Feeding bear and sharpening

[Stan Cunningham]

I got overwhelmed at with work and last time I posted I got a few sharpening suggestions.
I thought I would post a bear shot from last years workshop with more of the suggestions incorporated122499.
This photo was taken with a 5D III, 500 F4 with a 1.4 III (700mm), 1/1000 sec at 6.3, ISO 1600 as it was a dark AK day.


<iframe width="468" height="60" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" src="http://mer54715.datafeedfile.com/widget/aff_widget_prdt_generate-2.0.php?aff_num=10536&aff_net=1&widget_num=1766"><p>Sorry your browser does not support iFrame</p></iframe>

[Rachel Hollander]

Hi Stan - interesting image as the focus is really the fish and the bear's claw. Sharpening wet fur is always a bit more difficult and I think it looks good. Only thing I might consider is masking out the water so it is not so sharp.

TFS,
Rachel

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Stan an interesting image and different to what we normally see. :cheers:

It would probably take me about an hour to write how to set up Curves the way I have, totally disregarding PS and more towards the image, however I do get the feeling/impression you have perhaps lightened the image? All I would say is look to playing with Curves and how it affects the image. You need more tonality and depth which is there and it's not just clicking on NIK stuff, I keep it simple and try to avoid that stuff, personal choice as I worry about what it does to pixels? If you get more tone in the image then you will get definition & form, it's the mid tones you have to watch, that's your detail. I had a quick play, but won't post unless you think it might help give direction.

Agree with Rachel on the water, but you have got the colour right, cold, I would just look to getting more colour in therei e via an adjustment layer or gradient.

TFS
Steve

[Stan Cunningham]

Steve, Although I would love to learn more about curves I don't won't you to have to write a novel on them. I will be the first to admit they frustrate me at times. I would be glad to look at your post and see if I can help bring out the midtones.
I did have to lighten the image as the bear had previously been charging at me through the water which was an exposure problem. If I went manual on the bear which is what I like to do, the water was 100% blown out on the cloudy day. The best my crew and I could do was to push it a stop and a half to 2 to keep details in the water and in some situations, like this, that resulted in an overly dark bear which had to be lightened. Good spot on your part.
Merry Christmas Steve and all!

[Roger Clark]

Hi Stan,

Look through the raw processing exercises in digital workflow. In my posts I say what values in curves I used. I also stay away from most canned tools these days as I find too often there are undesirable side effects. I stick mostly with selections and curves. Not mentioned so far, is the bokeh in your background looks a little harsh. I would run over that with a blur tool. Nice image but I would like the see the bear's eye(s). I would darken the background above and behind the bear and try and brighten the bear more. Nice action and plenty sharp.

Happy Holidays,
Roger

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Stan, this was where I was going with my thinking. By using Curves and a Gradient you can see where the changes have taken place. Perhaps the additional one round of light USM may not have been required, as the water is looking a little too sharp in parts, but hopefully you get the idea. I agree with Roger about the BKG, I actually drop the saturation and very roughly swept a % brush over some highlights with a hint of colour in the hope of reducing them.

Personally having highlights in the splashes is a given and nothing you can do so, I would look to getting the bear exposed and worry about the other parts later in post production, although easier said than done at times. :w3 Without seeing the RAW it's perhaps difficult to gauge in which direction you need to take or explore, however, if we park the tech bits, I still think the capture portrays the action & drama well in difficult conditions.

[Stan Cunningham]

Steve and Roger,
Thanks for your informative replies and when I get back to a computer where I can try some processing in a week I will give it a try.
And Rachel I think you comment is right on which means I have to go back and reprocess several, but I believe it will improve the images.
Stan

[Steve Kaluski]

And Rachel I think you comment is right on which means I have to go back and reprocess several, but I believe it will improve the images.

It can only get better Stan. :w3

[Morkel Erasmus]

I like the action here Stan. Steve's repost is right on the money as usual, adding good tonal depth.
Ditto on the water being a tad too 'crispy'.
I would also consider burning some of the bright OOF branches in the BG...

I would be interested to hear if Roger and Steve have found adverse effects of something like Nik Color Efex on a large printed file? Degraded IQ perhaps? :e3

[Roger Clark]

I would be interested to hear if Roger and Steve have found adverse effects of something like Nik Color Efex on a large printed file? Degraded IQ perhaps? :e3

Hi Morkel,
I have not used Nik Color Efex wo can't comment on that. Every image enhancement algorithm I have seen produces artifacts, and the visibility of the artifacts vary with image content. It is a matter for the operator to not push too far and make those artifacts obvious.

Roger