Guys,

Please have a look at these pictures.

1.
20180801-ECMML-EHGG-0C2A2612 by Marcel Dijk, on Flickr

2.
20180801-ECMRA-EHGG-0C2A2584-2 by Marcel Dijk, on Flickr

Both these planes a re pretty new to a.net. Do these make a change of being accepted and if not what needs to be done?

Kind regards

First shot is noisy, grainy, and underexposed. Second shot is blurry, noisy, low in contrast, and high in frame.

Quality doesn't seem to be there on both unfortunately.

Runway28L wrote:

First shot is noisy, grainy, and underexposed. Second shot is blurry, noisy, low in contrast, and high in frame.

Quality doesn't seem to be there on both unfortunately.

#1
Suggested solutions? Can this photo be fixed?
Noisy:Bump noise reduction
Grainy:Ditto
Underexposed:Bump exposure + contrast

#2
Suggested solutions? Can this photo be fixed?
Blurry:Sharpening
Noisy: Bump noise redunction (but seems to be cross controlling since sharpening and noise redution seem to cancel each other out?)
Low in contrast: Bump contrast
Low in frame: Obviously do a better crop job

Hi Marcel,

I'm not on my screening computer, so going off this screen and what Evan mentioned;

#1: grainy and noisy are the same and can generally be fixed by using a bit more noise reduction (or shooting at a lower ISO to eliminate the issue at the root). It does look a little underexposed, which can indeed be solved by adding exposure. In additon, I would say the photo looks flat, so indeed additional contrast is needed. Pretty much your own assessment of the photo as per above.

#2: Same thing as #1, except for the fact that blurry can only be solved by taking a better (non-blurry) photo. Blurry can not be fixed by adding extra sharpening, as that will make the photo look even worse (very oversharpened). We call this 'oversharpened to compensate blurry'. Also, just to be sure, its high in frame, not low in frame.

Photo 1 has issues that can seemingly be fixed, photo 2 can't be fixed. Perhaps you have a better frame of the sequence for -MRA?

Hi Kas,

Thank you for your feedback, and Evan also!

#1. I'll try to fix this thanks. If I remeber correctly I had to crop quite a bit for this picture. Cropping too much can also cause noise. This is why shooting the whole frame (milimeters!) is so important.

#2. This one is FUBAR because I made a SNAFU when shooting this one. I'm not sure what destroyed it. Wrong autofocus point, heat haze, or f/9 (f/5,6*1,6 crop factor) is too low.

EC-MRA retry.

20180725-ECMRA-EHGG-0C2A1957 by Marcel Dijk, on Flickr

20180725-ECMRA-EHGG-0C2A2037 by Marcel Dijk, on Flickr

I do have my own assessement of what needs to be done but I'll wait what you guys make of it.

Best regards, this is really helpful.

First one is blurry, hazed, low in contrast, and low in frame. It also wouldn't make it motive-wise since the grass is blocking most of the nose wheels.

Second image is underexposed and high in frame. Good news is that both can be fixed easily. I would boost the whites and/or brightness sliders and lower the frame a bit.

Runway28L wrote:

First one is blurry, hazed, low in contrast, and low in frame. It also wouldn't make it motive-wise since the grass is blocking most of the nose wheels.

Second image is underexposed and high in frame. Good news is that both can be fixed easily. I would boost the whites and/or brightness sliders and lower the frame a bit.

Thank you for your feedback. I will try to fix these images and re-post. This could take a while because spare time is at a premium right now.

Evan, I doubt there is any fixing the first one due to the amount of heat haze. I'm assuming that was confusing wording and you meant both reasons for the second image. The first one is not going to be fixable, the second is. Also, crop factor doesn't affect aperture. If you have a cheaper lens, you'll especially want to be stopping down to f/8 or so.

DL747 wrote:

Evan, I doubt there is any fixing the first one due to the amount of heat haze. I'm assuming that was confusing wording and you meant both reasons for the second image. The first one is not going to be fixable, the second is. Also, crop factor doesn't affect aperture. If you have a cheaper lens, you'll especially want to be stopping down to f/8 or so.

As far as I know the crop factor effects both milimeters and apperture but I could be mistaken. I use L-series lenses so quality should not be a major factor.

I think the conclusion is that the original #1 EC-MLL (flying) can be fixed and the #2 Retry of EC-MRA (parked) can also be fixed.

DL747 wrote:

Evan, I doubt there is any fixing the first one due to the amount of heat haze. I'm assuming that was confusing wording and you meant both reasons for the second image. The first one is not going to be fixable, the second is. Also, crop factor doesn't affect aperture. If you have a cheaper lens, you'll especially want to be stopping down to f/8 or so.

I meant both issues in the second photo, which were underexposed and HiF. I didn’t mean to say that both images themselves were fixable, as I knew the whole time that the first image clearly can’t be fixed. My bad if my message came across like that. Probably should’ve clarified that first hand.

Runway28L wrote:

DL747 wrote:

Evan, I doubt there is any fixing the first one due to the amount of heat haze. I'm assuming that was confusing wording and you meant both reasons for the second image. The first one is not going to be fixable, the second is. Also, crop factor doesn't affect aperture. If you have a cheaper lens, you'll especially want to be stopping down to f/8 or so.

I meant both issues in the second photo, which were underexposed and HiF. I didn’t mean to say that both images themselves were fixable, as I knew the whole time that the first image clearly can’t be fixed. My bad if my message came across like that. Probably should’ve clarified that first hand.

You're good; I understood, but I wanted to make sure we didn't confuse the OP.

Thanks guys.

Okay, to make this water tight.

These two can be fixed.

20180801-ECMML-EHGG-0C2A2612 by Marcel Dijk, on Flickr

20180725-ECMRA-EHGG-0C2A2037 by Marcel Dijk, on Flickr

Correct me if I'm wrong,

Yep, both of those images are fixable.

OK, please review these modified versions.

0C2A2612 by https://www.flickr.com/photos/marceldijk/

0C2A2037 by https://www.flickr.com/photos/marceldijk/

Sorry to say, but:
-MML: blurry, a bit overexposed, low contrast. Likely not going to make it due to blurryness.
-MRA: low contrast and soft (not sure if the original is blurry or soft, but *might* be salvagable with more sharpening).