Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

pre-screen photos at dawn

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

  • Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
    In the air vs. on the ground. Both are in the air = similar.
    Thx dlowwa. Putted this way, there's no margin for debate. Reading the guidelines, I would never saw them as restrict as this. But rules are rules and things are what they are.
    thx again for your time and help
    /rgds
    a.m.

    Comment


    • Hi dlowwa
      can you please review these ? thx
      /rgds
      Attached Files

      Comment


      • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
        Hi dlowwa
        can you please review these ? thx
        /rgds
        1. soft, centering
        2-5 borderline soft, but no major issues

        Comment


        • Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
          1. soft, centering
          2-5 borderline soft, but no major issues
          Thx dlowwa. Well, it looks , the "soft" plague just land on my photos and I can't get rid of it.
          Can you help me understand it ? is it a HW or SW problem ?
          I'm including an original out off the camera file. is it soft already at origin ?

          thanks for your time and help
          /rgds
          a.m.
          Attached Files

          Comment


          • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
            Thx dlowwa. Well, it looks , the "soft" plague just land on my photos and I can't get rid of it.
            Can you help me understand it ? is it a HW or SW problem ?
            I'm including an original out off the camera file. is it soft already at origin ?

            thanks for your time and help
            /rgds
            a.m.
            Yeah, that's pretty soft. Still, at nearly 5000pix, you should be able to hide it well enough when sizing down to 1280 or so.

            Here's something I consider decently sharp, straight out of the camera, only cropped to show more of the aircraft:

            Click image for larger version

Name:	DS3_1712.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	488.0 KB
ID:	1040307

            Comment


            • Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
              Yeah, that's pretty soft. Still, at nearly 5000pix, you should be able to hide it well enough when sizing down to 1280 or so.

              Here's something I consider decently sharp, straight out of the camera, only cropped to show more of the aircraft:

              [ATTACH=CONFIG]25743[/ATTACH]
              Thx dlowwa.
              Well if this "..I consider decently sharp" is just "decent" I can't imagine what is a good sharp.
              That image is in a complete different league. I don't have HW to match that. Game over.
              My stuff is indeed soft stuff. Need to reconsider the hobby. Starts to get to stressful.
              Not having the right tools for the job. Wait for a week for the decision. Not been able to control the quality, always with the heart in the hands..
              ah.. there must be a better way.
              Thanks again for your time and help
              /rgds
              a.m.
              Attached Files

              Comment


              • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
                Thx dlowwa.
                Well if this "..I consider decently sharp" is just "decent" I can't imagine what is a good sharp.
                That image is in a complete different league. I don't have HW to match that. Game over.
                My stuff is indeed soft stuff. Need to reconsider the hobby. Starts to get to stressful.
                Not having the right tools for the job. Wait for a week for the decision. Not been able to control the quality, always with the heart in the hands..
                ah.. there must be a better way.
                Thanks again for your time and help
                /rgds
                a.m.
                Hi, don’t be Disheartened, photography is a great thing and we all start our journey from various perspectives.

                Dana is a very experienced, good photographer . He also shares that experience freely helping others willing to learn/listen.

                A key aspect is not new/latest hardware. Technique is learned and continues to develop that’s the main point, importantly aim to get as much right in camera as you can. Learn the exposure triangle, understand your current gear.

                Asking here is a good thing. Many will help.
                Regards T

                Comment


                • Agree that it's not so much about having the best gear as it is knowing how to get the best out of what you have. My example was not meant as a "if you can't get this kind of quality, don't bother uploading" so much as something to strive for, keeping in mind that like I said, even somewhat soft shots can be made to look good at 1280 if edited properly.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by 777MAN
                    Hi, don’t be Disheartened, photography is a great thing and we all start our journey from various perspectives.
                    Thanks 777MAN, for the encouraging words/advice.

                    Originally posted by 777MAN
                    A key aspect is not new/latest hardware. Technique is learned and continues to develop that’s the main point, importantly aim to get as much right in camera as you can. Learn the exposure triangle, understand your current gear.
                    Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                    Agree that it's not so much about having the best gear as it is knowing how to get the best out of what you have.
                    Thanks dlowwa, I understand that and I've/I'm trying to get the best of it. I've 4 different lens, 2 kits lens and two primes. Tested them with different apertures, focal length, and speeds
                    The end result is pretty much the same. They look in focus across the entire area, but too noisy and indeed lack of details (compared with your photo).
                    So the sensor must have some responsibility. Yet at 24Mpx and 100ISO it should be good enough. It may be, that my copy of the sensor and/or lens isn't on pair with the standards.

                    I believe your photo was taken with a full frame sensor... that for sure explains the low noise and high detailed.
                    However, there's lots of other photos taken with APS-C sensors with similarly quality... for sure they aren't low level cameras... but pro grade cameras.
                    Common sense tells that lens are the most important factor .... but all other parts working together should have some contribution (fast speed, low curtain shake, heavier thus less hand shaking).

                    ah.. when started this hobby...I fought against the SW, kind of solve it... and now, when I was planning/thinking/believing I could evolve to next level.. I'm stuck with the HW.

                    Well, need to test a Canon 6d MkII (probably the most common gear around here) to see if there's/I can make a difference...

                    Thanks again both of you, for your time and advices

                    /rgds
                    a.m.

                    Comment


                    • Hi dlowwa

                      Is this one ok ?
                      if yes, can/should I submit it to replace this one : https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9143747 ?


                      thx for your time and help

                      /rgds
                      a.m.
                      Attached Files

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
                        Hi dlowwa

                        Is this one ok ?
                        if yes, can/should I submit it to replace this one : https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9143747 ?


                        thx for your time and help

                        /rgds
                        a.m.
                        Both look fine. Not sure why the accepted one needs replacing.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                          Both look fine. Not sure why the accepted one needs replacing.
                          Thx dlowwa. The 2nd is a bit more defined... but agree, I've other photos/planes to upload..

                          Comment


                          • Hi dlowwa.

                            While trying to understand the softness limit/characteristics of my hardware, can you please review these ?
                            are these ok with their respective resolution ?

                            If yes, which one should I upload (off course this is a generic question for all images, no specifically these) ?

                            I prefer detailed photos.. so I like more resolution. But how about JP... is there any preference for low/high resolution photos ?
                            I can think of some "constraints" : disk space, time to download, client screen resolution.
                            Another issue is acceptance ratio. What's better : low or high resolution ?

                            Sorry for so many questions, but I'm just trying to reduce my rejection ratio...

                            Thanks for your time and help
                            Attached Files

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by a.m. View Post
                              Hi dlowwa.

                              While trying to understand the softness limit/characteristics of my hardware, can you please review these ?
                              are these ok with their respective resolution ?

                              If yes, which one should I upload (off course this is a generic question for all images, no specifically these) ?

                              I prefer detailed photos.. so I like more resolution. But how about JP... is there any preference for low/high resolution photos ?
                              I can think of some "constraints" : disk space, time to download, client screen resolution.
                              Another issue is acceptance ratio. What's better : low or high resolution ?

                              Sorry for so many questions, but I'm just trying to reduce my rejection ratio...

                              Thanks for your time and help
                              First pair ok, but second pair a bit soft towards the tail. Not a bit difference in quality between the two sizes.

                              Generally, the higher the resolution, the more flaws will be noticeable. Of all possible resolutions, those who upload at 1920 probably have the least success, since that size hides flaws the least. I set 1600 as a maximum for myself, which is a bit riskier than say, 1280, but I work under the principle if it's not good enough for 1600, then simply don't upload it. That means I'm pretty selective, and might leave out a few more images than I'd like, but I think my acceptance rate speaks for itself For a very small number of images that I really like, but might not have the quality for 1600, I will submit at 1280. I'd suggest 1280 as a good middle ground to try, and 1600 if you want to take a bit more risk.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by dlowwa View Post
                                First pair ok, but second pair a bit soft towards the tail. Not a bit difference in quality between the two sizes.
                                Thx dlowwa

                                Rigth now, I'm doing deep tests (again) with my gear. With the same setup... some images get ok, some are a bit soft... it may be because of the shaking...
                                but I'm starting to wonder if the focus works ok... because the background is always sharp... but not the tail or wing....and at f/10 aperture....shouldn't be the case
                                Anyway.... now I'm trying to use area focus instead of spot.... to force...different areas to be in focus.

                                Generally, the higher the resolution, the more flaws will be noticeable. Of all possible resolutions, those who upload at 1920 probably have the least success, since that size hides flaws the least.
                                .. I'd suggest 1280 as a good middle ground to try, and 1600 if you want to take a bit more risk.
                                appreciate your comments

                                I set 1600 as a maximum for myself, which is a bit riskier than say, 1280, but I work under the principle if it's not good enough for 1600, then simply don't upload it.
                                For a very small number of images that I really like, but might not have the quality for 1600, I will submit at 1280
                                ...and insights.

                                Now, on the other side of trying to improve the quality...
                                What would "radically" improve image quality ? Full Frame or a good lens ?
                                Rational says lens... but I've several lens....fix, zoom, prime....and can't see the difference... so the sensor, should be the key to get sharp photos like yours.

                                What do you recommend/would you choose ?
                                6D MKII, D750, A7III ? ( sure, old gear.... but prices are reaching my buying line )

                                Is it me....or the 6DMKII, is used to take the best photos in JP ?

                                thanks again for your time and help

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X