Kasper Dolberg - Submissions - Cut-Out Player Faces Megapack
27102380
Background and Stadium Packs
Submitted
01 Sep 2024 22:20:30
Timeline
This image is part of a pack:
AFC Ajax [Old Request Response]
This image is part of a pack:
Ajax 18-19 Cut-Out (74 Images) [Old Pack Submission]
This image is part of a pack:
Ajax 18-19 Cut-Out (74 Images) [Old Pack Submission]
This image is part of a pack:
Ajax 18-19 Cut-Out (74 Images) [Old Pack Submission]
This image is part of a pack:
Ajax 18-19 Cut-Out (65 Images) [Old Pack Submission]
This image is part of a pack:
AFC [Old Request Response]
This image is part of a pack:
Ajax 18-19 Cut-Out (74 Images) [Old Pack Submission]
This image is part of a pack:
AFC Ajax 18-19 Cut-Out (87 Players) [Old Pack Submission]
This image is part of a pack:
AFC Ajax 18-19 Cut-Out (87 Players) [Old Pack Submission]
This image is part of a pack:
AFC Ajax 18-19 Cut-Out (87 Players) [Old Pack Submission]
This image is part of a pack:
AFC Ajax 18-19 Cut-Out (87 Players) [Old Pack Submission]
This image is part of a pack:
AFC Ajax [Old Request Response]
Don't ask me why, but I really don't like the current cut of Kasper Dolberg. The quality of the cut is great, but there is something about the picture I don't like
Nothing personal mate,but same as me for new one...looks less quality and his hair at the end looks blur (mix of hair and background).
Nothing personal mate,but same as me for new one...looks less quality and his hair at the end looks blur (mix of hair and background).
Well as I said in the earlier post, it has nothing to with the quality of the current cut, and in my opinion a better picture outweighs a slightly better quality cut. But this is when we get to a point where it is personal preferences and nothing else. So I just share this cut and if it doesn't make it to the mp... hey then it doesn't make it, and life goes on
if you can make a better cut out of the source please do:
I completaly understand and respect mate,but then it's better to use the alternative thread with this kind of cuts.Mons often can replace it by the mistake as improvement.Like I was thinking,source wasn't that great/big for HQ cut.I'm too busy by fixing/re-cut buch of "improvements" from last update,wich are not improvements,and wich goes in by same "mistake"...
@mons after some constructive criticism from baja I have tried to improve the cut, by fixing the bottom hair detail after the best of my ability. I still thinks this cut is better than the current one, despite being a (slightly) inferior cut measured by quality. And I think if this is the policy then it should be changed. A more recent cut should always be accepted unless there are huge difference in quality... I'm not so much a fan of the approach of going in to tiny detail about hair. Put hey it is up to you. Just an opinion
@mons after some constructive criticism from baja I have tried to improve the cut, by fixing the bottom hair detail after the best of my ability. I still thinks this cut is better than the current one, despite being a (slightly) inferior cut measured by quality. And I think if this is the policy then it should be changed. A more recent cut should always be accepted unless there are huge difference in quality... I'm not so much a fan of the approach of going in to tiny detail about hair. Put hey it is up to you. Just an opinion
As a rule of thumb, it's my preference to use newer cuts whenever available, especially if the current MP cut is fairly old. That said, if it's a matter of months and there is little difference in the person's looks, then I use the one with the best quality. Quality considerations include orientation, cut colour. snow and hair details, amongst others. Hair details are definitely not the be-all and end-all when I compare cuts, but they are of course important, especially if the source and/or the current cut is of a good quality.
I won't be on my PC to compare this cut till tomorrow evening, so I can't say what my decision will be yet. I don't see much wrong with the existing cut to be honest bar the lighting.
As a rule of thumb, it's my preference to use newer cuts whenever available, especially if the current MP cut is fairly old. That said, if it's a matter of months and there is little difference in the person's looks, then I use the one with the best quality. Quality considerations include orientation, cut colour. snow and hair details, amongst others. Hair details are definitely not the be-all and end-all when I compare cuts, but they are of course important, especially if the source and/or the current cut is of a good quality.
I won't be on my PC to compare this cut till tomorrow evening, so I can't say what my decision will be yet. I don't see much wrong with the existing cut to be honest bar the lighting.
Well you heard my opinion and that is all that counts. I don't need to hear what your decision is. For me it is not important whether my cuts make the mp or not (I just include them in my own mp anyway), I just like to challenge when I think the comments are perhaps a bit to harsh (or concerning very small details) , because I think you (not specific you, but more in general) might scare away potential cutters.
Don't ask me why, but I really don't like the current cut of Kasper Dolberg. The quality of the cut is great, but there is something about the picture I don't like
Your newly picture is way better expression on Dolbergs face.
Expression counts too, besides quality.
A pic shouldn`t make an idiot out of a person.
Trust me, I worked at a german record label with professional fotographers.
Better take slight minus in quality instead of ultra-high quality of a dumb shoot.
Therefore I thank you Qvordrup
This image is part of a pack:
OGC Nice [Old Request Response]
This image is part of a pack:
OGC Nice [Old Request]
This image is part of a pack:
Nice [Old Request Response]
This image is part of a pack:
Denmark - UEFA Euro 2020
This image is part of a pack:
Denmark - UEFA Euro 2020 (Corrections)
Qvordrup