Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Runway28L wrote:Hello all,
I've finally decided to use photoshop and upload after nearly 4 years of taking photos.
Anyway, here are two of my first few photos I've gone and edited. Since I'm new with this sort of thing, I understand that they probably aren't the best:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/154462236@ ... ed-public/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/154462236@ ... ed-public/
Thanks
vcruvinel wrote:Runway28L wrote:Hello all,
I've finally decided to use photoshop and upload after nearly 4 years of taking photos.
Anyway, here are two of my first few photos I've gone and edited. Since I'm new with this sort of thing, I understand that they probably aren't the best:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/154462236@ ... ed-public/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/154462236@ ... ed-public/
Thanks
[I'm not a A.net screener]
Hi,
In my monitor both appears soft and also lack some contrast. But will be nice to wait a second opinion.
Best,
Vinicius
jelpee wrote:N887 : The first looks OK; the second edit is visibly oversharpened.
N744P: looks soft indeed..almost blurry
USAF 00461:looks oversharpened.
Jehan
jelpee wrote:Are you applying sharpening to before or after you resize the image? If you apply it before resizing, it will only be visible when viewed at its original size. In my workflow (entirely in jpeg and in Photoshop Elements 11) I level, crop, resize, adjust brightness, contrast and color) and then sharpen. I find that resizing as the last step results in degradation of image quality. Your images look like they suffer from compression which is impacting the quality and clarity. Hope this helps.
Jehan
Miguel1982 wrote:As Jehan pointed out, there are some steps that you can do barely at any time in the process (exposure, contrast, color adjustments) and some others that you want to do once you have resized the image to your final size, such as sharpening and noise reduction. That is only because the downsizing of the image has an important effect on both parameters, as it increases sharpness and reduces noise (to a point).
Also note that if the original image was blurry, even slightly, it will be nearly impossible to find the right sharpening balance. It will easily go from soft to showing jaggies and halos. From the examples you posted, the N851UA seems to suffer from some blur.
Cheers,
Miguel
vikkyvik wrote:N829DN: quality is not good; soft/oversharpened, sky is noisy. Yellow cast.
N815UA: Color is fine, but quality still not good - same soft/oversharpened look and noisy sky.
N301PA: same deal as N815UA, but also looks blurry.
Runway28L wrote:vikkyvik wrote:N829DN: quality is not good; soft/oversharpened, sky is noisy. Yellow cast.
N815UA: Color is fine, but quality still not good - same soft/oversharpened look and noisy sky.
N301PA: same deal as N815UA, but also looks blurry.
Ok thank you. As much as it's frustrating, it definitely helps getting honest feedback.
I'm fairly certain at this point that something is up with my camera as most of my shots are not coming out sharp enough. I am going to check my settings again... pretty sure something with the shutter speed or shooting mode that needs to be changed as I'm prone to motion blur and it doesn't really help that I don't ever use my tripod to take photographs, only for videos since it's a hassle to transport and set up.
vikkyvik wrote:If you're willing, upload a non-resized, unedited version of one of those shots and post the link. We could help you out in diagnosing the problem.
Runway28L wrote:vikkyvik wrote:If you're willing, upload a non-resized, unedited version of one of those shots and post the link. We could help you out in diagnosing the problem.
Alright, here are the original versions. I'll just include N851UA and N301PA for the sake of the conditions I shot them in.
N851UA: http://www.flickr.com/photos/154462236@ ... ed-public/
N301PA: http://www.flickr.com/photos/154462236@ ... ed-public/
vikkyvik wrote:I can only open those to about 1400 pixels. Is that the size of the original images?
airkas1 wrote:vikkyvik wrote:I can only open those to about 1400 pixels. Is that the size of the original images?
I can see them 1620x1080 (which Flickr indicates is the original).
Conditions seem to be ideal, but they look blurry and compressed. Not sure what the cause for that could be, other than maybe some in-camera processing?
airkas1 wrote:vikkyvik wrote:I can only open those to about 1400 pixels. Is that the size of the original images?
I can see them 1620x1080 (which Flickr indicates is the original).
Conditions seem to be ideal, but they look blurry and compressed. Not sure what the cause for that could be, other than maybe some in-camera processing?
Runway28L wrote:Also, the RAW format on my camera (which I use 100% of the time) automatically disables every extra feature in my settings such as D-Lighting.
Runway28L wrote:I have noticed compression in some of my photos, even in some of the original files
airkas1 wrote:I would suggest uploading them and the sharing the url here. That way we can view them without interference of Flickr quality. You can always delete them from the queue if they turn out to have flaws.
HarryLi wrote:Those URLs are not the photos' URL.These will lead us to our Photo Corner. Would you please check it again and copy the correct URLs here ?
Cheers,
Harry
Runway28L wrote:HarryLi wrote:Those URLs are not the photos' URL.These will lead us to our Photo Corner. Would you please check it again and copy the correct URLs here ?
Cheers,
Harry
Ok my apologies. Is it alright if I just give out the photo ID's instead?
#4795369
#4795367
airkas1 wrote:I could only find the 747: https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... ff311dda3a
It's quite blurry and very underexposed. Very poor quality, sorry. It's not going to make the cut.
airkas1 wrote:If you go to your Photo Corner --> "Screening" tab. Click on the photo. It now appears larger. Right-click the image and copy the URL.
-----
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 1566727480
https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 56212bf3ad
Both are blurry and not the greatest quality. The Southwest also seems exceptionally soft. Both will not make it, sorry.
airkas1 wrote:That latest Southwest you linked is also blurry and quite poor quality. The blurriness is quite apparent for a trained eye (no offense meant). I'll look at your workflow more in detail tomorrow.
HarryLi wrote:Would you like to have a check to the Quality Level when you save them after all Editing ? Especially LR because if the Quality began very poor at LR it will become worse at PS. Make sure that PS Saving Quality is 12 ( the Best) and LR also Is the best.
Besides, what re-size way did you use in PS ? The default setting or you choose others ? Maybe it will influence more or less.
All of the above are just my assumptions.
Cheers,
Harry
airkas1 wrote:I used Dropbox in the past and in my opinion it was better than Flickr. But since they changed their policies, I've been unable to link photos using their software.
jelpee wrote:Both images appear over exposed, over sharpened, blurry and seems to be showing signs of compression. Wonder if you are losing image quality when uploading?
Jehan