Post Your Recent REJECTIONS!

[moose135]

If it's a typical sunny day, I always use ISO 100. With the aperture around f/7.1, that will give me shutter speeds in the 1/400 - 1/800 range, more than enough for capturing airliners. At worst, I'll bump it to ISO 200. You don't need to be at ISO 640. And I don't like to use intermediate ISO values either - I still with "standard" values (100, 200, 400, 800, etc.) From what I've read, using values between those, the camera has to extrapolate the value, and can result in more noise than a higher, standard value.

[gonzalu]

Moose is right about the intermediate ISO settings... but only on SOME cameras... not all use the same technology for boosting ISO. Some cameras do amplification post ADC and some do it in the actual sensor itself. This needs lots of research from you in terms of your camera and how it does the amplification. In the end, the camera is simply mathematically amplifying the signal readout of the sensor... the sensor's NATIVE sensitivity is base ISO. For most cameras today it is either ISO 100 or ISO 200. Same with WB... if you much outside of Daylight too much, you;re compensating by boosting the BLUE or RED channel signal data which will increase noise etc. etc.

If you can shoot at base ISO, always do so... never let the camera amplify anything mathematically LOL. It is a great computer but it can't yet invent photons

Summer days will be worse as the noise in the wells will be already amplified by heat. COLD days will be better for high ISO shots but likely indiscernable by eyesight alone and usually only measurable in a lab.

Bottom line, stick to base ISO. On a fully sunny day, I get 1/1000 to 1/1250 sec at ISO 200, f/7.1 which is good enough to handhold my very heavy lens with VR off... on my 70-200m f/2.8, I can get sharp shots all the way down to 1/250sec with VR on.

Also, don;t use post processing or "D-Lighting" to compensate for harsh contrast. A harsh contrast day is actually natural and bellies are expected to be underexposed... unless the planes are very close to the ground or there is a lot of snow on the ground, this is inevitable especially in NY ... in Las Vegas and LA, they enjoy natural bounce cards! Al lthat sand laying around is great for bounce light

[Delta777LR]

thanks for all the help guys..

[gonzalu]

Sergio... my E-mail is posted at the end of the my first response... but here you go again (it is also on my profile I think)

manny (at) manny (dot) org

[steve1840]

I just had these rejected on JP.net:

This one they said was blurry:
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3335404

Is there anyway I can fix these for "backlit"? I'm thinking that maybe being backlit I never should have tried to submit them.
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3335396
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3335393
http://www.jetphotos.net/viewreject_b.php?id=3335383

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

[gonzalu]

Steve, just give up on the backlit images on the DBs... keep em for your collection as they are nice images. Backlit is backlit, can;t be "fixed" ... it can be made to look good but never like a front lit image unless you properly expose for the unlit side of the image which is typically 2 to 3 stops over the normal exposre for the other side.

In the case of the Habitat, it is very soft :-( here is my take on it from your JPG. Of course the original would look much better. Let me know if you want me to help edit it.



and your version for comparison

[mattdueck]

Hi Steve,

I am no pro like Manny but from my first look at your images, the first one to me looks soft and slightly underexposed. There is no way I have found to fix a backlit photo. The fact that the sun is behind and thats the light source then there is no magic way to turn the sun to where you need it. My two cents.

Matt

[gonzalu]

Hi Steve,

I am no pro like Manny but from my first look at your images,

Matt, I am more of a wannabe hack lol ... I am humbled by your kind words ... thank you sir

[steve1840]

Thanks Manny. I appreciate your compliment on the images that are backlit. I didn't think there would be any way to correct for backlit. So from now on any backlit shots I take I will keep them only for my private collection. As for the Habitat, I would definitely appreciate your help editing that one if you think it does have a chance of getting accepted with a little work. Your take on it looks much better.

[gonzalu]

Steve, no problem. Send me an original RAW if you have it or a JPG. I will do my best on it and send it back for your perusal.

manny (at) manny (dot) org

[RomNYC]

Yes Steve, your backlit images are actually fantastic... they're just backlit

Besides that, they look awesome! Keep up the good work

[steve1840]

Manny - Thanks, I will send you the original jpeg when I get home from work this afternoon. Damn OT. Well, at least I can get the battery grip I've been after and a new set of ink ($100) for my photo printer with the OT pay!

Rom - Thanks, I appreciate it. I'm starting to get the hang of it. Just need good light next time. Wish I could get non-backlit shots from the mounds of 22L arrivals in the morning/early afternoon. Oh well, guess when they are using the 22's at that time of the day I will have to just settle for keeping those pics for my self.

[Zee71]

I submitted these two photo's and they got rejected because of back lite issues (what do you expect the sun was just rising, but I thought they would work well).

[NIKV69]

Steve the Habitat IMO can't be saved. Manny did an great job but it's got slight blur all over. As for the backlit shots, not much you can do.

[gonzalu]

Mark, the first one COULD work depending on the screener you draw. The second one, IMO just won't make it in ...