Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 214

Thread: pre-screen photos at dawn

  1. #61
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    Thx. Probably I need to start working with layers, isolating the plane and working on new tons,colours just in the sky.
    I would actually advise less editing is the way to go, since overediting is what is causing you problems already.

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    how about this one ?
    A touch dark, but otherwise ok.

  2. #62
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    I would actually advise less editing is the way to go, since overediting is what is causing you problems already.



    A touch dark, but otherwise ok.
    Thx dlowwa

    #I would actually advise less editing is the way to go, since overediting is what is causing you problems already.

    I see. Which make all the sense... the photo should stands by itself and not because of good PS skills... but a bit of sharpen is always needed
    Anyway, I'm starting to apply another type of workflow... after selecting the sharpen photos out of the camerea. I apply then then crop and resize to jpg .... no additional processing.
    If the end result isn't reasonable, I don't consider it.

    I start to see that the halos and low contrast can be already there out of the camera...so it's very difficult to correct them and other issues later.
    One other thing is the compression / jpeg artifacts.... that can be more visible or not... just because you crop one bit left or rigth.
    Sometimes, just changing the aspect ratio 3:2 / 16:9... will introduce /reduce artifacts.

    So, yeh, it's an adventure to get the best end result.


    How about now, enough light ?

    thx again

    /rgds
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0036__.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	967.7 KB 
ID:	17907  

  3. #63
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,774

    Default

    Looks acceptable to me.

  4. #64
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    Looks acceptable to me.
    Thx dlowwa

    how about these ?

    /rgds
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0101__.jpg 
Views:	24 
Size:	970.9 KB 
ID:	17913   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0139_.jpg 
Views:	22 
Size:	892.0 KB 
ID:	17914   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0288_.jpg 
Views:	24 
Size:	1.04 MB 
ID:	17915   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0061_.jpg 
Views:	24 
Size:	1,008.1 KB 
ID:	17916  

  5. #65
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    Thx dlowwa

    how about these ?

    /rgds
    1. borderline overprocessed
    2-4 overprocessed, borderline contrast/color

  6. #66
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    1. borderline overprocessed
    2-4 overprocessed, borderline contrast/color
    Thx dlowwa

    I'm struggling a little bit, with the borderline contrast/color issue.
    Is this because of a clear visible border line , usually in white/clear color ?
    or because a sky color not much different from the plane colors ?

    Here's a version with no editting whatsoever.... just convert raw to jpeg and resize to 1280.
    Does this shows/manifests borderline contrast/color ?

    One other question, is this problem usually workable with processing ? or is better to move to another picture ?

    thanks again for your time and help

    /rgds
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0139 (4).jpg 
Views:	19 
Size:	967.1 KB 
ID:	17928   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0139_.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	892.0 KB 
ID:	17929  

  7. #67
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Here's another example... also no processing. However in this case... there's a clear white line below the body.... looking closer... we can see a mix of an artifact , plus some real light reflection.
    So the question is : is this recoverable ? or should I aim for clean photos to start with ?

    thx again
    /rgds
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0101.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	992.0 KB 
ID:	17930   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0101__.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	970.9 KB 
ID:	17931  

  8. #68
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    Here's a version with no editting whatsoever.... just convert raw to jpeg and resize to 1280.
    Does this shows/manifests borderline contrast/color ?
    /rgds
    There are two clearly different images here. Are they both with no editing?

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    Here's another example... also no processing. However in this case... there's a clear white line below the body.... looking closer... we can see a mix of an artifact , plus some real light reflection.
    Again, there are two images here. Which one are you asking about?

  9. #69
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Sorry for the confusion. The idea was to show the processed and non processed versions.

    Here's then just the two non processed photos.

    /rgds
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0101.jpg 
Views:	11 
Size:	992.0 KB 
ID:	17953   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0139 (4).jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	967.1 KB 
ID:	17954  

  10. #70
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    Sorry for the confusion. The idea was to show the processed and non processed versions.

    Here's then just the two non processed photos.

    /rgds
    Neither of these images have problems with halos/bad processing.

  11. #71
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    Neither of these images have problems with halos/bad processing.
    Thx dlowwa

    I believe I've identified the root cause of the problem and how to avoid/solve it.

    Basically I'm doing a layer mask to apply a HighPass filter in order to sharpen the image
    I'm applying the filter , by "paint" just some zones...which basically are the complete plane.

    After some tests, I realized that when the painting is applyed to the edges of the plane ...introduces a borderline with a dark color...so I'm assuming this is the borderline you mention.

    As such, I'm applying now the filter just to interior areas of the plane.

    Here's then the new photos processed in such a way, are they acceptable now ?

    thanks again for your time and help
    /rgds
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0101-2.jpg 
Views:	11 
Size:	1,005.3 KB 
ID:	17971   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0139 (4)-2.jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	957.4 KB 
ID:	17970  
    Last edited by a.m.; 08-24-2018 at 02:04 PM. Reason: replace photos

  12. #72
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    Thx dlowwa

    I believe I've identified the root cause of the problem and how to avoid/solve it.

    Basically I'm doing a layer mask to apply a HighPass filter in order to sharpen the image
    I'm applying the filter , by "paint" just some zones...which basically are the complete plane.

    After some tests, I realized that when the painting is applyed to the edges of the plane ...introduces a borderline with a dark color...so I'm assuming this is the borderline you mention.

    As such, I'm applying now the filter just to interior areas of the plane.

    Here's then the new photos processed in such a way, are they acceptable now ?

    thanks again for your time and help
    /rgds
    'Borderline' is used as an adverb meaning 'nearly' or 'almost', in other words the image may be rejected for that issue, or it may not. Thus, you could have 'borderline centering' (may be rejected for centering, or may not be) just as easily as you could have 'borderline color' (color may or may not be an issue). It is not a specific feature or characteristic of the image itself.

    If you're looking for 'borderlines' as an actual feature of the image, you will not find any. Sharpening with masks will not cause the types of halos present in some of the images you have posted.

  13. #73
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    'Borderline' is used as an adverb meaning 'nearly' or 'almost', in other words the image may be rejected for that issue, or it may not. Thus, you could have 'borderline centering' (may be rejected for centering, or may not be) just as easily as you could have 'borderline color' (color may or may not be an issue). It is not a specific feature or characteristic of the image itself.

    If you're looking for 'borderlines' as an actual feature of the image, you will not find any. Sharpening with masks will not cause the types of halos present in some of the images you have posted.
    Thx dlowwa

    #just as easily as you could have 'borderline color' (color may or may not be an issue).
    That was the borderline I was thinking.

    #Sharpening with masks will not cause the types of halos present in some of the images you have posted.
    yes, so far I was been able to identify halos associated with clarity, luminance and other processing.... but I now believe I'm able to see them.
    I'm now using a different approach to remove shadows... applying just locally in a layer...therefore not changing/forcing all image "shadows".
    ( I don't have PS, to handle it automatically )

    How about the two photos, do they look ok now. ?

    /rgds

  14. #74
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post

    How about the two photos, do they look ok now. ?
    First is a bit high, and the second a bit flat. Otherwise should be ok.

  15. #75
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dlowwa View Post
    First is a bit high, and the second a bit flat. Otherwise should be ok.
    Thx dlowwa

    /rgds

  16. #76
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    How about these ?

    /rgds
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0313.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	1,020.7 KB 
ID:	17993   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0303-2.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	1.05 MB 
ID:	17994   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0288_2.jpg 
Views:	19 
Size:	1.07 MB 
ID:	17995   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0281-3.jpg 
Views:	20 
Size:	1.05 MB 
ID:	17996   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0121-1.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	963.7 KB 
ID:	17997  


  17. #77
    JetPhotos.Net Crew pdeboer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    near EHAM/AMS
    Posts
    3,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    How about these ?

    /rgds
    No. 1-3 are a tad dark, no. 1 is also soft, 4 and 5 look acceptable.

  18. #78
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pdeboer View Post
    No. 1-3 are a tad dark, no. 1 is also soft, 4 and 5 look acceptable.
    thx pdeboer

    well, a tad is a tad, is a tad...

    (I must say, usually I left them dark... in order to reduce any non essential processing, I left them dark.
    TAP Portugal planes are a nigthmare to me... the blacks and whites are always wrong/dificult to assess... so they end up dark, not the case here anyway )

    .. so do they look better/ok now ?

    /rgds
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0303-2 (1).jpg 
Views:	16 
Size:	823.0 KB 
ID:	18027   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0288_2 (1).jpg 
Views:	13 
Size:	807.0 KB 
ID:	18028  

  19. #79
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    124

    Default

    How about this series of big birds ? thx

    /rgds
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0674_2.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	1.18 MB 
ID:	18063   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0738_2.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	1.42 MB 
ID:	18067   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0859_2.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	1.35 MB 
ID:	18066   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0798_2.jpg 
Views:	17 
Size:	1.33 MB 
ID:	18064   Click image for larger version. 

Name:	DSC_0825_2.jpg 
Views:	18 
Size:	1.27 MB 
ID:	18065  


  20. #80
    JetPhotos.Net Crew
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    6,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by a.m. View Post
    How about this series of big birds ? thx

    /rgds
    4 needs CW rotation and 5 is a touch dark, otherwise quality looks ok.

Posting Permissions

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