Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 91011
Results 201 to 214 of 214

Thread: pre-screen photos at dawn

  1. #201
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote 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:

    Attachment 25743
    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 Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0279.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	447.9 KB 
ID:	25748   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0325.jpg 
Views:	10 
Size:	383.7 KB 
ID:	25749   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0683.jpg 
Views:	11 
Size:	300.7 KB 
ID:	25750   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0758.jpg 
Views:	9 
Size:	433.5 KB 
ID:	25751   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_9799.jpg 
Views:	11 
Size:	531.4 KB 
ID:	25752  


  2. #202
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    174

    Default

    Quote 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

  3. #203
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,741

    Default

    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.

  4. #204
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote 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.

    Quote 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.
    Quote 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.

  5. #205
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    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 Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	CS-TTY DSC_2297.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	1.78 MB 
ID:	26052  

  6. #206
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,741

    Default

    Quote 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.

  7. #207
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote 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..

  8. #208
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    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 Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cs-tug 1280 DSC_3415.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	1.14 MB 
ID:	26082   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cs-tug 1600 DSC_3415.jpg 
Views:	12 
Size:	1.74 MB 
ID:	26083   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cs-tob 1280 DSC_3818.jpg 
Views:	12 
Size:	1.14 MB 
ID:	26084   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cs-tob 1600 DSC_3818 (2).jpg 
Views:	11 
Size:	1.72 MB 
ID:	26085  

  9. #209
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,741

    Default

    Quote 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.

  10. #210
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote 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

  11. #211
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    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.

    In order of importance: knowledge/technique, lens, editing, camera. More pixels will only make a difference if you're cropping your images significantly. Different sensor will only make a difference if you're shooting at higher ISO. If neither of those cases apply, then camera is the lowest priority. Knowledge/technique means knowing how and when to use your gear properly. The best pro will not be able to get perfect results if he is too far or there is too much haze, nor is a novice likely to achieve great results even at close range with perfect conditions.

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    What do you recommend/would you choose ?
    6D MKII, D750, A7III ? ( sure, old gear.... but prices are reaching my buying line )
    All high-end cameras are likely to achieve the same results (good or bad) with the same user under similar conditions, so I can't answer that question for you.

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    Is it me....or the 6DMKII, is used to take the best photos in JP ?
    My not-so-sarcastic answer is the best photographers are used to take the best photos on JP Give a good photographer a lower-end camera, they'll still likely come up with good results. Give a poor photographer a high-end camera, and I'd say they'd be much less likely to achieve those decent results.

  12. #212
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    In order of importance: knowledge/technique, lens, editing, camera. More pixels will only make a difference if you're cropping your images significantly. Different sensor will only make a difference if you're shooting at higher ISO. If neither of those cases apply, then camera is the lowest priority. Knowledge/technique means knowing how and when to use your gear properly. The best pro will not be able to get perfect results if he is too far or there is too much haze, nor is a novice likely to achieve great results even at close range with perfect conditions.
    Understand and agree with your points. For sure I need to know and proper use the gear I have. I've a 10Mpx and a 24Mpx camera... I've been able to take some photos from both. But I see that the 24Mpx does have a better level of sharpness.
    That's the reason I was trying to understand if a higher level can be a achieved by a different sensor/gear.
    I'm not being lazy here... I'm just trying to max out what the HW can provide... just like a good out focus and or ibis system.


    All high-end cameras are likely to achieve the same results (good or bad) with the same user under similar conditions, so I can't answer that question for you.
    ah.. ok, I understand the "political correct" answer


    My not-so-sarcastic answer is the best photographers are used to take the best photos on JP Give a good photographer a lower-end camera, they'll still likely come up with good results. Give a poor photographer a high-end camera, and I'd say they'd be much less likely to achieve those decent results.
    Again, agree. Gear are gear, and.. not everyone can be artists/pro grade photographs.
    I would prefer to focus myself ...on good angles, framing, light,... instead on the processing side.
    But I understand that the minimum acceptable photo quality ..do involve very specific parameters like : sharpness, exposure, level, etc.

    Isn't every day that a photo that misses all these parameters is acceptable. And usually when it misses ... its an extraordinary GOOD photo

    Well, maybe I'm expecting to much from my photos.. maybe I'm expecting that all came out sharp and or align and or well exposed... with no flaws.
    Probably I should filter even more them. Since I started posting...I've reduce the processing workflow...just to a single (minimum) high pass sharpening filter.
    I notice however, that a few images... are good enough with no high pass processing... so maybe I should just focus on these.


    In the meantime and taking the opportunity of a short vacations period, I've change a couple of camera parameters and tried it on this new location.
    At my eyes, they look a bit sharper (no additional SW processing, just different HW capture)...
    ... as such I've edit them at 1920... to confirm the "improvement" and/or the "normal" flaws.

    Can you please have a look at them ?

    Thanks again for your comments, insights , recommendations and extended chat, appreciated it.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	d-aisw 1920 DSC_4503.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	136.1 KB 
ID:	26343   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	ei-denv1920 DSC_4480.jpg 
Views:	10 
Size:	143.3 KB 
ID:	26344   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	cs-tte 1920DSC_4168.jpg 
Views:	9 
Size:	336.3 KB 
ID:	26345   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	d-atuz 1920 DSC_4465.jpg 
Views:	9 
Size:	124.5 KB 
ID:	26346   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	g-lsac 1920 .jpg 
Views:	9 
Size:	120.9 KB 
ID:	26347  


  13. #213
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,741

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    In the meantime and taking the opportunity of a short vacations period, I've change a couple of camera parameters and tried it on this new location.
    At my eyes, they look a bit sharper (no additional SW processing, just different HW capture)...
    ... as such I've edit them at 1920... to confirm the "improvement" and/or the "normal" flaws.

    Can you please have a look at them ?
    If you're asking for prescreening:

    1. soft, noisy, compression, centering, contrast
    2. soft/blurry, noisy, compression
    3. soft, compression, color, contrast
    4. soft, compression, centering, contrast
    5. soft, compression, contrast

    All of these images are severely compressed.

  14. #214
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    If you're asking for prescreening:

    1. soft, noisy, compression, centering, contrast
    2. soft/blurry, noisy, compression
    3. soft, compression, color, contrast
    4. soft, compression, centering, contrast
    5. soft, compression, contrast

    All of these images are severely compressed.
    Ah.. definitively, I don't have the touch, the feeling, the art, 1920 it's out of limits for me.
    Maybe I can have a chance at 1280, just maybe, who knows.

    thx again for your time and help

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •