Pre Screen Feedback Please

ChrisLait · Thu May 10, 2018 2:48 pm

Thanks. Might try the smaller size EY and resubmit and see what happens :-)

dutchspotter1 · Sat May 12, 2018 8:23 am

Qantas has quite some jaggies now, but noise levels look acceptable for me.
Etihad: aft part does look soft and needs more contrast indeed.

ChrisLait · Sat May 12, 2018 10:01 pm

Interestingly I just had the QF A330 rejected for noise...

ChrisLait · Fri May 18, 2018 12:34 am

Hi Everyone

I am thinking I should give up on this one but thought I would seek some input before I do. I have submitted a couple of times and rejected all .. most recently for Blurry, Halos and Soft. I have run it through photoshop since rejection to bring back the noise reduction so hopefully this has solved the halos issue and have decreased the photo size to try and minimise the impact of blurry & soft. (below is a 1/2 size link)

Do you think this is now OK, or should I just give up on this one and move on.

Thanks

ChrisLait · Fri May 18, 2018 4:33 am

This is another one I am not quite ready to give up on. It was originally rejected for Compression, Noise and Contrast. (original upload - https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... cfaefb0fa3)

I have increased the contrast and also worked on the noise. Not sure how so solve the compression rejection ... is this possible? I have also shrunk it down in size from the original rejected image so that any flaws aren't exaggerated.

Your thoughts are most appreciated! (even if that means give up and move on

)

ChrisLait · Fri May 18, 2018 8:17 am

.. and another couple that has been a bit of a work in progress. Qantaslink was a little oversharp and both had too much noise reduction .. and I have also made the file size smaller to the one that was originally posted here for feedback

Thanks in advance ..

ChrisLait · Fri May 18, 2018 9:05 am

another work in progress..

.... sorry, I probably should have these all in 1 post .. just didn't expect to get to all of them today!

HarryLi · Fri May 18, 2018 11:14 am

Hi,
For the VH-VUW, i think you should give since it does look pretty blurry which might be caused by Heat Haze i think and it's irreparable.
Regarding to Jetstar, i don't know why the SC gave you Noise rejection since i don't see any obvious noise from it. Instead, it seems to suffer a lot from Noise Reduction because lots of details of the aircraft were lost which leads to Compression issue. Besides, you can crop it tighter, especially the right side of the image.
The first Quantas Link seems overexposed to me Quality and Sharpness looks iffy and marginal. It seems to have bit of Heat Haze i think.
CX A359 : I will let it go since it's pretty blurry due to heat haze or you did not focus it successfully. What's more, it probably will be rejected by Compression as well since lots of deatils were lost due to the noise reduction i think.
The second Qantas Link : I will let it go as well as it looks pretty blurry. It won't make it here i think.

Cheers,
Harry

ChrisLait · Fri May 18, 2018 11:31 am

Thanks Harry .. I guess I will just move on from all of these. Another opinion is always valued.

JakTrax · Fri May 18, 2018 3:08 pm

ChrisLait, your biggest issue seems to me to be the use of noise reduction, which images captured in bright sunlight really shouldn't require. You are trying to address the problem but until you address the cause you're going to struggle. The best thing you can do is change your technique so that you are not using NR; this should in turn make it much easier to process the images to an acceptable standard.

Take the latest QF 717, for example: ISO1600, f/10, 1/4000th shutter; you could have used ISO200, at f/8, and got a shutter of easily 1/800th, which is plenty.

ChrisLait · Fri May 18, 2018 10:37 pm

Thanks JakTrax. I agree. I have been using NR to try and compensate for some of my earlier photos being shot in one of the profile settings on the camera instead of Manual mode. my more recent images are in the same range you describe and they are much better. For some reason I just didn't want to give up on these ones even though I knew they were going to be hard to bring up to a.net standards. I'll move on from these and with my settings now sorted, hopefully a lot better images coming!.

Thanks for the feedback, always appreciated. Sometimes you just need to hear it from someone else!

ChrisLait · Sat May 19, 2018 7:08 am

Any thoughts on this one would be welcomed. Have re-editied from previous version in this thread.

Thanks

airkas1 · Sun May 20, 2018 4:36 pm

The 717 is blurry noise and you've got a dead blue pixel on engine #2?
The Thai is too red and needs better color balance.

ChrisLait · Mon May 21, 2018 2:36 am

Thanks Kas. Have given up on the 717. The Thai sounds fixable with some color balance so I will re-edit this one.

Thanks as always!

ChrisLait · Tue May 22, 2018 1:22 pm

Just had this photo rejected for Halos, Soft and People??. I can accept the halos and Soft and work on these but people? Surely this is a mistake? The plane is 1500ft off the ground!! :-)

(although if I am not seeing someone can you please let me know where they are?)

Thanks

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 60adbf1ba0

HarryLi · Tue May 22, 2018 1:47 pm

Surely this is a mistake?

LOL, i think it should be a mistake made by SC. But another two reasons are correct i think. BTW, it looks bit of Reddish to me and the quality is marginal i think.

Cheers,
Harry

airkas1 · Tue May 22, 2018 2:06 pm

The "People" box is next to the "Personal Message" box. Simple misclick. Personal message was: "Bright halo around the tail.".

ChrisLait · Tue May 22, 2018 4:09 pm

Thought so but just checking as I’ve never had this one before

ChrisLait · Sun May 27, 2018 3:57 am

Question for the screening team ... what is your guide on rotating propellers? I am looking at some quite nice Q400 shots but they are on approach so obviously the props are spinning.

Just seeking guidance before I put too much work into post production.

Thanks

airkas1 · Sun May 27, 2018 9:45 am

For airborne aircraft, propblur is actually much nicer to look at than frozen props. But we accept both.

ChrisLait · Sun May 27, 2018 10:59 am

Thanks Kas. I will give them a try then and see if I can make them up to a.net standard

ChrisLait · Wed May 30, 2018 4:38 am

Hi all. Rejected for Soft. Is there anyway to fix it or should I just give up. Have re-edited and resubmitted twice.

Thanks as always

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... a1727ef26f

Runway28L · Wed May 30, 2018 5:37 am

Hi Chris,

I feel like your photo could use slightly more sharpening, possibly another 5-10%. Parts of the fuselage looks soft to me as well at the "Dream)liner" and "Etihad.com" titles.

You could also use the sharpening tool on some areas such as the nose wheel, door outlines, and metal on the nacelles... but be very careful when doing so. However, that's up to you.

ChrisLait · Wed May 30, 2018 6:56 am

Awesome. Thanks for that. I’ll give it another go before I give up on this one!

ChrisLait · Wed May 30, 2018 10:19 am

Also after feedback on this one. Same rejection as above .. soft. Have also submitted this one a couple of times after a number of edits. Happy to accept that it is soft, just need some guidance as to where so I can fix.

Thanks

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... d5c8baaa25

airkas1 · Wed May 30, 2018 1:44 pm

Pretty much the entire aircraft I guess. Same for the Etihad.

Select the sky, then inverse the selection. Duplicate layer --> filter --> sharpen --> smart sharpen --> add sharpening.

ChrisLait · Wed May 30, 2018 10:53 pm

Thanks, I’ll give that a go.

ChrisLait · Fri Jun 01, 2018 11:12 am

Hi All .. a question for future reference...

What level of jet wash / heat haze is acceptable for a plane on take off, especially on wet / cold days. This picture was taken this morning and while not good enough for upload, it does show a good deal of heat haze / water coming off the runway so is a good reference guide for me to know if an acceptable level of haze or not.

(Please don't worry about anything else that may be not up to scratch with this one as I have no intention of uploading this one)

Thanks as always :-)

Chris

spompert · Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:01 pm

Hello Chris, there`s not really heathaze in the photo but more jetwash. This kind of jetwash is acceptable as long as it doesn`t really affect the plane it self. The same goes for heathaze. As long the plane (with more planes the subject) is not affected it`s okay. I personally think that jetwash gives a nice addition to the photo in some cases, like in yours.

Greets
Stefan

ChrisLait · Fri Jun 01, 2018 12:11 pm

Thanks Stefan. I don't get to shoot early wet early mornings often so I wasn't sure the acceptable level. I too like this look so I'm glad to hear its not discouraged

ChrisLait · Fri Jun 01, 2018 2:03 pm

Just after some feedback on this one before I upload. I think the plane is good and I like the sunset colours however I don't haven't taken too many pictures with motion blur yet. This would be the first one I am happy with to a point of uploading.

Just after some feedback before I do. Is it good enough?

Thanks
Chris

HarryLi · Sat Jun 02, 2018 3:46 am

Hi Chris,
I'm sorry that the front gear and title look blurry to me and some other parts look slight soft to me. Size is kind to too big for its quality i think.

Regards,
Harry

ChrisLait · Sun Jun 03, 2018 2:27 am

airkas1 wrote:
Pretty much the entire aircraft I guess. Same for the Etihad.

Select the sky, then inverse the selection. Duplicate layer --> filter --> sharpen --> smart sharpen --> add sharpening.

I think I have followed your guidance on how to sharpen them up a bit correctly .. are these any better than the rejected versions?
Thanks

Etihad Rejected - https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... a1727ef26f

Qantas Rejected - https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... d5c8baaa25

Runway28L · Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:46 am

Hey Chris...

How much sharpening did you add to both? They now look OS to me.

The QF A330 also has a lot of background noise.

ChrisLait · Sun Jun 03, 2018 3:52 am

Honestly, I just used the auto settings in the Sharp Smarten tool in photoshop .. I am not a photoshop user .. normally I use lightroom .. so I assumed this tool would provide the "smarts" on what was right.

Will re-edit to bring the sharpness back a bit. Will also look at the noise on the QF.

Thanks for the feedback

ChrisLait · Sun Jun 03, 2018 4:25 am

Is this any better? Went back to the rejected photo and started again. Have removed sky noise and have slightly sharpened up the plane to a point hopefully it is now between the original soft and the previous edit over sharp.

Thanks

Runway28L · Sun Jun 03, 2018 5:08 pm

The last edit of the QF looks better now.

To be honest, the auto function for sharpening (or any other setting too) isn't very accurate in my opinion and that's why I never use it. I much prefer using the smart sharpen function in PS.

ChrisLait · Mon Jun 04, 2018 2:36 am

Excellent. Thanks for your guidance. (... and I'll stay away from auto functions in the future! :-)

)

ChrisLait · Wed Jun 06, 2018 10:54 am

Thanks

airkas1 · Wed Jun 06, 2018 11:03 am

Chris,

Regarding your photos currently in the queue:
- I would advise pulling the Shanghai, ANZ and Qantaslink. They are underexposed and need more contrast.
- The Qantas 737 fuselage looks odd. A bit 'washed out'/flat (low contrast).
- The Fokker looks flat as well.

ChrisLait · Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:19 pm

Thanks Kas. Will pull them all and re-edit. To fix flat, is this simply more contrast in your view?

Also, do you think the QF and Etihad above are now suitable to go back in the screening queue?

airkas1 · Wed Jun 06, 2018 2:26 pm

ChrisLait wrote:
To fix flat, is this simply more contrast in your view?

Usually, yes. But your fuselages seem quite 'milky', so not sure how that will work out.

ChrisLait wrote:
do you think the QF and Etihad above are now suitable to go back in the screening queue?

Yes.

ChrisLait · Thu Jun 07, 2018 3:37 am

Thanks

ChrisLait · Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:04 am

airkas1 wrote:
Chris,

Regarding your photos currently in the queue:
- I would advise pulling the Shanghai, ANZ and Qantaslink. They are underexposed and need more contrast.
- The Qantas 737 fuselage looks odd. A bit 'washed out'/flat (low contrast).
- The Fokker looks flat as well.

I have re-edited each of these to increase the exposure and contrast. I thought they looked ok before but you were right, more exposure and contrast and they look much better. This is where they are at the moment. Do you feel they are good enough to go back into the screening queue?

Air New Zealand - https://image.ibb.co/nnR98T/Air_New_Zea ... 518_V2.jpg
Shanghai Airlines - https://image.ibb.co/eJg1oT/Shanghai_Ai ... 518_V2.jpg
Qantaslink F100 - https://image.ibb.co/m7FY2o/Qantaslink_ ... 518_V2.jpg
Qantaslink Q400 - https://image.ibb.co/hPVGNo/Qantaslink_ ... 518_V2.jpg
Qantas 737 - https://image.ibb.co/kv8E8T/Qantas_737_ ... 518_V2.jpg

Also, this one was rejected for being Soft, High in Frame and Low Contrast which is no problem, I can accept that. https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-cor ... to/5018425
I have re-edited (for the 5th time ...I am going to get this one right!!) . Do you think this has addressed the issues identified in the last rejection?
https://image.ibb.co/d8HAF8/Qantas_787_ ... 117_v5.jpg

Thanks
Chris

ChrisLait · Thu Jun 07, 2018 10:27 am

This one was also rejected - for Colour, Soft, Halos, and a personal message of "red". Do you think this re-edit has fixed these issues up?

https://image.ibb.co/c92fho/Thai_A350_H ... 418_V3.jpg

Thanks Again :-)

ChrisLait · Thu Jun 07, 2018 12:01 pm

Just coming back to this one after a little bit. Was originally rejected for Soft, Blurry and Halos. I have re-edited since the rejection so I hope I have fixed these up now.

Rejected Version - https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 79fe9be3f1

Re-edited version - https://image.ibb.co/hHhu8T/Virgin_Aust ... 318_v3.jpg

Thanks in advance for the feedback :-)

Chris

airkas1 · Thu Jun 07, 2018 12:59 pm

ChrisLait wrote:
Air New Zealand - https://image.ibb.co/nnR98T/Air_New_Zea ... 518_V2.jpg
Shanghai Airlines - https://image.ibb.co/eJg1oT/Shanghai_Ai ... 518_V2.jpg
Qantaslink F100 - https://image.ibb.co/m7FY2o/Qantaslink_ ... 518_V2.jpg
Qantaslink Q400 - https://image.ibb.co/hPVGNo/Qantaslink_ ... 518_V2.jpg
Qantas 737 - https://image.ibb.co/kv8E8T/Qantas_737_ ... 518_V2.jpg

The Qantas 737 fuselage still looks overexposed/washed out. The rest look passable.

ChrisLait wrote:
Also, this one was rejected for being Soft, High in Frame and Low Contrast which is no problem, I can accept that. https://www.airliners.net/user/photo-cor ... to/5018425
I have re-edited (for the 5th time ...I am going to get this one right!!) . Do you think this has addressed the issues identified in the last rejection?
https://image.ibb.co/d8HAF8/Qantas_787_ ... 117_v5.jpg

Now it's oversharpened, and low in frame again. If it's the 5th time already, I suggest to let it go.

ChrisLait wrote:
This one was also rejected - for Colour, Soft, Halos, and a personal message of "red". Do you think this re-edit has fixed these issues up?
https://image.ibb.co/c92fho/Thai_A350_H ... 418_V3.jpg

The whites of the fuselage still have a bit of a magenta tint. The light and quality isn't great.

ChrisLait wrote:
Rejected Version - https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... 79fe9be3f1
Re-edited version - https://image.ibb.co/hHhu8T/Virgin_Aust ... 318_v3.jpg

A bit better, but honestly I would leave it. The light is quite harsh and the photo is hazed (especially the tail).

ChrisLait · Thu Jun 07, 2018 1:13 pm

Thanks Kas. Glad to know I got most of them up to scratch quickly this time! 4 of those pulled from screening yesterday are now back in the queue. I will play with the QF 737 a little more an if I can't make it work I will give up quicker than the others I have been hanging on to. The QF 787, Thai and Virgin are all binned and i'm moving on!

Thanks again

airkas1 · Thu Jun 07, 2018 2:41 pm

By the way, the other Qantas 737 in the queue is blurry (especially the nose)

dutchspotter1 · Thu Jun 07, 2018 3:45 pm

airkas1 wrote:
By the way, the other Qantas 737 in the queue is blurry (especially the nose)

You're taking "pre screen" quite literally :lol:

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net