Opinion, Tips and Improvements

vcruvinel · Thu Aug 31, 2017 11:39 am

airkas1 wrote:
It's a poor crop, too much space on the left, while the tail on the right side is cut off. Also a double with the wide view that you uploaded.

I did this crop to get some details from the wing, but I will correct to center the image! Only wants to show the body and wing in this one, but I don't intend to upload, just for practice!

about he colors, sharpness...any point?

vcruvinel · Fri Sep 01, 2017 4:07 am

any suggestion and improvements to this tail shot?

vcruvinel · Fri Sep 01, 2017 5:48 pm

jelpee · Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:29 pm

Tail shot: Needs clockwise rotation. Image is over-exposed and low contrast to me. The angle of the light is not the best.
Full body shot: Again, over-exposed; lighting is quite harsh.

Jehan

airkas1 · Sun Sep 03, 2017 7:45 am

I just accepted the B762. It's soft and not great in terms of quality, but rarity makes up for it in this case.
For the Lear, I would upload the full photo. It's also not great and a bit blurry, but perhaps rarity will make up for it as well.

vcruvinel · Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:14 am

Many thanks for all the feedbacks. I will not upload the tail shot, only the full body from the airplane. I will do a better editing in the learjet before upload.

airkas1, many thanks! I`m trying to improve my skills in editing the photos too. taking the opportunity, I working on this two new photos (I`d taken many shots, rare ones too, but i will focus in one or two at time, I need to work in my job too lol)

find attached the shots, tell me if it`s acceptable and how I can improve as aways.

vcruvinel · Mon Sep 04, 2017 2:46 am

airkas1 · Tue Sep 05, 2017 7:08 pm

Wing photo: motive (too empty), CCW. Won't make it
GOL: motive (gears blocked), underexposed (backlit). Won't make it.
Nose: Yellow, oversharpened. Has a chance, but no guarantees.

vcruvinel · Tue Sep 05, 2017 8:28 pm

airkas1 wrote:
Wing photo: motive (too empty), CCW. Won't make it
GOL: motive (gears blocked), underexposed (backlit). Won't make it.
Nose: Yellow, oversharpened. Has a chance, but no guarantees.

Thanks for the feedback! What about this ones?

jelpee · Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:39 pm

PR-PFN is OK except for the unmotivated crop of the window on the left side which is fixable. Otherwise it is acceptable for me.

Jehan

vcruvinel · Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:52 pm

jelpee wrote:
PR-PFN is OK except for the unmotivated crop of the window on the left side which is fixable. Otherwise it is acceptable for me.

Jehan

I will correct this detail. What about the FAB5966? what can I improve?

airkas1 · Wed Sep 06, 2017 12:58 pm

The Tucano is passable for me and I agree with Jehan on the PR.

vcruvinel · Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:04 pm

airkas1 wrote:
The Tucano is passable for me and I agree with Jehan on the PR.

airkas1, there is no shot from FAB5966 in the DB, so I uploaded and get rejected with this reasons (happened yesterday):

Category (ok, I will review but I think I put in the right one, no problem with this)
Soft
Heat Haze

With this feedback, you can help me in which points of the photo I can improve something? The shot is really soft?

About the PR: I will do the corrections and upload! many thanks

airkas1 · Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:11 pm

I did see the haze, but considering that it's a new frame, I'd say it's passable. It's not really soft, but the haze is the worst issue and also the unfixable issue. Do you perhaps have a better photo?

vcruvinel · Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:12 pm

airkas1 wrote:
I did see the haze, but considering that it's a new frame, I'd say it's passable.

I upload again with priority (new registriation in DB and brazilian air force event shot) or do an Appeal?

airkas1 · Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:14 pm

You can upload it again if you want.

vcruvinel · Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:15 pm

airkas1 wrote:
You can upload it again if you want.

Ok, for me there is no problem, I will upload now and review the category. many thanks!

airkas1 · Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:30 pm

Added it, but please keep an eye on the following:
- Builder is ONLY applicable if the aircraft is license-built. So not applicable in this case.
- The wrong generic type and version were used.

I have corrected both of the above, so this time you don't need to do anything. That said, I just opened the photo and all blues are purple... Likely a wrong color profile. Can you please convert to the right color profile (sRGB) and reupload?

vcruvinel · Wed Sep 06, 2017 1:40 pm

airkas1 wrote:
Added it, but please keep an eye on the following:
- Builder is ONLY applicable if the aircraft is license-built. So not applicable in this case.
- The wrong generic type and version were used.

I have corrected both of the above, so this time you don't need to do anything. That said, I just opened the photo and all blues are purple... Likely a wrong color profile. Can you please convert to the right color profile (sRGB) and reupload?

airkas1, thanks for all the corrections! I will remember this points! But another thing, I put Embraer A-29B Super Tucano, right? Is not correct? Just corrected and upload again now.

About the PR, I will upload after correct the window issue, but it's normal queue shot, nothing special.

airkas1 · Wed Sep 06, 2017 2:56 pm

Well, yes and no. You put the generic type as A-29B and the version as Super Tucano. That was the wrong one.
The correct info is:
generic type - Embraer EMB-312H/314 Super Tucano
version - Embraer A-29B Super Tucano (EMB-314)
(all listed in the dropdown menus)

Be sure to use the reupload feature in the photo corner (in the accepted tab, next to the photo on the right side) to reupload the photo. You don't need to put it in the queue again.

vcruvinel · Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:06 pm

airkas1 wrote:
Well, yes and no. You put the generic type as A-29B and the version as Super Tucano. That was the wrong one.
The correct info is:
generic type - Embraer EMB-312H/314 Super Tucano
version - Embraer A-29B Super Tucano (EMB-314)
(all listed in the dropdown menus)

Be sure to use the reupload feature in the photo corner (in the accepted tab, next to the photo on the right side) to reupload the photo. You don't need to put it in the queue again.

airkas1, sorry! It was my mistake to not ask you the details from each field. I will pay more attention next time. I use this option from the photo corner, as you describe!

I use this option!

After finish PR-PFN I will work again in the PT-OBD...many many thanks fro all tips, tricks and attention!

airkas1 · Wed Sep 06, 2017 3:29 pm

No problem! We all learn each day

And yes, that's the correct link.

vcruvinel · Wed Sep 06, 2017 4:56 pm

airkas1 wrote:
No problem! We all learn each day
And yes, that's the correct link.

yes! for sure.

let`s go back to PT-OBD

and also PR-PFN

airkas1 · Fri Sep 08, 2017 5:41 pm

PR-OBD still looks more or less the same (quite marginal) and will really depend on who screens the photo. Also best to mention that it's a new reg in the comment to screener field.
PR-PFN looks alright

vcruvinel · Fri Sep 08, 2017 6:49 pm

airkas1 wrote:
PR-OBD still looks more or less the same (quite marginal) and will really depend on who screens the photo. Also best to mention that it's a new reg in the comment to screener field.
PR-PFN looks alright

airkas1, I will improve more the PR-OBD. I aggree with you and there is some aspects I can do better.

About the PR-PFN, I will upload!

More two shots:

HarryLi · Sat Sep 09, 2017 3:17 pm

The business Jet seems Overexposed toward the nose. But not serious.The B727 looks bit of soft and seems like heat haze ? Not quiet sure .

vcruvinel · Sat Sep 09, 2017 7:28 pm

HarryLi wrote:
The business Jet seems Overexposed toward the nose. But not serious.The B727 looks bit of soft and seems like heat haze ? Not quiet sure .

Harry, do you think it’s necessary to correct the exposure in the nose? It was a very very sunny day here!

About the 727, I completely agree with you. I saw again the image and it’s a bit soft (I will do more sharpening). Abou the heat haze, can you tell me in which areas there is?

Many thanks!

HarryLi · Sun Sep 10, 2017 9:43 am

The nose and the gear make me feel Heat Haze but i am not quiet sure maybe just soft.
The exposure of the Business Jet seems OE to me but maybe good for other. You can wait more replys about them.

Cheers,
Harry

vcruvinel · Sun Sep 10, 2017 10:10 am

HarryLi wrote:
The nose and the gear make me feel Heat Haze but i am not quiet sure maybe just soft.
The exposure of the Business Jet seems OE to me but maybe good for other. You can wait more replys about them.

Cheers,
Harry

Harry,

Many thanks for the feedback! I will see again and improve

Best

vcruvinel · Sun Sep 10, 2017 1:05 pm

Following the tips from our friends, I did some improvements in my workflow. See if have some difference.

vcruvinel · Sun Sep 10, 2017 2:17 pm

exposure and sharpening correct. Opinions!

airkas1 · Sun Sep 10, 2017 2:28 pm

The 727 is overexposed at the top of the nose and also a bit blurry. Doubt it will make it, sorry.
The Lear should be passable for a new and rare frame.
The Phenom is backlit, which unfortunately is unfixable.

vcruvinel · Sun Sep 10, 2017 4:56 pm

airkas1 wrote:
The 727 is overexposed at the top of the nose and also a bit blurry. Doubt it will make it, sorry.
The Lear should be passable for a new and rare frame.
The Phenom is backlit, which unfortunately is unfixable.

airkas1, no problem, I will work in other photos from the 727, I will post the original and ask which is the best

About the Learjet I just upload and use the last one, it was the best one, not too much exposure

And about the Phenom, I really do not see the backlight. Can you please show me where? I will learn more if you show me. I have other good shots from the Phenob, I will do the same as 727 before start editing

Thanks!!

airkas1 · Sun Sep 10, 2017 5:03 pm

The Phenom looks underexposed due to the angle of the light. Maybe not so much backlit as a bit of a mix between back/front lit. I also see a bit purple color fringe on the landing lights and the engine cowling.

Regarding the Lear, I just accepted it. However:
- If the aircraft does not carry titles, it is always "Untitled". If the aircraft does carry titles, you should obviously use that name. This means that "Private" and "Unknown" are not acceptable for the airline field.
- The ctaegory for a business jet is always "business", not "private". No matter if it's privately owned.

I've already corrected both of the above, but FYI for next time.

vcruvinel · Sun Sep 10, 2017 5:44 pm

airkas1 wrote:
The Phenom looks underexposed due to the angle of the light. Maybe not so much backlit as a bit of a mix between back/front lit. I also see a bit purple color fringe on the landing lights and the engine cowling.

Regarding the Lear, I just accepted it. However:
- If the aircraft does not carry titles, it is always "Untitled". If the aircraft does carry titles, you should obviously use that name. This means that "Private" and "Unknown" are not acceptable for the airline field.
- The ctaegory for a business jet is always "business", not "private". No matter if it's privately owned.

I've already corrected both of the above, but FYI for next time.

Nice! Really understood the points from the Phenom. In this case, as I have the support from airliners.net team, I will upload the original ones first (there is many points that I can’t see obviously and the team can). I have two another shots from this aircraft and will work in next days.

About the points from their LJ, I will not forget anymore! Already see the acceptance.

Also I have another shots which do not have registration in the site DB. I will work in this ones after improving some aspects from my workflow, principal about sharpening.

Many thanks as away!

vcruvinel · Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:16 am

New shot from the event! FAB2004. No shots from the all aircraft body in the site DB (only a tail shot).

jelpee · Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:47 pm

Both are quite blurry for me.

Jehan

vcruvinel · Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:52 pm

jelpee wrote:
Both are quite blurry for me.

Jehan

Blurry in the aircrafts? Need more sharp?

HarryLi · Mon Sep 11, 2017 2:24 pm

The first one looks not quiet bad to me but the Heli looks blurry especially the tail and the main body and i think the Heli also has Level issue ?

Cheers,
Harry

vcruvinel · Mon Sep 11, 2017 2:34 pm

HarryLi wrote:
The first one looks not quiet bad to me but the Heli looks blurry especially the tail and the main body and i think the Heli also has Level issue ?

Cheers,
Harry

Harry, I will do more sharpening in the body and about the level I think you're right, I need to correct the vertical reference!

vcruvinel · Mon Sep 11, 2017 3:51 pm

other angle from the PR-PHX (original). This one is ok to edit?

HarryLi · Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:28 pm

This one seems blurry at the front part.Such as the gear and the nose maybe due to heat haze ? I guess. And the purple fringe is more obvious in this one.

vcruvinel · Tue Sep 12, 2017 2:42 pm

HarryLi wrote:
This one seems blurry at the front part.Such as the gear and the nose maybe due to heat haze ? I guess. And the purple fringe is more obvious in this one.

Harry, there is any possible way to correct this purple points?

HarryLi · Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:09 pm

I downloaded this one and did some quick editing to it and here is the result :
https://www.flickr.com/photos/153041003 ... ed-public/

My steps :
Imagine - adjust - selective color - choose Carmine - All options switch to +100% but the Carmine Option switch to -100% - see the result.

Cheers,
Harry

vcruvinel · Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:29 pm

HarryLi wrote:
I downloaded this one and did some quick editing to it and here is the result :
https://www.flickr.com/photos/153041003 ... ed-public/

My steps :
Imagine - adjust - selective color - choose Carmine - All options switch to +100% but the Carmine Option switch to -100% - see the result.

Cheers,
Harry

Harry, wow! Looks very good! Many thanks for explanation and describe to me the workflow to get this result. I will do your steps today and post the results here!

Many, many thanks!

HarryLi · Tue Sep 12, 2017 3:32 pm

Ah, you are welcome, but the heat haze or maybe blurry issue would be difficult to solve even can't be deleted i guess. If it's possible ,maybe choosing a better one is better .

vcruvinel · Tue Sep 12, 2017 4:41 pm

HarryLi wrote:
Ah, you are welcome, but the heat haze or maybe blurry issue would be difficult to solve even can't be deleted i guess. If it's possible ,maybe choosing a better one is better .

Harry, the heat haze that been doing my the planes engine is a big problem? I have another shot...But it's very dificult to no get the heat haze from the engines here

vcruvinel · Tue Sep 12, 2017 6:03 pm

Did some improvements in the B727

jelpee · Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:28 pm

Re. the B727, needs a little more brightness (check right side of histogram) and IMO a touch of sharpening and some noise reduction in the shadow areas. Should be OK then.

Jehan

vcruvinel · Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:45 pm

jelpee wrote:
Re. the B727, needs a little more brightness (check right side of histogram) and IMO a touch of sharpening and some noise reduction in the shadow areas. Should be OK then.

Jehan

Nice, I will correct and post again for prescreen approval

many thanks

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net