast. Only the second looks fixable.

[Sergio Canobbio]

Hello!
May I ask for a prescreening for these photos?



Moreover, would it be ok to post both .1 and .2 even if they are taken during the same flight?

For .1 it is correct that I should flag both "wing view" and "airport overview"?

Many many thanks in advance!

[dlowwa]

Hello.

I got some rejections I'd like to understand better to improve my skills.

1. [ATTACH=CONFIG]28346[/ATTACH] rejected for contrast

Would this version be acceptable? >> [ATTACH=CONFIG]28347[/ATTACH]

Rejected version looks better to me.

2. [ATTACH=CONFIG]28348[/ATTACH] overprocessed

Do you have any advice about this? This is the one with the cloud parallel to the airplane, is the problem that it has been seen as a halo, or you can spot jaggies or else?

Also looks ok to me.

3. [ATTACH=CONFIG]28349[/ATTACH] dirty / dust spots

This one is driving me crazy... I checked with the equalize tool *and* the jp tool and I can not see any remaining dust spot (I have also checked the position of the dust spots with the other photos of the batch). I see only "spots" created by the clouds and birds, AFAIK. Would you please show me where the dust spots are?

The bird/dark speck above the nose probably.

[Sergio Canobbio]

Hello.

I got some rejections I'd like to understand better to improve my skills.

1. rejected for contrast

Would this version be acceptable? >>


2. overprocessed

Do you have any advice about this? This is the one with the cloud parallel to the airplane, is the problem that it has been seen as a halo, or you can spot jaggies or else?


3. dirty / dust spots

This one is driving me crazy... I checked with the equalize tool *and* the jp tool and I can not see any remaining dust spot (I have also checked the position of the dust spots with the other photos of the batch). I see only "spots" created by the clouds and birds, AFAIK. Would you please show me where the dust spots are?

As usual, many many thanks in advance

[dlowwa]

First of all, I'd like to thank you again for all your advice. I got 14/14 photos accepted in the last few days, and I think all the credit goes to what I learned here.

About the last batch, what do you think of these versions?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]28082[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]28083[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]28084[/ATTACH]

1. I think I have fixed horizon and exposure, but I see a faint halo around the tail. Is this amount of halo acceptable?
2. Is now heat haze acceptable?
3. Are now heat haze and exposure acceptable?

I can surely put these in the private collection, but I'm trying corrections to improve my workflow.

Generally speaking, is there a way to reply the "dust spot check tool" of JP in PS, which is most useful for dirt and halos? I searched in the forum, but didn't find a unambiguous answer. I use Equalization + brightness down + contrast up to check my photos, but it is not as effective as your tool.

Thank you in advance!

I don't really see processing being an issue on the first. It does look a bit softer than the previous version, or perhaps the heat haze is just a bit more noticeable. The latter two I would still consider borderline for the same reason, but might be ok.

Other than the equalize function in PS, I am unaware of any replicate the check for dust tool exactly, though anything you can't see without equalizing shouldn't really be cause for a rejection.

[Sergio Canobbio]

Adding sharpening won't help fix heat haze, but reducing the resolution sometimes does hide it more.

First of all, I'd like to thank you again for all your advice. I got 14/14 photos accepted in the last few days, and I think all the credit goes to what I learned here.

About the last batch, what do you think of these versions?



1. I think I have fixed horizon and exposure, but I see a faint halo around the tail. Is this amount of halo acceptable?
2. Is now heat haze acceptable?
3. Are now heat haze and exposure acceptable?

I can surely put these in the private collection, but I'm trying corrections to improve my workflow.

Generally speaking, is there a way to reply the "dust spot check tool" of JP in PS, which is most useful for dirt and halos? I searched in the forum, but didn't find a unambiguous answer. I use Equalization + brightness down + contrast up to check my photos, but it is not as effective as your tool.

Thank you in advance!

[dlowwa]

Thank you.
In your opinion, generally speaking is a borderline heat haze fixable? Maybe a little more output sharpening + reducing to 1024p?

Adding sharpening won't help fix heat haze, but reducing the resolution sometimes does hide it more.

[Sergio Canobbio]

1. borderline overexposed/horizon
2. ok
3. heat haze
4. borderline heat haze
5. borderline heat haze/overexposed

Thank you.
In your opinion, generally speaking is a borderline heat haze fixable? Maybe a little more output sharpening + reducing to 1024p?

[dlowwa]

What do you think fo these newer versions? Thank you for your patience & help.
(I have actually changed photo for #1.)

[ATTACH=CONFIG]27835[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]27836[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]27837[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]27838[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]27839[/ATTACH]

1. borderline overexposed/horizon
2. ok
3. heat haze
4. borderline heat haze
5. borderline heat haze/overexposed

[Sergio Canobbio]

1. soft/heat haze
2. borderline dark/contrast
3. borderline soft/heat haze
4. borderline contrast
5. soft, horizon, overexposed

What do you think fo these newer versions? Thank you for your patience & help.
(I have actually changed photo for #1.)

[dlowwa]

May I have a pre-screening also on these? Thank you in advance.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]27759[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]27760[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]27761[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]27762[/ATTACH] [ATTACH=CONFIG]27763[/ATTACH]

And especially:
1. 2. 3. is color/contrast ok?
4. In this new version I think I have fixed halos. Is it ok in that sense? In your opinion the borderline heat haze alone will cause a rejection?
5. This is an older photo I asked for a pre-screening before, but with a totally different postproduction. Is this acceptable in your opinion?

Many many thanks!

1. soft/heat haze
2. borderline dark/contrast
3. borderline soft/heat haze
4. borderline contrast
5. soft, horizon, overexposed