Uploading to Anet/JP? Pre-Screen Here!

[RomNYC]

NYCAers, your thoughts on this? Thanks in advance :)

[gonzalu]

Nice shot Rom... To be really anal, I would move it left in frame a few pixels until it is PERFECTLY centered... also, A.net may consider it a bit overexposed, perhaps JP.net as well... did you get my e-mail about hardware calibration?

Also, at this size, it looks a bit soft. I say you should post an 1000px wide (minimum) or anythign up to 1600px wide (max) and then let us judge... Judging it at this resolution will not be a good final opinion...

[RomNYC]

Nice shot Rom... To be really anal, I would move it left in frame a few pixels until it is PERFECTLY centered... also, A.net may consider it a bit overexposed, perhaps JP.net as well... did you get my e-mail about hardware calibration?

Also, at this size, it looks a bit soft. I say you should post an 1000px wide (minimum) or anythign up to 1600px wide (max) and then let us judge... Judging it at this resolution will not be a good final opinion...

Thanks Manny. I do agree on the overexposure, I realized that as soon as I sent my previous message. The actual photo is 1024px wide, but I didn't want to congest the thread with a bigger file. You may view it full size here: http://www.instantscaptured.com/Port...7wdK5&lb=1&s=O

Let me know if the additional edit looks better?

Re: hardware calibration, remember who you're talking to ;) I know what it means, but I have no idea what to do about it. Is it even worth doing on a 6 year-old 13-inch Mac?

Thanks for your input!

[gonzalu]

Rom,

Is the ORIGINAL out of camera image OOF? or blurred in any way? The 1023px wide image you uploaded looks soft/oversharpened... which means it was soft to start and then oversharpened to compensate. The jaggies look rough and still looks soft... Can you send me the OUT OF CAMERA RAW or the JPG off line? I can give you a better opinion that way. This particular one is not going to have an easy time during screening :)

Hardware calibration works on ANY computer :) I have yet to find one that won't do it.

Thankfully, all Macs have decent panels to begin with so your road will be fairly straight without much traffic. You have to buy a piece of hardware that sits in front of your screen and measures the colors and brightenss of the screen and then createsa CUSTOM color profile you install on your operating system. Sometimes the changes can be DRAMATIC to not that much. But at least you have the same or as close to similar look as that of a screener or Cary, myself and anyone else here who has a hardware calibrated monitor.

My reds should be about 99.99% exactly the same as that shown on Cary's monitor... that I can guarantee... Software calibration will be VERY poor but BETTER than NOTHING! ... the very least you can do is calibrate your Gamma manually...

http://macs.about.com/od/usingyourma...-assistant.htm

[RomNYC]

Will do.

It does not appear OOF to *me*, but you may have another opinion. Let me know. My originals DO look soft, no question about that. That was shot at either 1/1250 or maybe even 1/1600, why don't I get something sharper? Sometimes I question the way I follow an aircraft with the camera as I am shooting. Might be something to work on over there.

[gonzalu]

Rom, it is not related to shutter speed or motion blur I am afraid. Looks to me to be lens quality and conditions. So they look ghosted in sharp contrast areas... a few things contribute to this..

With GOOD system components, this is likely caused by Heat Haze or Turbulence as is the case with my images from that day. I TOO have the dreaded ghosted edges on contrast boundaries like where the titles edges meet the white fuselage. Unfortunately, I was en-route to (unnamed location) when this plane came in so I don;t have an exact comparison, but, my Caribbean Air 737s do look slightly mushy as well.

Another thing that causes this is poor lens quality. Lower end lenses have much less corrective optics (less elements) no Aspehrical elements (those elements that are NOT perfectly spherical on purpose to focus different wavelengths properly on the focus plane. Those are HAND POLISHED/CUT and are expensive) or expensive coatings ...

Finally, a filter mounted in front of your lens could also help (by help I mean HELP NEGATIVELY by introducing TWO more air to glass surfaces that can reflect light and reduce contrast) depending on the light angles, shading of the front element, etc.

In the case of your image it is my feeling that the lens construction combined with the absolute horrible conditions on the 26th (Super Cold and Full Bright Sun near Water) contributed to the less than stellar results, myself included.

Tried to do the best I could in post... however, your resulting CROPPED image is less than 2900px wide so reducing that to even 1000px will not help hide the flaws completely ... that said, it can still be passable, you be the judge... (images are 1024px wide but display here compressed by the vBulletin Theme... please right-click view image in Firefox to view original FULL SIZE and full quality... )

ORIGINAL



EDIT



...

Also be careful with those nasty dust spots... they are quite visible...

[RomNYC]

Not a lot in my favor on this one! Thanks Manny, this failure at least gave me a nice photography lesson from you Hopefully I'll find a couple of decent shots from that session, in spite of the conditions.

[gonzalu]

Rom, I think the shot properly edited (feel free to use my edit) has a good chance with JetPhotos but maybe not so much with A.net... you should try, your mileage may vary. Depends on the screener sometimes if the first screener decides he/she likes it, the rest of the team may not see it and get accepted straight through. If the team gets to vote on it as it is done often lately, your chances of pleasing them all is much tougher :/

[Kris V]

How would these fair for Airliners?
(Please be harsh)

[gonzalu]

Beautiful shots Kris...

The Everts Cargo is a bit low in frame and may get a motive rejection. Not sure but, I see no other DC-6 shots cropped like this in the db. Maybe if you cropped by the wing root? I don;t really know.

The 77F looks a bit dark; could use some more exposure. Not so much to kill the mood, but someone may feel it should be brighter MOTIVE-wise... if the intent is to show the sunset, keep it bright and more yellow. Your call.

I recently got a similar shot as the Everts rejected about three times, three different crops, all motive related due to the crop. That is a tough one and now I just stay away from that sort of crop... YMMV

[Kris V]

Beautiful shots Kris...

The Everts Cargo is a bit low in frame and may get a motive rejection. Not sure but, I see no other DC-6 shots cropped like this in the db. Maybe if you cropped by the wing root? I don;t really know.

The 77F looks a bit dark; could use some more exposure. Not so much to kill the mood, but someone may feel it should be brighter MOTIVE-wise... if the intent is to show the sunset, keep it bright and more yellow. Your call.

I recently got a similar shot as the Everts rejected about three times, three different crops, all motive related due to the crop. That is a tough one and now I just stay away from that sort of crop... YMMV

Thanks Manny, I'll see what I can do about the Everts...

[gonzalu]

Kris, in my opinion, the Everts may look better in 3x2 instead of 4x3 ratio... to my eyes a long fuselage looks best in a long thin frame rather than a square one, but of course, that is all subjective

[Kris V]

Kris, in my opinion, the Everts may look better in 3x2 instead of 4x3 ratio... to my eyes a long fuselage looks best in a long thin frame rather than a square one, but of course, that is all subjective

I must say I have to agree with you on that also.

[RomNYC]

Thoughts on this one? Main point of concern is the composition, since I purposefully moved the plane to the right to show the moon.

Full size: http://www.instantscaptured.com/Port...KVQ5r&lb=1&s=O

[JDANDO]

I like the composition, not sure jp will like it, but give it a go.