Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

natalie huang - editing advice

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

  • natalie huang - editing advice

    Hi all,
    I recently uploaded this photo and was rejected on counts of over-sharpening and over-processing -

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7032094

    Could someone please explain why it would be considered oversharpened? I understand that there are halos around the aircraft when the "check for dust" function is applied, which might have contributed to the overprocessing verdict - could that also have affected whether it is suitably sharpened?

    Thank you so much!

  • #2
    Originally posted by Natalie Huang View Post
    Hi all,
    I recently uploaded this photo and was rejected on counts of over-sharpening and over-processing -

    https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7032094

    Could someone please explain why it would be considered oversharpened? I understand that there are halos around the aircraft when the "check for dust" function is applied, which might have contributed to the overprocessing verdict - could that also have affected whether it is suitably sharpened?

    Thank you so much!
    There is no need to check with the "check for dust" tool to see the massive halos around the wing and above the front section. Now, some sharpening settings, for example with too large radius, can cause halos, but I think, these halos are caused by some auto-adjusting features. Sharpening looks OK to me.
    My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Natalie Huang View Post
      Hi all,
      I recently uploaded this photo and was rejected on counts of over-sharpening and over-processing -

      https://www.jetphotos.com/viewqueued_b.php?id=7032094

      Could someone please explain why it would be considered oversharpened? I understand that there are halos around the aircraft when the "check for dust" function is applied, which might have contributed to the overprocessing verdict - could that also have affected whether it is suitably sharpened?

      Thank you so much!
      editing visible halos, dead space, aircraft totally out of center, visible jaddges. Regards

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by enzocmte View Post
        editing visible halos, dead space, aircraft totally out of center, visible jaddges. Regards
        Not too much dead space and not totally out of center, as also stated by the screeners. Jaggies are not a rejection reason for me here. The halos are the only and major rejection reason.
        My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

        Comment


        • #5
          Hi,
          Thank you! Would this make a better submission?

          Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6323 (2).JPG
Views:	1
Size:	655.4 KB
ID:	1032150

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Natalie Huang View Post
            Hi,
            Thank you! Would this make a better submission?

            [ATTACH=CONFIG]20855[/ATTACH]
            This would be rejected for overprocessed (editing halos).

            Comment


            • #7
              Oh no! I thought they were gone after adjusting shadow/highlights but guess it's just my eyes I'll work more on it

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Natalie Huang View Post
                Oh no! I thought they were gone after adjusting shadow/highlights but guess it's just my eyes I'll work more on it
                Indeed, the s/h tool is probably causing the halos; I suggest setting it to 0 and trying again.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Hi,
                  Thank you for the advice! I have set them to 0 for the following two photos (and tried to use the curves tool instead) - are they better?
                  Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6323 (1)JP.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	673.5 KB
ID:	1032174Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_6310JP.JPG
Views:	1
Size:	662.7 KB
ID:	1032175

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Natalie Huang View Post
                    Hi,
                    Thank you for the advice! I have set them to 0 for the following two photos (and tried to use the curves tool instead) - are they better?
                    [ATTACH=CONFIG]20881[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]20882[/ATTACH]
                    Light halos still visible, but better than before. First also looks a bit oversaturated. Both would benefit from a tighter crop.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                      Light halos still visible, but better than before. First also looks a bit oversaturated. Both would benefit from a tighter crop.
                      Thank you - I'll try to correct them and submit to the queue.
                      Sorry for the frequent re-uploading!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Natalie Huang View Post
                        Thank you - I'll try to correct them and submit to the queue.
                        Sorry for the frequent re-uploading!
                        No problem. As long as we see an attitude like yours, i. e. as long as we see that somebody wants to learn and improve, we will gladly offer our help.

                        Just an idea: are you shooting RAW or JPG?
                        My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by LX-A343 View Post
                          No problem. As long as we see an attitude like yours, i. e. as long as we see that somebody wants to learn and improve, we will gladly offer our help.

                          Just an idea: are you shooting RAW or JPG?
                          Aw, thank you!

                          I'm shooting in RAW.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Natalie Huang View Post
                            Aw, thank you!

                            I'm shooting in RAW.
                            OK, then just a tip. When converting a RAW photo, the are 3 features (at least in Adobe RAW Converter, similar features may be also in LR or other converters) in the first panel: "Clarity", "Vibrance" and "Saturation". On your first tests, leave all of them at "0". Mainly "Vibrance" is one of those culprits for getting halos. And once you have halos, there is no way of getting rid of them.

                            Once you have your photo in PS, check your photo every once in a while by equalizing it (and then of course "undo" it ). That way you get an idea, which settings might cause such halos.
                            My photos on Flickr www.flickr.com/photos/geridominguez

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by LX-A343 View Post
                              OK, then just a tip. When converting a RAW photo, the are 3 features (at least in Adobe RAW Converter, similar features may be also in LR or other converters) in the first panel: "Clarity", "Vibrance" and "Saturation". On your first tests, leave all of them at "0". Mainly "Vibrance" is one of those culprits for getting halos. And once you have halos, there is no way of getting rid of them.

                              Once you have your photo in PS, check your photo every once in a while by equalizing it (and then of course "undo" it ). That way you get an idea, which settings might cause such halos.
                              Oh thank you for the detailed suggestions!
                              I'm using Canon's Digital Photo Professional 4 and sadly I don't see such an option at the RAW converter - hopefully that just means there are no unhelpful settings to worry about instead of more troublesome implications
                              I submitted the Lufthansa after disabling the auto brightness adjustment; the equalised result doesn't seem to have a halo left - hope I'm right this time!

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X