Hi everyone! I have two photos recently screened and somehow, both of them got rejected only because of noise; one of them was uploaded only once, and the other was uploaded multiple times after addressing the reasons why it got rejected. I was wondering if one or both of these photos are fixable; here are the two photos:

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 0a7285a6e7
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... ed748d6bdb

Let me know what you guys think!

fsx98 wrote:

Hi everyone! I have two photos recently screened and somehow, both of them got rejected only because of noise; one of them was uploaded only once, and the other was uploaded multiple times after addressing the reasons why it got rejected. I was wondering if one or both of these photos are fixable; here are the two photos:

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 0a7285a6e7
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... ed748d6bdb

Let me know what you guys think!

There is visible noise in both photos. Did you use any noise reduction in your workflow? I think it's necessary and will fix easy the noise problem.

Vinicius

I rejected both of those.

The first one should be alright after the noise removal, although when I look at it again it also could use some more brightness.
The second one is quite marginal (even without the noise) and personally I wouldn't upload it. But that's your call to make.

Thanks to both! Currently I'm using Adobe PhotoShop to edit these photos, and I was wondering if the program has a noise reduction feature built in the software?

and I was wondering if the program has a noise reduction feature built in the software?

If you took those photos with RAW file that would be easy to deal with as there is a function which can reduce noise in Camera RAW. Well, if you took those with JPEG File you can use " Blurry" ---> " Surface Blurry " function in PS with 0.2 0.2.However, i don't recommend to use it too much as it will hurt the quality of the photo and it might cause " Compression " issue. For me, most of time i reduce noise at Camera RAW window as i took RAW file.

Cheers,
Harry

HarryLi wrote:

and I was wondering if the program has a noise reduction feature built in the software?

If you took those photos with RAW file that would be easy to deal with as there is a function which can reduce noise in Camera RAW. Well, if you took those with JPEG File you can use " Blurry" ---> " Surface Blurry " function in PS with 0.2 0.2.However, i don't recommend to use it too much as it will hurt the quality of the photo and it might cause " Compression " issue. For me, most of time i reduce noise at Camera RAW window as i took RAW file.

Cheers,
Harry

I've used this feature on the DAL 757 photo and I found some grainy spots to be smoothed out! Thanks! Now I'll try to reupload the photo!

fsx98 wrote:

HarryLi wrote:

and I was wondering if the program has a noise reduction feature built in the software?

If you took those photos with RAW file that would be easy to deal with as there is a function which can reduce noise in Camera RAW. Well, if you took those with JPEG File you can use " Blurry" ---> " Surface Blurry " function in PS with 0.2 0.2.However, i don't recommend to use it too much as it will hurt the quality of the photo and it might cause " Compression " issue. For me, most of time i reduce noise at Camera RAW window as i took RAW file.

Cheers,
Harry

I've used this feature on the DAL 757 photo and I found some grainy spots to be smoothed out! Thanks! Now I'll try to reupload the photo!

Sorry about that the values should start with 2 and 2. Besides, as Kas mentioned before it also can be brighter so if is possible you can make it little bit brighter too. And i recommend you to take with RAW FILE so that would be easier to edit later because using blurry will hurt the quality of photos seriously i think. I seldom use this fuction.

fsx98 wrote:

Thanks to both! Currently I'm using Adobe PhotoShop to edit these photos, and I was wondering if the program has a noise reduction feature built in the software?

For best results, you should only apply the noise reduction to the areas of the photo that need it. In your DL photo, that is the darker areas of the image - the blue and red areas on the tail, the blue engines, the dark areas under the wing, and maybe the grass.

I would select those areas only, and use Photoshop's Noise Reduction tool (it's under Filter --> Noise --> Reduce Noise).

Now, to be honest, what I see in your photo doesn't really look like noise when I zoom in. It looks like some weird kind of compression. It actually resembles what I used to see in old versions of MS Paint. Does it show up in the full-size, unedited image?

vikkyvik wrote:

fsx98 wrote:

Thanks to both! Currently I'm using Adobe PhotoShop to edit these photos, and I was wondering if the program has a noise reduction feature built in the software?

For best results, you should only apply the noise reduction to the areas of the photo that need it. In your DL photo, that is the darker areas of the image - the blue and red areas on the tail, the blue engines, the dark areas under the wing, and maybe the grass.

I would select those areas only, and use Photoshop's Noise Reduction tool (it's under Filter --> Noise --> Reduce Noise).

Now, to be honest, what I see in your photo doesn't really look like noise when I zoom in. It looks like some weird kind of compression. It actually resembles what I used to see in old versions of MS Paint. Does it show up in the full-size, unedited image?

It is hard to tell, but it's some kind of grain in the blue areas of the aircraft; also, in my experience of editing aircraft photos, I have never used Photoshop's Noise Reduction tool because of the complexity of its settings; any advice on how to better use the noise reduction tool on Photoshop?

any advice on how to better use the noise reduction tool on Photoshop?

As i mentioned before , using RAW file to take photo would be easier to edit later and also can get good quality of photo. There is a function to reduce noise in Camera RAW and it's easy to control i think. And using Camera RAW to reduce noise can cause less effect in the quality of photos.
Besides, you don't need to set up any thing to your computer because each Photoshop would have its own Camera RAW which means that when you open a RAW Photo in PS it would jump to Camera RAW window first and then you can adjust the photos first at the window ( Like color, exposure, noise reducetion etc..) and then turn to PS to do more works. Unless your PS Version or Camera Version is too low to support your file and you'll need to update the Camera RAW but most of files can be done. You can try to shoot some photos of RAW FILE with little bit high ISO and then edit them to see the result. ( Not necessary to take planes pictures to experience ).

Cheers,
Harry

fsx98 wrote:

any advice on how to better use the noise reduction tool on Photoshop?

In general, go easy. For minor noise in shadows, I might use the following:
Strength: 1
Preserve Details: 0%
Reduce Color Noise: 30%
Sharpen Details: 0%

And I always leave Remove JPEG Artifact unchecked.

In general, I never go above the following:
Strength: 2
Preserve Details: 20%
Reduce Color Noise: 70%
Sharpen Details: 0%

When I use similar settings on the noisy areas on your shot, it doesn't do too much, which is partially what makes me think it isn't necessarily noise.

What ISO did you use for the shot?

Thanks for the suggestions all! Will keep these considerations in mind when I edit photos!

fsx98 wrote:

any advice on how to better use the noise reduction tool on Photoshop?

I usually first use the noise reduction function of the RAW converter in Photoshop. If it's still too noisy afterwards, I use dfine2, which is a piece of software that comes with Google's NiK collection. It's available on the web for free).

airkas1 wrote:

fsx98 wrote:

any advice on how to better use the noise reduction tool on Photoshop?

I usually first use the noise reduction function of the RAW converter in Photoshop. If it's still too noisy afterwards, I use dfine2, which is a piece of software that comes with Google's NiK collection. It's available on the web for free).

Usually I edit with JPG, but should I start editing with RAW, how can I launch the RAW converter via Photoshop? I currently use a Nikon D5000 camera and RAW pictures are associated with .NEF. Are NEF files associated with RAW converter programs?

If you double-click the .NEF files, they should open in Photoshop. There you have the ability to tweak all kinds of things before actually processing it in Photoshop as a JPG.

airkas1 wrote:

If you double-click the .NEF files, they should open in Photoshop. There you have the ability to tweak all kinds of things before actually processing it in Photoshop as a JPG.

I'll keep this into consideration when editing; thanks!

Hello everyone! Here's an update on Photo 4696097 (Delta B757 reedit): Photo is rejected for the following:
Halos
Noise
Oversharpened
Personal Message
-"Halos around tail, winglet and reg oversharpened, nose and windows soft"
Soft
Underexposed



Wondering if this photo could be fixed any further, provided that all advices in this post are considered?

Hi Victor,
Would you please copy the Address of this photo here ? Because the way that you used to post photo above is only avaliable to the photos that have been accepted to the DB. But from the link that you posted before ( Without your re-editing ) i have to say that it indeed Underexposed and the REG indeed has Oversharpened trace. Besides, after using " Equalize" to this one in my PS i can see apparent Halo around the tail you can have a check on your own. As this is your re-editing version so i can'tcomment too much BASE on the last one.

Cheers,
Harry

HarryLi wrote:

Hi Victor,
Would you please copy the Address of this photo here ? Because the way that you used to post photo above is only avaliable to the photos that have been accepted to the DB. But from the link that you posted before ( Without your re-editing ) i have to say that it indeed Underexposed and the REG indeed has Oversharpened trace. Besides, after using " Equalize" to this one in my PS i can see apparent Halo around the tail you can have a check on your own. As this is your re-editing version so i can'tcomment too much BASE on the last one.

Cheers,
Harry

Here is the link:
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 7d0a70d3e7

Noise problem seems better than the last one that you posted. But the sky is still apparent. And it indeed seems underexposed also can be judged from the histogram in PS. Regarding to the Halo problem, i used PS "Equalize " to check and indeed see apparent Halo around the tail part , you can have a check on your own.Nose part seems to be Soft or Blurry to me and as SC said in the Personal Message, the REG indeed OS.I can see obvious Jaggys around the REG and winglet. IMO, i will not recommend you to continue upload this one as the general quality is quiet low i think. Hard to satisfy the standard of A.net.

Cheers,
Harry

HarryLi wrote:

Noise problem seems better than the last one that you posted. But the sky is still apparent. And it indeed seems underexposed also can be judged from the histogram in PS. Regarding to the Halo problem, i used PS "Equalize " to check and indeed see apparent Halo around the tail part , you can have a check on your own.Nose part seems to be Soft or Blurry to me and as SC said in the Personal Message, the REG indeed OS.I can see obvious Jaggys around the REG and winglet. IMO, i will not recommend you to continue upload this one as the general quality is quiet low i think. Hard to satisfy the standard of A.net.

Cheers,
Harry

Will keep that in mind; thanks for helping me understand what the halos look like!

fsx98 wrote:

HarryLi wrote:

Noise problem seems better than the last one that you posted. But the sky is still apparent. And it indeed seems underexposed also can be judged from the histogram in PS. Regarding to the Halo problem, i used PS "Equalize " to check and indeed see apparent Halo around the tail part , you can have a check on your own.Nose part seems to be Soft or Blurry to me and as SC said in the Personal Message, the REG indeed OS.I can see obvious Jaggys around the REG and winglet. IMO, i will not recommend you to continue upload this one as the general quality is quiet low i think. Hard to satisfy the standard of A.net.

Cheers,
Harry

Will keep that in mind; thanks for helping me understand what the halos look like!

You're welcome. Some halo is obvious at the original photos. And some of halos might caused by editing.Thus, it's necesary to use Equalize to check the photos before you save or finish all editing steps. Also can check dirty spot through it. If you are using Nikon DSLR ,i would recommend you to turn the "D-Lighting " off because as i know that this function of Nikon would cause HALO effect at the origin (Of course I'am Canon User). But if you are not Nikon User that would be none of your business.

HarryLi wrote:

fsx98 wrote:

HarryLi wrote:

Noise problem seems better than the last one that you posted. But the sky is still apparent. And it indeed seems underexposed also can be judged from the histogram in PS. Regarding to the Halo problem, i used PS "Equalize " to check and indeed see apparent Halo around the tail part , you can have a check on your own.Nose part seems to be Soft or Blurry to me and as SC said in the Personal Message, the REG indeed OS.I can see obvious Jaggys around the REG and winglet. IMO, i will not recommend you to continue upload this one as the general quality is quiet low i think. Hard to satisfy the standard of A.net.

Cheers,
Harry

Will keep that in mind; thanks for helping me understand what the halos look like!

You're welcome. Some halo is obvious at the original photos. And some of halos might caused by editing.Thus, it's necesary to use Equalize to check the photos before you save or finish all editing steps. Also can check dirty spot through it. If you are using Nikon DSLR ,i would recommend you to turn the "D-Lighting " off because as i know that this function of Nikon would cause HALO effect at the origin (Of course I'am Canon User). But if you are not Nikon User that would be none of your business.

Will keep that in consideration! Thanks again!