Airshow selection (compression test!).

Good one. In that case Ollie, may I suggest that in future you think a bit before posting. You will benefit from this approach and, maybe, will cease being the recipient of ribald comment.

.

Ollie
The 262 had swept wings, the effect you’re seeing is a comination of the sweep-back and John’s use of a wide angle lens close to the nose of the beast. Nothing intrinsically ‘wrong’ with the pic, just optical illusion. The apparent depth of field should also have given you a clue. OK?

.

I realise that, i also checked my referance material and they did have some dihedral.

and the Me262 did not have dihedral as far as i can remember.

Ollie
The 262 had swept wings, the effect you’re seeing is a comination of the sweep-back and John’s use of a wide angle lens close to the nose of the beast. Nothing intrinsically ‘wrong’ with the pic, just optical illusion. The apparent depth of field should also have given you a clue. OK?

.

Yes I did plan the shot and I had to do it bloody quick as a truckload of schoolkids where on their way in and the other photographer was an acceptable blemish as apposed to two thousand kids 😡 .

Must try harder next time!! :p .

John.

People in the background, just cut them out, hope you don’t mind John.
Phil.

Now drop down the File menu, select ‘Save for Web’. Drop down the ‘Preset’ combo and select ‘JPEG High’. Click Save, give it a filename, upload to your webspace and off you go. You might get away with ‘JPEG Medium’, or fiddle with the ‘Quality’ setting to taste.

Well Well, Damian that’s different to what i’ve been doing for the last 2 years, will give that a go, thanks.
Regards Phil.

Morning all,

I use Pixmantech, rawshooter essentials 2005 as I shoot in RAW format (the only way to get the quality from my D70s), it is a basic programme and I can touch up the exposure, saturation and a couple other bits and then convert to Jpeg file.

Once I have the Jpeg I then use Advanced JPEG Compressor v4.8, I have only just got this one and it is fantastic for reducing the file size and picture size without quality degradation (other programmes create a stepladder effect on straight edges when reducing sizes), it also has a basic un-sharp mask function but it works on a slider and not by entering values so it is not very user friendly.

I also have Adobe Photoshop V7.0 but I still have yet to learn more about that one and my post picture processing time is getting to much an amature like me!!!

When I set out to begin photography it is not my intention to run with the big boys, I am just trying to get my pictures somewhere near to reasonable for posting on here and e-mailng to friends, I am very greatfull for all the advice given here and fell like I am getting there.

Many thanks,

John.

Nope – that museum photo is actually not level – the right wing is lower than the left – so either it has a flat tyre, or the picture needs levelling. I prefer the latter option, given other reference points – although I haven’t had the opportunity to place a grid over it yet.

A good way to check level is actually to look for vertical reference objects, not just horizontal ones, in my experience.

Incidentally, I use Jasc’s Paint Shop Pro (not Adobe) – but many photo editing packages have an unsharp mask facility. I’m not altogether sure that they use common settings though.

John,
There is nothing wrong with the colour or focus but looking at my referance material the wing on the 262 looks like it has to much dihedral.

I posted a thread about the unsharp mask recantly, i dont know if you read it but there was some very helpfull replies there.

Cheers ollie I will digest the other thread asap.

Also looking at the Hendon photo you need to add some distortion control, the top of Black 6 rear fuesalage looks wrong and the Me262 did not have dihedral as far as i can remember.

How wrong? colour/focus/distortion?, the ‘dihedral’ behind the 262 is the Kawasaki ki-100 main wings 😀 😀 .

Regards,

John.

the shot was obviously planned this way, pity about the other photographer though.

Yes I did plan the shot and I had to do it bloody quick as a truckload of schoolkids where on their way in and the other photographer was an acceptable blemish as apposed to two thousand kids 😡 .

Must try harder next time!! :p .

John.

Unlike yours here.

And your reason for this comment was? I could say exactly the same thing about your comment.

I posted a thread about the unsharp mask recantly, i dont know if you read it but there was some very helpfull replies there.

Unlike yours here.

Also looking at the Hendon photo you need to add some distortion control, the top of Black 6 rear fuesalage looks wrong and the Me262 did not have dihedral as far as i can remember.

Total twaddle, the shot was obviously planned this way, pity about the other photographer though.

I posted a thread about the unsharp mask recantly, i dont know if you read it but there was some very helpfull replies there.

Also looking at the Hendon photo you need to add some distortion control, the top of Black 6 rear fuesalage looks wrong and the Me262 did not have dihedral as far as i can remember.

RobAnt

I assume you are using Adobe when you talk about unsharp mask?, that to me is a whole new ball game and very complicated!.

The high res original is damn near perfect but I am aiming to get the file size suitable for posting and e-mailing, I feel a hurdle has been overcome with file size and dimensions and I will have to get into Adobe and try this un-sharp mask buisness but that will be later today.

Thanks,

John.

Cool, now all we need to do is slightly sharpen it, to bring it all into focus.

Here, I’ve applied the unsharp mask twice: –

Radius 138
Strength: 50
Clipping: 5

on each occasion.

If you chose to apply changes to any of your photographs, always work on a copy, never the original – otherwise you could end up not being able to start again. Plus, you might not be able to capitalise on your experience later, when you want to re-work them because of what you’ve learned.

Actually, looking at this picture again, I’ve very slightly over cooked the sharpening. Once at strength 50 and once at S:25 would probably have been better, as there’s a small amount of pixillation/jaggies on the Bone’s wingtip.

Of course, if you attempt to blow this copy up, it would look awful – but that’s a good thing. It’s good to look at at this size, but won’t print very well.

Ok I have done a bit more tweaking so here goes with another.

John.

Thanks for the advice Robant, I thought that the programme I have didn’t re-size but I have since found out that it does so I have posted and adjusted pic for you all to pass judgement.

Regards,

John.

Compression is fine, but you might like to consider resizing your pictures too – otherwise, when we click on them, they are bigger than our screens (unless auto resizing is turned on).

I would recommend a maximum of 1024 pixels wide – these all seem to be at least 3 times bigger than that – which is fine if you want to give your photos away for nothing to be published, but resizing and compression also gives you a bit of control over whether a potential publisher might ask you for a better copy, but it won’t compromise how well they appear on a computer screen.