Hi All. Would appreciate your feedback on the below Cathay Pacific A350. Thanks!

The tip of the hor.stab. is cropped out, which will likely lead to a motive rejection. I suggest to include the entire stabilizer. In addition, I'd recommend 1600px wide for this one. Looks good otherwise.

Excellent. Thanks for your feedback

A couple more for consideration

The two 788 shots are backlit so no chance I'm afraid. The Tigerair is blurry and the Jetstar 320 has something odd going on on the underside of the aircraft (particularly the central part of the belly and port wing) - looks like some sort of manipulation which isn't acceptable here.

Those two B787 are backlit which makes them hard to make it here.
Tiger: Looks underexposed and blurry. Blurry maybe due to Heat haze i think.
Jetstar looks pretty weird to me. Did you apply lots of Noise Reduction to it ? Lots of detail are lost especilly the bottom and the wings. Besides, the sky makes me feel that it also has compression issue which might be also due to noise reduction. Overall, quality is pretty poor.
BTW, you can start only one thread and post all your photos there instead of opening so mant threads

Cheers,
Harry

Just after some feedback on the below picture. It is the same as the one at the top of this thread however after actioning (or thinking I did) the feedback received here and submitting, it has been rejected due to being blurry and soft around the tail and nose and would be better at a smaller size. Happy to take the feedback on board and no dramas.

I have dropped the size down to 1400 wide. Do you think this is enough, too much, or just right, and do you think it has fixed the issues raised?

Thanks in advance.

Looks fine to me!

Do you think it could be increased in size or is this about right?

I think you should appeal the rejected photo.

Thanks. Will do.

Appealed and accepted

A couple of new ones for feedback .. thanks in advance

.. and another .. Thanks

TG A359: Likely wouldn't make it since it looks like the sun isn't out in that one and makes the aircraft underexposed, kinda like the QF 789 in one of your prior threads.

SQ A330: The lighting is better, but still not the greatest as it mostly covers the top of the fuselage and parts of the aircraft look underexposed. Not so sure about that one.

The exposure on the MH and Tigerair look ok to me. I'll leave sharpness and quality for someone else to comment on since I'm not on my computer right now.

Thanks for the feedback. I might trash the Thai as I have others, and see if I can salvage the SQ .. again, I have others that may be more usable.

Would be keen for feedback on the MH and Tiger sharpness and quality as they looked pretty good in editing but I'm still getting my eye in for whats good and what's not.

Hi All

Just after a bit of feedback on these please. (Pics are in thumbnail mode. Please click to open)

Thanks in advance for your guidance.


. . . . .

. . . .

Jetstar 1: blurry, OS, too much noise reduction or similar (giving it a 'smudged' look), quality, will not make it
Jetstar 2: OS (jaggies everywhere)
Qantaslink 1: OS, too much noise reduction or similar (giving it a 'smudged' look)
Qantaslink 2: Too much NR, might work in 1200px wide
Cathay 1: Too much NR, OS, very poor editing on the left wing
Cathay 2: Too much NR, OS
Qantaslink 3: Too much NR, OS, halos
Qantas A380: toplit (poor light), OS, some halos
Jetstar 3: Too much NR, OS, soft/blurry cockpit
Qantas 3: Too much NR, OS

Pretty much all seem to be editing/workflow related, so we should probably review that if you like. Can you sum up what your editing process is?

If you still happen to remember, what noise reduction values did you use on those images? I typically use between 10% and 20% when I apply a sharpening filter to my image.

Can I ask why there is a need to use NR on images taken in bright sunshine?

Karl

Thanks for the feedback guys. From the sounds of it, some of these are just not going to work .. so I will move on from these, but with a bit of re-editing some may (or may not) be reworkable.

I am still getting used to editing and working out right from wrong (obviously!) however .. I am using Lightroom Classic CC and my editing process in general is:

* Crop (16x9) - but just a loose crop initially
* Auto set Exposure / Tone etc.
* Add Lens corrections (as high as it will go)
* Sharpen & Noise Reductions - Also mostly add full corrections
* Boost the Clarity and dehaze just a little bit
* Re-crop to the final size including straightening and positioning.

If the picture looks workable from there, I may play with the exposure slightly to increase the pop of the plane, slightly play with the luminance and saturation (mainly the blue as most of my pics so far have been on clear blue sky days) and also I have started playing with the sharpness to try and reduce some of the jagged edges it can cause but to be honest I am still getting used to what is too sharp and what is not sharp enough. I am currently shooting in RAW however some of the earlier ones I might still work with were shot in JPEG.

Although normally shot in bright sunlight, I have been putting full noise reduction on because i was noticing thee sky and image weren't as crisp as I would like and had some grainyness (not sure if thats the right term) and when I applied the noise it went away. Also pretty much all of my early attempts to add pictures to the site were getting knocked back for noise (amongst other things) so I figured the best way to deal with it was to apply full noise correction ... although it sounds like I may now have gone too far.

As an example of some that are identified as OS and Too Much NR - Cathay 3 (the one flying away from the camera) has a Sharpening setting of 139 and a Noise Reduction setting of 96, Qantaslink 2 has a Sharpening setting of 107 and a Noise Reduction Setting of 97, and the Jetstar 2 has a Sharpening setting of 117.

Hopefully this helps to understand where I am at at the moment and that I can use your feedback to improve faster. Hopefully with a bit of re-editing guidance I can get these to look great (and acceptable for upload!)

Thanks again for you help.
Chris.

P.S. - I also re-ooked at the Cathay with the "poor edit" on the left wing. The original is actually just weird itself so the edit has likely exaggerated a bad picture. Should have noticed this and not uploaded. All part of the learning process

This is the Qantaslink 2 resized to 1200 and pulled back on the noise reduction

I can see obvious Halo around the aricraft. The quality looks marginal to me i think.And the upper-right angle has slight vignetting i think.

Hi All

I have just had this photo rejected for being Underexposed and Low Contrast which is OK and sounds like it can be fixed in editing .

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... a533646506

I have re-edited to increase the exposure and contrast (below). Do you feel its enough or should be increased more?



Thanks for your feedback.
Chris

From exposure perspective, i prefer the last one. But i agree with the low contrast rejection since it can have more contrast but the exposure looks not bad to me. In addition, Halo should given at the last time since i can see slight Halo above the aircraft and around the cockpit area. Did you apply lots of Highlight & Shadow ? Or if you are Nikon User ... remember to switch off the D-Lighting fuction which will cause Halo effect.

Cheers,
Harry

Thanks Harry. I don’t think I adjusted the highlights and shadows too much but I’ll check. I too preferred the previous exposure but I guess that’s why I’m not on the screening team .

I have already resubmitted so we’ll see how we go.

Your feedback is much appreciated.

Hi All

Just after some feedback on this image. The plane itself is actually not the best colour in real life so just after some thoughts on if this will affect chances of acceptance.

Have managed to get a few accepted recently so I think my editing is getting better but just need a second opinion.

Thanks Everyone.

Hi chris,
This 787 does better than before at some respects. But i think it still has some problems.
First of all, the overall quality of it looks not so great since you can see that lots of the details of the planes are lost especially the bottom and the wing.
Besides, it still has slight halo around the aircraft especially the tail part.
Also, it can have bit of more contrast i think just a little bit.

I have reviewed the post you posted before, especially your process of editing. I found that you are using lots of Noise Reduction when you edit those photos. I think that's the reason why lots of details are lost. Besides, using too much Noise Reduction might be a possible factor to cause halo issue. I would suggest you to have a check to your Origin pic by using Equalize in PS to see if the origin get Halo or not. If the orgin is clear so it would be the problem of your editing process.

Cheers,
Harry

Thanks Harry. Your feedback is always appreciated - and helps!

In relation to the jetstar 787 I think I have been trying to salvage a bad series of photos and its just not working. Might have to dump them all and start again with a fresh photo shoot. I do tend to use a bit of noise reduction and I guess this has become a habit from a series of early rejection I was receiving for noise. Figured the best way to stop that rejection was to boost it as far as it would go but it looks like this has had a not so good effect. Will try to pull back on it.

Halos are a new one for me as I haven't had a halo rejection so I am probably not looking for them as much as I am with noise, exposure and framing which have been the main rejections previously. Although I have it, I don't use Photoshop for editing (I am using Lightroom) but I will look to run future images through the equalise function as you suggest and see what is happening in the picture.

Thanks again for your guidance.
Chris

Halos are a new one for me as I haven't had a halo rejection so I am probably not looking for them as much as I am with noise,

If you are afraid of Noise Issue, reducing noise in Camera RAW can be a way for u.

Thanks .. I'll check it out

Hi All

Just after some more feedback please

Thanks
Chris

... and another couple ...

Thanks

Just my 2 cents:
Qantas: halos around right wing, left main gear, bottom of tail
E-7: backlit
C-17: high in frame, needs CW rotation, engines look a bit blurry/soft but RAAF tltles/reg on tail/engine vortex generator look oversharped.

I really don't see why you would use noise reduction for images shot in bright sunlight. Even at ISO400, noise shouldn't really be a problem if you're getting the exposure right and you're not over-saturating colours or adding too much contrast. NR basically blurs an image, so using it excessively is going to lead to some ugly and very visible side-effects.

Karl

Qantas: halos.
Poseidon: too much NR, backlit, oversharpened. Will not make it.
C-17: oversharpened, high in frame, looks like there was a stain or something on the lens, as the top of the tail & hor. stab. look a bit 'foggy'.

Thanks Guys. Appreciate the feedback as always.

QF - I took some advice from earlier in my thread about using Equalize in PS to check for these. Being a new editing step in my workflow I didn't see anything obvious but when directed to specific spots I can see what you mean. I might try to see if I can re-edit these out and re-post for review.

E-7 / Poseidon / Wedgetail (here in Aust.) - I could re-edit the NR and OS but being backlit I cant ... this look like it's going in the bin.

C-17 - Could fix the OS but the original framing is high so I tried to bring it down as much as I could but I am now at the edge of the original picture so no more room to move. Didn't notice the tail issue but when pointed out it really is obvious. I guess sometimes it's easy to overlook the obvious when looking at specific detail. I have a 2nd pic which I will upload for review. Its a nose shot so hopefully I have framed / cropped this OK as I have not posted a nose for review yet.

In relation to Noise, I think I have covered why my NR has been up before. I have been trying to pull back on this but looks like I still need to pull back some more.

Thanks again everyone.
Chris

Just a couple of follow ups from my last post.

QF - I have reduced the NR significantly to see if I can get rid of the halos. Hopefully I have??




C-17 - This is my first attempt of a nose crop. It's a different pic to the one above so hopefully the quality is better??



Thanks in advance
Chris

Regarding the C-17, front part looks sharp (titles, reg etc actually oversharped), but from "Air Force" backwards it looks blurry.
Regarding the new Qantas, halos look a little better but still visible near the front part of the right wing.
Also the image has become too noisy now. ISO 800 is way too high (ISO 200 would have been fine in this weather). Therefore I suggest selective NR: apply it to the sky and a/c shadow areas only. To avoid adding halos while applying NR to the sky, you should leave a little room at the a/c-sky border (please compare the two images below to see what I mean). Also you need to make sure never to sharpen the sky as this will add noise.

Here is Photoshops auto-select:


Here is my manual selection with a little room at the a/c-sky border. This is especially important at areas where the a/c is darker than the sky (i.e. bottom half and the right wing). For the top half (where the fuselage is white), the Photoshop auto-select will be fine too.

C-17: Needs a tighet crop (on the left of engine #2 and just to the left of engine #3. Also needs more contrast. It looks a soft/blurry towards the wing, so maybe some selective sharpening in those areas will help.

Qantas: still some halos around the wing/fueslage/sky area. It also has a noisy sky now (which makes sense with reduced NR, but now it's too noisy). What were your settings for that photo?

Thanks for the feedback guys. The more detailed the better for me at this stage. I am not an experienced photoshop user so the detailed explanation here is appreciated. It sounds like it can be salvaged, I just need to work out how to do it! (not sure why this shot at ISO 800 although probably shooting in auto settings rather than manual is a pretty good assumption).

Thanks for the advice on the C-17 crop Kas. I'll see if I can get this right too as it would be my first in this style.

As for the QF these are the current Lightroom settings on the picture as uploaded here - https://image.ibb.co/jL79Jy/QF_Settings.jpg .

I'll keep working on these ones. Thanks again

Chris

Seeing the EXIF on the top of the lightroom screenshot, there really is no need to shoot ISO800 in those conditions. Personally, my 'sweet spot' is F8 with ISO100 (shooting in Av mode on Canon). This will result in a shutter speed of some 1/400-1/500. That's sufficient. There is no real need to bump everything up to 1/1600 or that much ISO. Of course a wrong setting is easily made and I've had to learn the hard way as well in the past Lowering the noise will eliminate the need for the noise eduction, which in turn will give a better quality photo.

As for the halos, those are likely caused by your clarity, shadows and highlights settings. I wouldn't recommend anything more than +/- 20 for shadows/highlights and clarity to max 10.

Thanks Kas. Just went back and had a look at some of the ones I am working on and definitely the ones that require the least work are all pretty much in the same "sweet spot" you describe. Everything else is taking much more work. A lot of my earlier pics were shot in the camera's auto modes so they are all over the place. I think settling on the sweet spot settings will lead to a much better outcome.

I'll go back and have a look at the clarity / shadows / highlights on the QF and see if this helps

Also, I have re-cropped the C-17. Do you think this looks any better?



Thanks

The crop needs to be moved a bit to the left to give the #3 engine a bit more breathing space. Otherwise the crop look fine.Can't comment on the quality/contrast (if you adjusted that), since I'm not at my screening PC.

Thanks .. is this better?

I did try to slightly adjust near the top of the right wing in the area of the "air force" lettering, but not too much

... and is the QF any better?

The crop on the C-17 looks fine. Can't comment on the rest yet due to earlier mentioned reason.
The halos on the Qantas seem to be gone, so that's a good improvement. Unable to comment on the rest of it.

Excellent. Thanks

Just had this rejected for Bury and Soft. Thoughts and is it fixable?

https://imgproc.airliners.net/photos/air ... f3bddc1361

Thanks

Hard to say whether the EY is blurry as the parts that look it most are in the engine's jet-wash. A smaller size would likely hide any blur as the front certainly looks passable to me (with further sharpening). I'd say it could also use a contrast boost.

The C-17 to me looks way too OOF after the word 'Royal' and I doubt anything you do will fix that. Most likely a DOF issue as your shutter was certainly fast enough!