Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sergio - Editing advice

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

  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post

    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).

    Leave a comment:


  • Sergio Canobbio
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post

    It would not be acceptable.
    Could you point out the reasons? Thank you in advance.

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
    Hello!
    I'd like to know if this photo can be acceptable. Thank you in advance!

    Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 F-RBAA LFKS.jpg
Views:	42
Size:	467.4 KB
ID:	1097932
    It would not be acceptable.

    Leave a comment:


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

    Click image for larger version

Name:	1200 F-RBAA LFKS.jpg
Views:	42
Size:	467.4 KB
ID:	1097932

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sergio Canobbio
    replied
    Hello!
    May I ask for a prescreening for these photos?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	OO-SSJ EBBR 1200p DSC_9399.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	676.0 KB
ID:	1043350 Click image for larger version

Name:	OO-SSJ Suisse 1200p DSC_9399.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	655.1 KB
ID:	1043351 Click image for larger version

Name:	A6-BLL EBBR 1200p DSC_9429.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	686.6 KB
ID:	1043352 Click image for larger version

Name:	C-GHKR EBBR 1200p DSC_9428.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	602.8 KB
ID:	1043353

    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!

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
    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.


    Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
    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.


    Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sergio Canobbio
    replied
    Hello.

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

    1. Click image for larger version

Name:	_jpRE_EI-GGO LIMC 1200 DSC_8352 Contrast.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	811.0 KB
ID:	1042517 rejected for contrast

    Would this version be acceptable? >> Click image for larger version

Name:	_REV_EI-GGO LIMC 1200 DSC_8352t.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	831.0 KB
ID:	1042518


    2. Click image for larger version

Name:	_jpRE_EI-GGN LIMC 1200 DSC_8241 overprocessed.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	689.8 KB
ID:	1042519 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. Click image for larger version

Name:	_jpRE_C-GHPY LIMC 1200 DSC_8615 DIRTY.jpg
Views:	2
Size:	743.2 KB
ID:	1042520 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

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sergio Canobbio
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    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?

    Click image for larger version

Name:	_REV_EW-294PA LIMC 1200 DSC_8560.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	584.3 KB
ID:	1042313 Click image for larger version

Name:	4X-EDH LIMC 1024 DSC_8404.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	365.4 KB
ID:	1042314 Click image for larger version

Name:	ZS-SJC FAOR 1024 DSC_3830 2019-08.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	562.5 KB
ID:	1042315

    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!

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
    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.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sergio Canobbio
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    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?

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
    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

    Leave a comment:


  • Sergio Canobbio
    replied
    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    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.)

    Click image for larger version

Name:	EW-294PA LIMC 1200 DSC_8560.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	534.2 KB
ID:	1042110 Click image for larger version

Name:	PH-BGM LIMC 1200 DSC_8012.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	548.6 KB
ID:	1042111 Click image for larger version

Name:	PH-BXU LIMC 1200 DSC_8524.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	701.4 KB
ID:	1042112 Click image for larger version

Name:	4X-EDH LIMC 1200 DSC_8404.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	409.0 KB
ID:	1042113 Click image for larger version

Name:	ZS-SJC FAOR 1200 DSC_3830 2019-08.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	660.9 KB
ID:	1042114

    Leave a comment:


  • dlowwa
    replied
    Originally posted by Sergio Canobbio View Post
    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

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X