ShipSpotting.com
Login: Lost Password? SIGN UP
Ship Photo Search
Advanced Search
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
Author Topic: Topic 2: Focus and exposure  (Read 9084 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
davidships
Webmaster
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,712



View Profile
« on: September 05, 2015, 12:57:53 pm »

The site standard currently reads:
Quote
Photos must be sharp and correctly exposed.
No silhouettes will be accepted

Can an acceptable sharpness be described?

At what size should sharpness be considered - gallery image, full screen or full image size?
Can “correct” exposure be described?

Would inclusion of examples of acceptable/non-acceptable images be helpful?

Please add your views on this topic below, before 5 October 2015.
Report to moderator   Logged
lappino
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 216


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 05, 2015, 02:15:22 pm »

Unsharp - meaning blurred ship's name from a distance when it should clearly be visible.

"Correctly exposed" - goes with the same category as "correct religion". Makes zero sense, remove it.
Report to moderator   Logged
Dеnis
Photo Administrator
Home away from home
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 287


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: September 05, 2015, 03:12:05 pm »

If a photo is within the acceptable resolution, in full size: if the ship occupies more than some 50% of the frame - name, railings, windows, masts, aerials should be clearly visible.
Report to moderator   Logged
simonwp
Just can't stay away
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 135


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: September 05, 2015, 08:03:31 pm »

Current standard for focus seems to be OK, remove correct exposure, seems to be applied subjectively by administrators anyway.
Report to moderator   Logged
Captain Ted
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,954



View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: September 05, 2015, 08:59:02 pm »

Photos should be sharp at any time and/or distance.
Report to moderator   Logged

NOW!!!,,,if we could get rid of the sailors,,how safe shipping would be !!!!!!!!
Patrick Hill
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 520



View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: September 05, 2015, 10:08:29 pm »

What about scanned older photos? Not everyone has the ability to scan and produce a pin-sharp image - will there be some tolerance for scans?
Report to moderator   Logged
Robbie
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,149


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: September 05, 2015, 11:03:20 pm »

When it comes to sharpening I think there is too much sharpening. there are a few images that I feel are over sharpened. From trial and error I have found if someone uses the sharpening tool in say Picasa or iPhoto, etc anything over about 50% becomes pixelated. Every little detail is over sharp and unrealistic.
I think sharpening is a good thing but it should be the same quality as what you would see in real life not heavily happened and odd looking.

Regards Robbie
Report to moderator   Logged
csaba
Quite a regular
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: September 06, 2015, 04:58:28 am »

If I would put it as a wallpaper on my computer it is a go  Smiley
Report to moderator   Logged
Brent
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,952


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: September 06, 2015, 06:19:03 am »

I would like to see some leniency for ships of yesteryear that have to be scanned off an average negative/slide, especially if it is the only image of the ship on site. Despite the standards it is still possible to post modern digital pretty ordinary shots, so we should be able to expand the library with views not of best quality.
Report to moderator   Logged

...
DEREK SANDS
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 15,276


taken in Holland 2014


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: September 06, 2015, 10:51:05 am »

There is already some tolerance for older images that are scanned, this does not need to change in my opinion.

 We must be sensible, the advances of digital photography are impossible to reproduce except from transparencies of exceptional quality.

Older images are very much admired on the site by a lot of the members.

best regards

Derek
Report to moderator   Logged

Cornelia Klier
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,882



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: September 06, 2015, 03:29:15 pm »

The way it is now, it is o.k.

Sharp means, if I can read ships name and see ships window and it is just as sharp as it is in real, too. Especially on letters you can see this very good.

Keeping site standards like they are now, is o.k.
Report to moderator   Logged

Kyle Stubbs
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 953


Something something Danger Zone.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: September 06, 2015, 05:38:24 pm »

I think adding examples for sharpness, especially in distant photos, might be useful. Perhaps for larger vessels, examples showing where deck gear and railings are and are not clear, and for smaller vessels, showing clear detail of small features such as nameboards and windows.

Kind Regards,
Kyle
Report to moderator   Logged

"Action speaks louder than words but not nearly as often." -Mark Twain
Phil English
Photo Administrator
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,418


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: September 07, 2015, 12:53:46 pm »

A lot of photos are removed under the sharpness rule because a full-size they are 'noisy'.  Basically, that means that the camera is struggling at low light and/or long distance and producing a poor image. At full screen, straight lines become distorted and smeary. Small-sensor pocket cameras/mobile phones and high-zoom bridge cameras are the main culprits. The larger sensor DSLRs do not struggle so much. I see a lot of people posting such images but if they were to reduce the pixel width to, say, 1600, the problem would be much reduced.

I think that the rule should be redefined to take this problem into account.

Brgds
Phil
Report to moderator   Logged
Tuomas Romu
Home away from home
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 300


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: September 08, 2015, 09:52:06 am »

As for "correct exposure", the photographs should not be clearly over- or underexposed (large white or black areas), and none of the color channels should be clearly "clipped".

Regarding noise, I agree with Phil. If the camera cannot produce a noise-free image at 1:1, the resolution should be reduced before uploading the photograph.
Report to moderator   Logged
davidships
Webmaster
Top Poster
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,712



View Profile
« Reply #14 on: September 08, 2015, 11:31:21 am »

An observation: There are two full screen versions: "fit screen" (the opening default) and "original size".  In some cases the original is smaller than full screen, so it is the site software that can add apparent lack of focus. For those, perhaps it is the original size should be considered. In other cases, the full screen can look fine, but the original size might be considered "too large" for it's content (yet often invaluable for identitying mystery vessels, for example). 
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
Page created in 0.052 seconds with 19 queries.
Copyright © 2010 All rights reserved