Good shots Ginger. I like the green heron the best. I know it ain't easy with BIFs but if you can you want to frame or crop them so that they have more area in front of them (the direction they are heading).
Harry http://behret.smugmug.com/NANPA member How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
That last shot is good enough for a bird book or a Nationial Geographic article. Nice and sharp and great bokah.
The first suffers from oversharpening of the vegatation in the foreground. This is a very common problem and we all have it. If you sharpen enough to get the subject matter to look good, often it will be too much for any in-focus vegatation. There are several ways to address this:
Use a layer mask to decrease opacity of the sharpening layer over the vegation
Use the blur tool or a blurred layer with a mask to blur the vegation BEFORE sharpening
Use the history brush to desharpen the vegation after sharpening
There is a problem that even your excellent first shot suffers from and which seems common to almost all shots of white birds. How to keep the birds white and still show some feather detail? Pathfinder and I have struggled with several of his favorite shots trying to acheive this and I have to say we really have not found the answer. I'm willing to play with this some more, but I'll need access to the raw version.
Ginger, you hit it with the sharpness in these shots.
Dixie Photographs by Dixie | Canon 1Ds | Canon 5D Mark II | Canon 5D | Canon 50D | Canon 10D | Canon EOS Elan 7 | Mamiya Pro S RB67 |
...and bunches of Canon lenses - I'm equipment rich and dollar poor!
Thank you all for looking, I didn't know if you would. I just put the CS2 on. I was aware of the oversharpening, but it was getting light and I hadn't been to bed. It was not on purpose, it was kind of using the same settings I had been using and it was too much on that one photo. Easy in a way to redo. But I didn't have time. I do like CS2.
I might go ahead and buy it, use the Amazon "prize" to get a Scott Kelby "how to" book. I went along with a lot of auto stuff, especially in the bridge. I am afraid I will need more memory. I will have no money left, but if I get more memory, I hope someone here can tell me how to install it. I have about 700 something now in memory, but it went low last night. The reviews at Amazon would have led me to expect that.
I need help in using the search here, I plugged in things like CS2, etc, don't remember, kept trying, then I remembered FM, was a much easier search. Most people don't seem to think it is worth the money. I wanted to know about the noise reduction and the sharpening. The bridge was not a factor to me. If someone could help me know which search words to use, I can find problems others have had, or the Scott Kelby book can do that.
Rutt, those birds aren't going to show any feather detail. I think people are expecting too much sometimes. That is a full frame shot there, too far away for feather detail.
On the exposure, the birds looked too white. CS2 auto liked them like that, I fought it. Then I checked it, even made them a little less exposed w the highlight thing, checked again. Either my old CS is off, my eyes are off, or this CS2 is off. They are not stark white, they are correct white according to eye dropper, CS2, etc. But no feather detail, too far away.
On the flying bird, I could have fought for some more detail in the wings. I didn't. This was all an experiment, and I was trying to get to bed before my husband got up.
If you want detail, then one, you have to realize that the whole bird is not white. Shadows, etc. come into play and they need to be brought out. The photograph has to be taken close enough to the bird to get that. I have been lucky enough, during nesting season, to get that close to a bird TWICE, at most. Otherwise I have to use what I have. IMO. Oh, you might mean that preening feather stuff I did get while the birds are nesting. I guess I did get that. Very rarely do they do that now, for me, and not right in my face, so to speak. They do it for a short time and far away.
Maybe, we, I, should look for different things different seasons.
I have seen other shots, from others where the birds look "smooth", I recognize them right off as a bird that is far away. My school of thought on that is to leave them far away and get a landscape w birds. I have been trying to shoot like the better birders here, and I guess not done too well, but I do have thoughts on the subject.
I am glad and amazed and surprised that you like these shots. In general. The only difference was CS2 over CS. I did the SAME Little Green Heron again, w/o any cropping, though I was tempted to get more in front than back, but I wanted a virgin "no crop" to see what was going on w the sharpness and see if this would help. Not sure what helped, I think it was the advanced part of the sharpening. Plus it seemed to start out better and go together.
I am going to stop rambing and talk to my husband. He has not seen this, knows nothing about it, except the problems I was having. He leaves for out of town again tonight.
Ginger it may be just me but why do you shoot bifs at f8 why not try 6.3 and i know you white lens folks love that hi iso nikon can not even spell iso or if they do it hurts your ears . lower the iso anyway and go on a day [morning or afternoon ] that has good light . the last thing is handheld is good one out of 20 .I know full well I am not as good as most and maybe need not to be giving advice but taking it .So anyone that looks at this please tell me what is wrong with this advice .The one thing I do know for sure it is worth the $ it cost you Ginger
Ginger it may be just me but why do you shoot bifs at f8 why not try 6.3 and i know you white lens folks love that hi iso nikon can not even spell iso or if they do it hurts your ears . lower the iso anyway and go on a day [morning or afternoon ] that has good light . the last thing is handheld is good one out of 20 .I know full well I am not as good as most and maybe need not to be giving advice but taking it .So anyone that looks at this please tell me what is wrong with this advice .The one thing I do know for sure it is worth the $ it cost you Ginger
Thanks, jwear. I appreciate it. I am following the advice of two respected Canon people, here on dGrin, and in general, I would think, on the ISO, one being the former lens owner. I thought I would do that for awhile.
However, they, too, say to do it wide open. I don't feel comfortable not leaving leeway from the shoulder to the eye. I am not that close to them, the birds. I had it wide open for awhile yesterday.
I do go higher if there is more than one bird involved. I try to keep the fstop low, but I am getting very fast shutter speeds.
My percentages of good shots depends a lot on where I shoot and what time of day, as you did point the time of day out. There have been factors involved in both of those things recently: where I shot and time of day. I got a terribly high percentage yesterday (Mon aug 29), and at the causeway, Friday. I may seem to post too many, but I don't post all I shoot, nor do I post all I like. I hate not doing that, but I do draw a line. I use a monopod when it gets darker.
Thanks for looking and commenting. Also for sharing the advice.
ginger
Nice work Ginger
I like the last one best. It's great to be able to see the exif.
I usually try to use the widest aperture that I can get in order to get the fastest shutter speed and "freeze" the action. I think you could avoid the green speckles in the background if you could get away from the 800 ISO. But, it may not have been a very light situation that you had.
I do wonder about the speckely look of the green in the background. I get that too. Is it the ISO or could it be smoothed out by smoothing the "blue speckles" of "digital noise" using Scott Kelby's method. I have not had the time to try all of his tips on the CS2 sharpening and smoothing techniques.
There is so much to learn in Photoshop. I've had CS2 for a while and still hardly know what is there. I just learned how to convert to LAB and use the curves there. That was a big help with the color casts on my gorillas. It was a thrill to discover the method after I've heard Rutt talk about it for a year. It was all Greek to me until now.
I have yet to catch a good bird in flight shot. I tried a couple at the zoo, but I was only using the 200mm lens. So, nothing good.
These three shots are all nice. But the last one is very beautiful. You are definitely getting the technique down. Keep it up.
It is interesting what some people see that others don't.
What you are referring to in undoubtedly "noise", and I would assume that could be dealt with. It is a trade off, the more you reduce the noise, the more the sharpness goes down.
I just get it so that I like it. MY background is blk and white 400 ASA film in the seventies, no care about noise. Digital noise is different from film noise.
To avoid d noise, some people go to great extremes of spot on exposure and stuff.
But, hey, this is supposed to be fun! And tech stuff has never been as important to me. Back when I was doing my film noisy blk and wh, others were doing very high resolution slow speed film shots, for all the technical reasons going on here. (I used high ASA and even pushed it, others used very low ASA and based their souls on it. When it went out of production, they bought it up as reserves for the future. It has always been a matter of some do/some don't.)
later,
You can deal w the noise in the RAW, in USM, and in noise reduction in CS2.
And luminosity is important there, too. Smooths it all down, at the expense of the sharpness. So people like Harry would say the exposure has to be spot on.
A pretty easy method to reduce background noise from sharpening is to use "Selective Sharpening." Rutt eluded to its use in his post. It is very easy and quick to do and can add loads of sharpness without the back ground noise. This works especially well for BIF as blue sky just loves to get "noisy" when sharpened. The only "hard" part is getting used to using layer masks.
The following is a primer on this method:
Make a copy of your layer. (ctrl+j)
Sharpen your image. Don't worry about noise, just get your bird/critter as sharp as you want it.
Add a layer mask. Layer...Layer Mask....Hide All. This adds a Layer mask to the layer that hides the layer you just sharpened.
Select a Soft Edged Brush and paint with white on the layer you just added a mask to. This will now reveal your sharpened image. Only paint on the part of the image you want sharpened.
You can also adjust the Opacity of the layer you just sharpened if you oversharpened to start with.
Option 2. For those of you that are not comfortable with layer masks you can try this option.
Select the lasso tool
Just under the menu bar you will see a bar that has options for the lasso tool. Add a 20-30 px feather to this bar.
Make a generous selection of your bird/critter.
Copy this to another layer (ctrl+J) or Layer...New...Layer via copy.
Sharpen this layer. This will only sharpen the part of the image that you copied to the new layer. The feathering will blend the sharpening in with the rest of the layer.
This option is not as good as the first method but you wont have to add a layer mask.
I hope this makes sense. If it doesn't please let me know and I can make up a more detailed guide.
Thanks, sTeve, just got home and skimmed it. i mean i haven't fed the dogs and they are overdue, just skimming stuff.
But I will print/fave places/and e-mail it to myself for save to my computer.
My problem, well one is, until I definitely know I want a shot forever, I don't want to put that much work into it. People would probably prefer to see really well worked up shots, but I am finding the PS stuff to be more and more time consuming.
And, especially as I work with this lens, I am doing a lot of shooting. I could only show people stuff they like, but it never ceases to surprise me that something that I would have thrown in the trash, if I could part with much of anything I shoot, I work it up, someone likes it, I look at it again, and I love it. I have one of those shots up now.
I don't know what thread it is on, but it is a bird flying off a bush. It is oversharpened, accidentally. I need to fix that. But it was not a shot I planned on working up...................did it for some reason, but didn't expect anyone to like it..........someone did, now I love it. So I don't know what I am keeping forever until about a month goes by. I am not keeping up with post work very well.
I stopped at the beach today. Someone reminded me that birds are there, too, when they posted Shore Birds. So I have 2 gbs of them. I have to upload them, yet I decided not to be on the PC tonight, but I need to do that.
Well, I just don't always spend a lot of time in post. If I do, I will remember to let everyone know. Right now, by the time I sharpen, I just do it, with some thought, but not as much as some of you pros do.
ginger
I really appreciate that info, though, really, as i have been confused re layer masks for a long time, maybe this will clarify things..........and that is how I learn.
Comments
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
The first suffers from oversharpening of the vegatation in the foreground. This is a very common problem and we all have it. If you sharpen enough to get the subject matter to look good, often it will be too much for any in-focus vegatation. There are several ways to address this:
There is a problem that even your excellent first shot suffers from and which seems common to almost all shots of white birds. How to keep the birds white and still show some feather detail? Pathfinder and I have struggled with several of his favorite shots trying to acheive this and I have to say we really have not found the answer. I'm willing to play with this some more, but I'll need access to the raw version.
Photographs by Dixie
| Canon 1Ds | Canon 5D Mark II | Canon 5D | Canon 50D | Canon 10D | Canon EOS Elan 7 | Mamiya Pro S RB67 |
...and bunches of Canon lenses - I'm equipment rich and dollar poor!
I might go ahead and buy it, use the Amazon "prize" to get a Scott Kelby "how to" book. I went along with a lot of auto stuff, especially in the bridge. I am afraid I will need more memory. I will have no money left, but if I get more memory, I hope someone here can tell me how to install it. I have about 700 something now in memory, but it went low last night. The reviews at Amazon would have led me to expect that.
I need help in using the search here, I plugged in things like CS2, etc, don't remember, kept trying, then I remembered FM, was a much easier search. Most people don't seem to think it is worth the money. I wanted to know about the noise reduction and the sharpening. The bridge was not a factor to me. If someone could help me know which search words to use, I can find problems others have had, or the Scott Kelby book can do that.
Rutt, those birds aren't going to show any feather detail. I think people are expecting too much sometimes. That is a full frame shot there, too far away for feather detail.
On the exposure, the birds looked too white. CS2 auto liked them like that, I fought it. Then I checked it, even made them a little less exposed w the highlight thing, checked again. Either my old CS is off, my eyes are off, or this CS2 is off. They are not stark white, they are correct white according to eye dropper, CS2, etc. But no feather detail, too far away.
On the flying bird, I could have fought for some more detail in the wings. I didn't. This was all an experiment, and I was trying to get to bed before my husband got up.
If you want detail, then one, you have to realize that the whole bird is not white. Shadows, etc. come into play and they need to be brought out. The photograph has to be taken close enough to the bird to get that. I have been lucky enough, during nesting season, to get that close to a bird TWICE, at most. Otherwise I have to use what I have. IMO. Oh, you might mean that preening feather stuff I did get while the birds are nesting. I guess I did get that. Very rarely do they do that now, for me, and not right in my face, so to speak. They do it for a short time and far away.
Maybe, we, I, should look for different things different seasons.
I have seen other shots, from others where the birds look "smooth", I recognize them right off as a bird that is far away. My school of thought on that is to leave them far away and get a landscape w birds. I have been trying to shoot like the better birders here, and I guess not done too well, but I do have thoughts on the subject.
I am glad and amazed and surprised that you like these shots. In general. The only difference was CS2 over CS. I did the SAME Little Green Heron again, w/o any cropping, though I was tempted to get more in front than back, but I wanted a virgin "no crop" to see what was going on w the sharpness and see if this would help. Not sure what helped, I think it was the advanced part of the sharpening. Plus it seemed to start out better and go together.
I am going to stop rambing and talk to my husband. He has not seen this, knows nothing about it, except the problems I was having. He leaves for out of town again tonight.
ginger
Bravo Ginger. Looks like you are quickly getting the hand of that monster lens of yours.
BMP
"Osprey Whisperer"
OspreyWhisperer.com
“PHOTOGRAPHY IS THE ‘JAZZ’ FOR THE EYES…”
http://jwear.smugmug.com/
However, they, too, say to do it wide open. I don't feel comfortable not leaving leeway from the shoulder to the eye. I am not that close to them, the birds. I had it wide open for awhile yesterday.
I do go higher if there is more than one bird involved. I try to keep the fstop low, but I am getting very fast shutter speeds.
My percentages of good shots depends a lot on where I shoot and what time of day, as you did point the time of day out. There have been factors involved in both of those things recently: where I shot and time of day. I got a terribly high percentage yesterday (Mon aug 29), and at the causeway, Friday. I may seem to post too many, but I don't post all I shoot, nor do I post all I like. I hate not doing that, but I do draw a line. I use a monopod when it gets darker.
Thanks for looking and commenting. Also for sharing the advice.
ginger
My Photo gallery- rohirrim.smugmug.com
Selective Sharpening Tutorial
Making a Frame for your image (Tutorial)
I like the last one best. It's great to be able to see the exif.
I usually try to use the widest aperture that I can get in order to get the fastest shutter speed and "freeze" the action. I think you could avoid the green speckles in the background if you could get away from the 800 ISO. But, it may not have been a very light situation that you had.
I do wonder about the speckely look of the green in the background. I get that too. Is it the ISO or could it be smoothed out by smoothing the "blue speckles" of "digital noise" using Scott Kelby's method. I have not had the time to try all of his tips on the CS2 sharpening and smoothing techniques.
There is so much to learn in Photoshop. I've had CS2 for a while and still hardly know what is there. I just learned how to convert to LAB and use the curves there. That was a big help with the color casts on my gorillas. It was a thrill to discover the method after I've heard Rutt talk about it for a year. It was all Greek to me until now.
I have yet to catch a good bird in flight shot. I tried a couple at the zoo, but I was only using the 200mm lens. So, nothing good.
These three shots are all nice. But the last one is very beautiful. You are definitely getting the technique down. Keep it up.
Susan Appel Photography My Blog
It is interesting what some people see that others don't.
What you are referring to in undoubtedly "noise", and I would assume that could be dealt with. It is a trade off, the more you reduce the noise, the more the sharpness goes down.
I just get it so that I like it. MY background is blk and white 400 ASA film in the seventies, no care about noise. Digital noise is different from film noise.
To avoid d noise, some people go to great extremes of spot on exposure and stuff.
But, hey, this is supposed to be fun! And tech stuff has never been as important to me. Back when I was doing my film noisy blk and wh, others were doing very high resolution slow speed film shots, for all the technical reasons going on here. (I used high ASA and even pushed it, others used very low ASA and based their souls on it. When it went out of production, they bought it up as reserves for the future. It has always been a matter of some do/some don't.)
later,
You can deal w the noise in the RAW, in USM, and in noise reduction in CS2.
And luminosity is important there, too. Smooths it all down, at the expense of the sharpness. So people like Harry would say the exposure has to be spot on.
I have a dr appt in 15 min and am not ready,
later, thanks, Snappy,
ginger
The following is a primer on this method:
- Make a copy of your layer. (ctrl+j)
- Sharpen your image. Don't worry about noise, just get your bird/critter as sharp as you want it.
- Add a layer mask. Layer...Layer Mask....Hide All. This adds a Layer mask to the layer that hides the layer you just sharpened.
- Select a Soft Edged Brush and paint with white on the layer you just added a mask to. This will now reveal your sharpened image. Only paint on the part of the image you want sharpened.
- You can also adjust the Opacity of the layer you just sharpened if you oversharpened to start with.
Option 2. For those of you that are not comfortable with layer masks you can try this option.- Select the lasso tool
- Just under the menu bar you will see a bar that has options for the lasso tool. Add a 20-30 px feather to this bar.
- Make a generous selection of your bird/critter.
- Copy this to another layer (ctrl+J) or Layer...New...Layer via copy.
- Sharpen this layer. This will only sharpen the part of the image that you copied to the new layer. The feathering will blend the sharpening in with the rest of the layer.
- This option is not as good as the first method but you wont have to add a layer mask.
I hope this makes sense. If it doesn't please let me know and I can make up a more detailed guide.Regards,
My Photo gallery- rohirrim.smugmug.com
Selective Sharpening Tutorial
Making a Frame for your image (Tutorial)
But I will print/fave places/and e-mail it to myself for save to my computer.
My problem, well one is, until I definitely know I want a shot forever, I don't want to put that much work into it. People would probably prefer to see really well worked up shots, but I am finding the PS stuff to be more and more time consuming.
And, especially as I work with this lens, I am doing a lot of shooting. I could only show people stuff they like, but it never ceases to surprise me that something that I would have thrown in the trash, if I could part with much of anything I shoot, I work it up, someone likes it, I look at it again, and I love it. I have one of those shots up now.
I don't know what thread it is on, but it is a bird flying off a bush. It is oversharpened, accidentally. I need to fix that. But it was not a shot I planned on working up...................did it for some reason, but didn't expect anyone to like it..........someone did, now I love it. So I don't know what I am keeping forever until about a month goes by. I am not keeping up with post work very well.
I stopped at the beach today. Someone reminded me that birds are there, too, when they posted Shore Birds. So I have 2 gbs of them. I have to upload them, yet I decided not to be on the PC tonight, but I need to do that.
Well, I just don't always spend a lot of time in post. If I do, I will remember to let everyone know. Right now, by the time I sharpen, I just do it, with some thought, but not as much as some of you pros do.
ginger
I really appreciate that info, though, really, as i have been confused re layer masks for a long time, maybe this will clarify things..........and that is how I learn.