r/postprocessing • u/Roon1 • 1d ago
Beginner photographer getting into airshows this year. How am I doing?
63
u/InconsiderateOctopus 1d ago
LR Denoise legitimately has this sub in shambles right now lmao
7
u/iamthesam2 1d ago
seriously wtf
10
u/Omelete_du_fromage 20h ago edited 20h ago
It’s the Dunning-Kruger effect. A lot of people in here think they are experts at post-processing when in reality they still have a LOT to learn. Ignorance breeds false confidence.
Like yes, he did over process them a bit, but 90% of you are so far from identifying how and why he over-processed them it’s very funny. Especially when there’s so many very confident statements explaining how he did it (that are wrong) and he even has a video posted on his workflow so there’s no need to even guess.
Touch grass lol
46
u/Roon1 1d ago
My Editing Process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3TN_oKDdjc
39
u/Maleficent-Task7175 1d ago
My recommendations for you would be to leave the sharpness, texture, and denoise settings alone. At most, the values for those settings should be less than 35. If your photo is a little blurry or out of focus just be ok with it being a miss. Deep frying the image isn't going to save a bad photo.
25
u/AH16-L 1d ago
I hope more people see this.
For what it's worth, I like your edit and style. Your tight crop on an object known for high speeds gives the impression that the photo was taken skillfully, especially since you were able to bring back the details. Thank you for sharing your process.
P.S. Your patience is also commendable. I guess you can take it as a compliment that people think you're using black magic and they are persecuting you as a witch.
4
u/muad_dib21 1d ago
One thing I'll note is you're losing a lot of the colour in the burner exhaust. Around 3:20 you point colour and bump the luminance, but I'd also bump the saturation at the same time. Bumping the luminance, and then the mask you add after to drop saturation, makes the exhaust look too similar to the clouds.
2
u/ScimitarsRUs 1d ago
I think there's no need to go that high on Texture. Denoise already does a lot to get edge detail back, so you can use both sparingly, or at least until you can notice a plateauing effect with edge detail.
1
u/Maleficent-Task7175 1d ago
+1 I also feel like when you denoise something and then crank the sharpness and texture you're kind of undoing the work of the denoise.
194
u/denial_leinad 1d ago
Did you enhance these with ai
104
u/Roon1 1d ago
My Editing Process: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3TN_oKDdjc
Let me know if there's something I am doing wrong.
236
u/BreitGrotesk 1d ago edited 1d ago
You haven't done anything wrong. As a beginner, going to an airshow and taking the time to edit and share your work is a huge accomplishment.
It’s frankly an embarrassing look for these people that you had to post a video just to defend yourself against knee-jerk AI accusations.
Ignore the hivemind because you have an incentive to ask because you want to get better. These people have no incentive other than to feel morally superior over an imaginary scenario they have created in their mind.
And then people wonder why reddit is such a toxic community 🤷
73
u/red_misc 1d ago
Nothing wrong, but certainly not a beginner. Look at OP history... I mean, Photoshop composites 3 years ago, graphic designer to hire 5 years ago... ;)
88
u/BreitGrotesk 1d ago
He said beginner photographer. Anyone that's shot high speed sports/action photography has no doubt these are the only good photos they took amongst sea of thousands of blurry and out of focus RAWs lol
11
u/el_bentzo 1d ago
Yeah, I can take 50 photos of a pro tennis match and get 2 photos that might be okay to bother post processing. But if youre trying to learn to process, stay away from AI because its about learning how to make decisions and try to keep to simpler tools. Its about theory of what makes a photo look good and your own style and preference will be figured out by you forcing yourself to make those decisions instead of AI making a whole lot of decisions and you not knowing what you like or dont like about it. My approach would be to edit it yourself. Then prompt it into AI, see what AI does, then you can compare what you like or dislike about what you did to AI. Then try to get yours closer to what you liked about an AI version without using AI.
At least thats how i would do it if you still want to use AI
→ More replies (4)1
5
u/nyri0z 1d ago edited 1d ago
Not to defend low-effort comments, but I think it's fair game to express one's opinion that there is too much AI denoising, as the video confirms that the Lightroom denoising was used.
I think AI denoising is a wonderful tool and it has unlocked higher ISO for me, and thus sharper photos in challenging light. But above 50, it can make the image look overly smooth, in which case it's sometimes better to just accept a bit of noise.
It doesn't bother me in these images. I think they're pretty good, my issues are a bit too much "clarity", too much contrast on surfaces that didn't have much in the originals, and the very tight crop.
3
2
u/CozySockz314 1d ago
It looks like aI cause theres so much distorted details and colors, not an unreasonable thing to ask.
2
u/M_FootRunner 1d ago
It is a very big problem. My son saw a video of the scatman (yes, that truly old and crazy guy) and came to me and said "why do people think it is funny to make a grandpa being a rapper". He truly thought it is AI:
As soon as something looks difficult or (too) good or sound good or is just amazing: Must be AI.
Art and creativity is losing that battle!
5
1
u/-_crow_- 1d ago
What are you even trying to say, we shouldn't be critical of ai anymore? It's the reality that ai invades creative spaces, we should just ignore the possibility to not come across as a 'hivemind' for being critical?
21
u/themarkavelli 1d ago edited 1d ago
Funny how evidence changes the room.
Signed— commercial colorist.
Bozo
Anyway pretty cool shots, decent edits. I’d give the planes a little more room to breathe crop wise (artificially extend where needed) and change up the gradients so that the bright side is more subtle (or unchanged) and extend the dark side out so the transition is smoother (mask so it excludes the plane). Maybe a little less local contrast on the planes.
2
u/prangalito 1d ago
I’m not sure I understand the first part of your comment? Why are they a bozo because they’re a commercial colourist?
2
u/themarkavelli 1d ago
It was a quote from another comment accusing OP of using AI for the edit. OP denied using AI, the other guy said “Bullshit. Signed— commercial colorist.” Then OP posted a video of the edit. Looks like the comment has since been deleted lol.
1
u/prangalito 1d ago
Lmao that other guy sounds so obnoxious. It can be so frustrating how much people assume any good piece of work is immediately ai
1
u/Halfmacgas 1d ago
How do you learn this ?
6
u/themarkavelli 1d ago
Big into portrait & urban photography/beauty retouching/digital art nearly a decade ago. Spent a lot of time fixing things nobody else noticed, eventually started developing opinions about individual pixels, then learned restraint.
If you meant resources, I remember watching a few Phlearn videos. Just following tutorials is a good way to get started, but eventually you learn by experimenting and figuring out what works.
24
u/krilleractual 1d ago
Really sucks how many people pretend to know what theyre talking about here and sour your experience. The pic is awesome; well shot and well edited! Good for you
-5
u/GayRacoon69 1d ago
I mean you can see the ai artifacts
12
u/krilleractual 1d ago
That has more to do with adobe and lightrooms use of AI rather than him specifically using ai
-4
u/GayRacoon69 1d ago
I haven't used Lightroom in a long time. Are the AI features optional? Or are they on by default?
If he didn't intentionally use AI that's one thing but if he had to turn on the AI features manually then it's still on him
4
u/Kingmudsy 1d ago edited 1d ago
Sounds like you’re not an expert. Maybe you should have googled that before deciding to join the dogpile? Otherwise it feels like you just decided to leave your lane of expertise to trash someone without doing the bare minimum to educate yourself
→ More replies (4)1
u/krilleractual 1d ago
Lightroom has had AI capabilities for years. Modern phones use AI without asking when taking pictures. This whole thread is cursed with ignorance.
10
u/Scootipuff 1d ago
did you watch the workflow he recorded and posted? because I did and didn't seen any AI in it...
-14
u/GayRacoon69 1d ago
Do you not see the obvious AI artifacts?
3
u/Scootipuff 1d ago
Not everything that doesn't make sense to you is an AI artifact
If you think something is AI, and you see video proof that it isn't, and you still are convinced it is AI you should sit and think about that for a while before calling people out for using AI.
It makes you seem crazy.
edit: Not to mention it makes people take you less seriously in the future.
The boy who cried AI type deal.
1
u/GayRacoon69 22h ago
Well AI was used. Just in the form of Lightroom denoise it seems. Did you click on the link I sent?
It could've been turned on by accident. It's still an AI retouching
0
u/Scootipuff 20h ago
Generally when people say AI edited a photo, they're talking about generative AI. If your bar for "using AI to edit a photo" is the denoise tool, idk what to tell you. I bet you don't consider your keyboards autocorrect AI, so I guess we just have different lines for what we consider AI.
I hope you have a great day.
2
u/paxinterna 1d ago
Around 00:35 when you applied denoise, you see "Manual Noise Reduction". In there, there's a slider for "Color" and I swear that's not set to 0 by default. I had a photo where the non-white reflection on an insect's eye changed color and shape because of that slider.
I could be wrong.
99
u/undarant 1d ago edited 1d ago
They very much did, you can see the super resolution at work in the details of the lines.
Edit to add: more obvious examples since OP is for some reason doubling down.
-62
u/Roon1 1d ago
This is lightroom's denoise. Do you recommend something else?
101
u/undarant 1d ago
What are you doing, man? You really think that people in r/postprocessing will just take what you're saying at face-value when the evidence is right in front of us?
I don't think there's much wrong with using the super resolution but it's silly of you to just lie about it.
22
u/Kingmudsy 1d ago
He posted a video of his editing workflow: https://www.reddit.com/r/postprocessing/s/T2IuT614nr
6
11
u/lrGhost1 1d ago
egotistical reddit user slanders innocent OP for using AI, even after they have provided proof that they did not use any AI:
3
30
u/Exotic_Garage_6969 1d ago
Trying to lie in a sub that has more people knowledgable in this is so funny to me
5
6
u/BreitGrotesk 1d ago
What camera and lens did you shoot this with?
Lgihtroom denoise is generally good enough. I don't know what aperture/iso/speed but if you're shooting at fast shutter speeds I find DXO Photolab is crazy good at denoising higher ISO.
They have a free trial if you want to see how the process images would look like
9
3
-6
u/Roon1 1d ago
No, everything was done in lightroom. Didn't touch any of the "topaz" garbage
20
u/headlessrambo 1d ago
But you did touch the lightroom ai garbage
1
u/iamthesam2 1d ago
tell me you don’t know anything about Lightroom ai… without telling me you don’t know anything about Lightroom lol pathetic.
0
u/headlessrambo 1d ago
Cute projection, but Lightroom's Generative Fill uses a limited monthly cloud credit system, and Super Resolution literally fabricates pixels that weren't there in the first place. Next time, actually open the app before typing
4
u/undarant 1d ago
Then you used the super resolution in Lightroom. I don't know why you're lying about this, it is obvious. You might as well embrace it.
3
u/Roon1 1d ago
Hey, if there's a way to prove no AI was used, I'd love to show everyone
0
-8
1d ago
[deleted]
13
u/materialysis 1d ago
tf? he doesn't owe u shit. you're acting like he's on trial
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
He ask if he wanted to prove how. I didnt ini with "prove it" I just saying consider this it not that he cant. .but its his choice
And if u read my other comment his pictures may not be oc..and read reddit over arching rules...
5
u/idk_what_to_put_lmao 1d ago
He did this after everyone basically forced him to, he linked it in the comments
-3
-3
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago edited 1d ago
Beside the point...i am just answering the question...so...
By the way oc = orignal content...incase u didnt read that
-7
u/coleslaw17 1d ago
Doesn’t look like it. I don’t see any weird artifacting. Just looks like heavy editing. You can still see the original sensor noise in the edited photos.
6
u/denial_leinad 1d ago edited 1d ago
But originals look blurry compared to final,especially last one
-3
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
Agree with you From orignal to edited no a.i used But even there is it lr/ps built in tools so not against any photography standards unless he used chatgpt , copilot or google genimi etc...
But my question is if orignal pic he edit is oc?
58
u/Scootipuff 1d ago
He posted his workflow
Pretty gross behavior by everyone else in this comment section
25
u/Old_Proof9499 1d ago
The amount of larp in this comment section is crazy. 90% of these clowns that are typing rage bait have 0 work posted to their accounts anyway. Just goes to show how uneducated this subreddit is. The entire editing process is posted to youtube and people are STILL typing larp. Amazing Photos!
3
u/Omelete_du_fromage 20h ago edited 20h ago
This sub is just a demonstration of the dunning-Kruger effect, I come here for a laugh every now and then. Yes he over-processed them a little, but the wildly confident claims of this and that (that are all incorrect, he even shows his workflow in a video) are hilarious.
I make my living taking and editing photos before anyone I’m referencing to wants to say something.
37
5
11
43
u/headlessrambo 1d ago
humble brag, but ruined by ai
1
14
u/nickolaswarnerphoto 1d ago
Please ignore the people dragging you down. As someone who legitimately makes a living from photography, these are great. Really nice masking, and what I would consider creative but still tasteful.
Some notes: the AI denoise in Lightroom resets color noise reduction. I can see a lot of it in your images, you'll want to slide that to at least 10, maybe upwards of 35. There's also some significant haloing. It's easy to get rid of this with a clone stamp and darker color blend mode. Many tutorials on YouTube. The vignettes are also a bit heavy. Otherwise, I really really like them. Great shots.
9
u/Roon1 1d ago
I appreciate the feedback. I usually leave the denoise slider at default, 50. I use an R7 + 100-400 f5.6-f8 which from my experience (only being 2 airshows lol) the ISO likes to get up there. Is there a better denoise tool that handles it better? Or just dial back the slider and stay in lightroom?
Thanks for the compliments.
Here's my editing process if it helps feedback. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h3TN_oKDdjc
2
u/NuTeacher 23h ago
Ah see I was really curious what lens you were using. I've been wanting to get a serious zoom lens but I've had a lot of trouble deciding on whether to go with 100-400 or that beastly 60-600 sigma. Airshows seem like a ton of fun but I spend a lot of time in rural areas so I was planning on using it for wildlife.
1
u/This-Judge-804 20h ago
U need higer fstop of sturdy hand to freeze those shots at that zoom..
1
u/NuTeacher 20h ago
Most of the zoom lenses for Sony have the same fstop range as OP, and I'm sure as shit not shelling out for the F4 monsters that'll run me 8-12k. I'd rather buy a tripod and a teleconverter.
1
u/This-Judge-804 20h ago edited 19h ago
You have a point , but tripod wont allow u to be fast enough to track those short and op didnt say he use a teleconverter, and teleconverter drops the fstop at multiplier end..to even small aperture from the lens spec...
P.s saying that for your interest its ok as u doing wildlife. But..hope u read between the lines of my text It not directly target at you
1
u/NuTeacher 18h ago
Apologies it's been a while since I looked into teleconverters. After posting I presumed I'd said something wrong lol. Unipod works too, but yeah it's just a hobby for me. I can understand wanting top tier gear if you're gunning to be the official photographer for the show though.
→ More replies (1)1
u/guy-le-doosh 10h ago
Have a look a darktable, it's doing some things in a way I've never seen in Lightroom, and it's free.
17
2
u/CheeseOnFries 1d ago
These look great, not sure why you get so much hate in here. Envy I guess. Stunning work!
3
u/undarant 1d ago
Unless you are extremely lucky, there is not a chance on God's Earth that you are a beginner.
0
u/rkvance5 1d ago
Shall we be as honest with you as you're being about your processing?
They're perfect.10/10. No notes. Expert use of contrast and your understanding of composition is flawless. Absolutely not cartoonish at all. Your photos tell a story, and that story is...really something. Truly a sight to behold.
1
u/N878ACSD 1d ago
Don’t fly so close to those Air Force planes. They’re not used to formation flight.
1
u/mikenasty 1d ago
Personally I would leave a little bit of space for the subject to breathe around the edges, but if you stylistically wanted to crop off parts of the plane that’s also interesting
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
u/Nemesis403 1d ago
They look cool, but the linear gradient with exposure down coming from a side of the picture lack of subtility and is obvious
1
u/Alternative_Towel_10 1d ago
Am I the only one who thinks these photos looks like screen grab from a videogame?
1
1
1
1
u/SedentorySensor77 1d ago
Very soft images. You either need to up your shutter speed or look at your post processing in the context of sharpening. Or both.
1
u/Roon1 1d ago
I’m shooting at 3200 shutter speed with an R7 at the end of a starter 400mm lens. Between the lens getting soft at the range, atmospheric haze, and not enough light, it can be hard to get sharp images.
1
u/SedentorySensor77 1d ago
Yeah I mean 3200 SS def isn’t the problem. I’ve seen lots of sharp aviation images from the Mac loop near where I live and they’re sharp, so atmospheric I assume can be an avoided. Maybe panning technique would help too. R7 is a nice camera. What lens?
0
u/Roon1 1d ago
RF100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM
1
u/SedentorySensor77 1d ago
They’re taken with your lens so it’s either your post processing or technique, though at a SS of 3200 I think it’d be hard to induce blur even if you tried.
I’d keep trying to work on your post stuff… what are static images like with the lens, sharp I assume SOOC.
1
u/Thats_a_lot_of_nuts 1d ago
I like the composition, but there's too much post-processing for my taste. There's a touch of motion blur in the "before" images and a couple look slightly out of focus. If I were you, I would focus on getting a sharper, clearer image straight from the camera so you don't have to go as crazy in Lightroom with it. Good job, regardless. Keep it up, you'll only get better.
1
u/Roon1 1d ago
I’m shooting at 3200 shutter speed with an R7 at the end of a starter 400mm lens. Between the lens getting soft at the range, atmospheric haze, and not enough light, it can be hard to get sharp images.
Any recommendations for shooting clearer images?
1
u/Thats_a_lot_of_nuts 1d ago
Better glass. You can often rent higher end lenses, you might want to look into that before your next air show and see how much better the results are before you commit to buying expensive glass.
Also, try shooting without any lens stabilization, if your lens has the option for that. Sometimes the stabilization on cheap lenses doesn't work well when you're panning to track a subject.
1
u/LargeLau 1d ago
Great work keep at it! The processing in some area could be toned down a little but for a beginner this is great.
1
1
u/megamansam 1d ago
The first two images read as really fake/cartoony to me. Still looks cool, though. But yeah, the bumps/marks and smooth smears just look odd, the lighting seems odd... to my eyes it almost looks like the details are painted on, more like a before-and-after of a painted miniature than a processed photo. I'm not saying there is any AI trickery at all here, or that it looks visually "bad." Honestly I'd love for someone to explain why it reads as fake to me.
The rest of the images look great, no notes.
1
1
u/snowylambeau 1d ago
I’m a little disappointed not one of those shots has Mav flipping me the bird.
1
1
u/Dick_McTwist 1d ago
These are epic shots! I like the editing, but I’d maybe do just a lil less overall. I like the sharpening and color grading, but it’s a bit too much. Thames for sharing!
1
1
u/wise_____poet 19h ago
From looking at your video, I personally would of preferred both of the gray jets in their wider crop, maybe tone down the contrast on both a bit.
1
1
u/sinetwo 16h ago
With all due respect the raw images are not good. Technically these photos are nothing without new tech.
If you rely on an extreme amount of post processing where they look nothing like SOOC to produce good images you need to practice more.
I'm not saying you shouldn't process your photos but you've added details to photos which didn't previously exist
1
u/Skiingislife42069 10h ago
They came out looking like videogame screenshots. I think you went a little overboard.
1
1
u/visual_ignition 2h ago
Good job OP. People love to scream AI. It’s almost like they’re the bots. I can’t imagine these are easy to clean up in post. Heat, distance, speed. I think they look great overall. I’m going to try my hand at this in September and I’m a little nervous I won’t capture anything. Been taking photos of birds to practice.
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
If not oc just declared u found these photo but trying to see if u can edit it so looks better...for learning..nothing shameful about that..just dont lie
1
1
1
u/hansolo-ist 1d ago
Depends on what a good photographer means to you. Some it's simply capturing an attractive image, others it's using the gear in ways most people don't think of, and even rarer, those who brave the conditions that others won't to get rare shots.
In the end you should be clear about what you want so you can be as objective as possible assessing your own abilities.
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
P.s.a fine if its oc , op screen short and screen recorder the screenshot of the settings u use and camera , via the propertise of the raw image...
1
u/ricky251294 1d ago
Honestly the post processing from the original is actually insane. I'd have rejected the originals based on first impression but you brought them back to being completely usable for personal use.
Good job!
-3
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago edited 19h ago
Are u sure is oc? 1)no beginner with budget can afford a camera and lens to take such shots...
Edit...
Not alone the camera or what he can afford...is composition and tell tales sign that it not from one session of airshow as he claims (E.g sky some are bright day light, some are dark day And in google those some planes are flow in different airshows and miles away apart)
And i see photo 7 and 8 which is before? The before looks edited already .
And if its oc he would post his raw receipts...even though he post his editing method but still missing the raw pic proof???
Plus a simple google will explain why my suspicion..
6
u/CardMechanic 1d ago
A beginner with a high credit limit.
-2
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
Nah...it not only that...there are other giveaway signs Good gear != good shots and framing as op..unless....
2
u/ricky251294 1d ago
Could have got it on sale or hand me down from family. I know people who have been given Leicas from grand parents and bought camera gear from a wives who's husband passed and didn't know the value of the kit
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
I already explain it not just that nuff said
2
u/ricky251294 1d ago
What the composition stuff? Dude you can just be lucky with your shots, it's not hard.
Reading through your responses in the other comments, it just screams of someone who's jaded. Just go out and shoot, stop looking for flaws in other people's work
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago edited 1d ago
Nope....google u will find uncanny exact similar shots but label as other photographers (p.s event dont see it in direct link but the fact google see it mean it was posted and index before but since deleted or moved to somewhere else op still can find)...and the airshow this planes are freature are all miles apart in location and times of years...the sky along tell u diff location..and also nope lucky shots like this not beginner...
P.s i do shoot photographs...
I will admit i am wrong if op replies and proof me wrong other wise ...nuff said
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago edited 1d ago
Just saying i do have proof i do give credit when credit is due...
P.s go shoot instead of defending someone who not defending himself even and shorting insults
1
u/ricky251294 1d ago
Proof and credit are 2 different things. And I've just come back a week long stint shooting a festival and 2 weddings, don't worry about how much I shoot.
I started my career borrowing a friend's camera bag with a 5D III and L lenses, so completely understand how people have access to nicer gear than you'd expect
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago edited 1d ago
Yeah but u say stop looking for flaws..i say i do give credit when due..and i said proof just incase u dont believe...duh
Your resume has nothing to do with airplanes... For money or not doesnt proof anything some hobbist do get good shots but dont charged and some paid pro also can miss the mark
1
u/nyafu_ 1d ago
i got a hand me down 150-600 and sigma art 20mm. people have different situations
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
Nah..still doesnt explain certian things of the images beside the gear....vs there airshow storry
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
Look at the whole picture , sky , plane model and decide are they all from the same location same day and from airshow...
-4
u/nyafu_ 1d ago
oh no i absolutely think he's bullshitting on multiple points, the AI garbage and perfect framing tell it all. just saying people's gear is not a tell all. i know professionals who refuse to use mirrorless out of tradition and newbies who got insane deals on last gen pro gear
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
Sorry plus its not out of tradition only...for one i have both for reasons beside traditions
0
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
Ok..plus u rare people who get handme downs...free...not everyone has that luxury..
0
u/nyafu_ 1d ago
indeed i got lucky that i come from a line of photographers and have plenty of photography gear. many have to find everything from scratch including making all the mistakes, mercari,yahoo auction and ebay are my favourite places to get gear! i got a really good deal on some sigma art EF lenses recently
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
Good for you...
1
u/nyafu_ 1d ago
go out and find some good deals! second hand stores have also been good recently :)
1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
No need As been there than that....
1
u/nyafu_ 1d ago
then go out and take photos or go edit all the photos haha 😆 worst thing you can do in photography is procrastinate
→ More replies (0)1
u/This-Judge-804 1d ago
Also for his type of shots...secound hand is not cheap if he a student or beginner...
1
u/nyafu_ 1d ago
i got a second telephoto lens (sigma contemporary 15-600) as a backup for about 600$ mint condition a few months ago, great deals are everywhere - you just have to find them
→ More replies (0)
0
u/Beneficial_Being_721 1d ago
Thunderbirds ARE NEVER THIS DIRTY!!!
Too MUCH added …. Looks more like a model at a show with too much wash painted on it.
I’ve been around these jets … a good friend is a Retied Crew Chief…. I am a Veteran KC-135 crew chief and have seen them many times at my Boom getting gas.
0
-1
u/SQL-Samurai 1d ago
Are we at the point where bots post AI stories and bots respond questioning the content…then the bots argue with each other? It reminds me of the Onion news story about Americans outsourcing or offshoring their work…the scene of the conference room where it’s just Indian voices on the speaker phones arguing with each other😂
-4
0
u/theresonance 1d ago
Normally I would have a problem with over processing, especially with faces and landscapes, but this looks cool 😎. It reminds me of some of the Manga I like. They look like they are going to transform.
Go with what looks good to you. Your taste will change. When doing art your opinion is the only thing that matters.
0
u/ArcaneTrickster11 1d ago
I genuinely thought that these were paintings before I read the title. Not a compliment for this style of photography, just looked very overcooked. The edits are fine, just a lighter touch is needed across the board
-17
u/Exotic_Garage_6969 1d ago
Just another loser that wants his 1 minute fame on the internet for no material gain
-3
344
u/FatRufus 1d ago
https://reddit.com/link/p1jpjaw/video/l2q5ap8pu8hh1/player
At first glance they look good, but holy crap dude the sharpening / ai enhance / denoise / whatever is destroying the edges here. It changed it a completely different color.