Puffin

[Jonathan Ashton]

Canon 5D IV Canon 500mm f4 L IS II
Auto ISO 2000 (+1.0) 1/1000 sec f8
ACR + PSCC
Not too happy about the fuzzy edge of the background rock, I did wonder about blurring it - any alternative suggestions would be gratefully received.
Image taken on the Farne Islands, all comments welcome.

[Krishna Prasad kotti]

Very Nice Image. I like the Green Background. May be the bird is bit too central in the Frame,

I also noticed out of focus background rocks. I do not have any suggestions. I am interested as what other will say.

TFS

[John Mack]

I don't mind the rock. The green background is great. Nice pose on the bird with very good detail as well. Nice one.

[David Cowling]

A lovely image Jonathan. Lots of feather detail and exposure looks spot on. I like the smooth green background. OOF rocks ok with me.

[Mike Poole]

OOF rocks a little unfortunate but a long way off a deal breaker. The bird itself is beautifully presented. I'd be tempted to get rid of the yellow patch just behind the puffin but we're well into nit picking territory now

Nice work Jon

Mike

[annmpacheco]

Hi Jon, I'm interested as well how to tame the rock line but no suggestions from me. I realize your "puffin exposure" in the past has been addressed and your preference remains unchanged. I see your blacks here overexposed and the orange feet pale... I realize it is very likely we will disagree, thats okay, just speaking for my eyes. If this exposure was unchanged from the original exposure then the whites would have to be blown with this much light "illuminating" the blacks to the point where they are brownish/grey... There are details in the whites except on the top of the chest and I wonder if those whites are too hot? I'm trying to understand why your puffins (blacks) are always IMO "overexposed and for you, "just right...?" Enlighten me no pun intended, thanks Jon

[Dorian Anderson]

The rock line is minor and would require major cloning to manage. I love the detail in this shot, particularly on those amazing feet! I agree with Ann about the blacks. He looks a bit washed out as he now.

[Arthur Morris]

BLACKs and colors look great to me (on my admittedly slightly dark monitor). In addition, I believe that this is a hatch year bird and that the wing coverts, tertials, and flight feathers should be brownish black. Or not... The o-o-f rock bothers me just a bit but not as much as the bit of yellow stuff right where the lower back meets the rock. A superbly handsome pose and a very sharp image.

with love, artie

[Arthur Morris]

Carved the edge of the rock with a 20% hardness Clone Stamp Brush and added 2 points of BLACK to the BLACKs and the Neutrals in Selective Color. Better or worser?

with love, artie

[Jonathan Ashton]

Anne I presented the puffin pretty much well as it appeared on the day. Most people don't understand that their appearances vary with age and under different lighting conditions. If that sounds condescending I apologise it is not intended.
I distinctly remember seeing the blacks as they are here, or very close to this. I was indeed a little surprised how pale some of the blacks were. If you see other posts I made you will note some are indeed richer.

The histogram is just about perfect no whites blown and no blacks clipped, I start using Camera Neutral, if you use "Standard" you are starting from Adobe's version or Canon's version which are instantly visually richer so you will instantly be impressed by the more vibrant colours and you will be biased. I start from Neutral it is totally flat and then I add curves, contrast highlights etc with saturation and or a little vibrance to achieve what I recall. If you set your camera to Neutral the histogram of the jpeg will give a better reflection of the dynamic range, Standard applies contrast so the histogram will be pinched, I suspect this is why you thought my histogram would have been blown.

Artie there is a subtle difference in colours and I like your version very much, hand on heart I don't know if I prefer yours or mine or which is closer to reality. Thanks for taking the time to make a repost I really appreciate it. I like what you did to the rock but I am not clearly understanding what/how you did it.
I also have my screen very accurately colour calibrated and set to a luminance of 100 I think most people have in the region of 120, but I currently have mine at 100 because it seems to be reasonably close to good for prints/proofing and because I now have a larger screen I find that brighter can be a bit overbearing and it makes my eyes tired. My study is low ambient light. I cannot stress how much ambient light can affect your judgement, it has caught me out numerous times.

[Arthur Morris]

Artie there is a subtle difference in colours and I like your version very much, hand on heart I don't know if I prefer yours or mine or which is closer to reality. Thanks for taking the time to make a repost I really appreciate it. I like what you did to the rock but I am not clearly understanding what/how you did it.

I also have my screen very accurately colour calibrated and set to a luminance of 100 I think most people have in the region of 120, but I currently have mine at 100 because it seems to be reasonably close to good for prints/proofing and because I now have a larger screen I find that brighter can be a bit overbearing and it makes my eyes tired. My study is low ambient light. I cannot stress how much ambient light can affect your judgement, it has caught me out numerous times.

What is reality other than what we remember? Or think we remember? There is simply no way to determine which colors are right; it is all personal opinion :)

I cloned away the o-o-f edge of the rock using the Clone Stamp Tool with the hardness set to 20% If you overlaid the two images you would see that the rock is now a bit smaller :)

with love, artie

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Jon, a good had that day and great to see you processing more from the day. I see artie has beaten me to a RP since leaving a message for you, but I will add my thoughts too.

Colours look good to me, but on this occasion I think you could afford to drop the Shadows for a bit more of a richer look to the plumage. In the real darks it is minimally clipped, something to look at for any prints, but easily addressed with a quick adjustment brush. I might also just burn the nearest foot for a little more 'tonal balance', but personal taste. If I'm correct, I think you may have added some Vibrance witch I might reduce or remove, it just adds that tinge of yellow IMHO and so the whites become a tad 'cleaner'. Agree that the yellow triangle is removed and the yellow in the rock too, by your sign off. I also think from recollection the rock was more 'cooler', however I might get a bit more detail from the rock in ACR, but being a 'softer ' look in the OP, some folk may prefer that, as it does not distract from the clarity & nice detail within the subject.

Cheers
Steve

[Arthur Morris]

Hi Jon, a good had that day and great to see you processing more from the day. I see artie has beaten me to a RP since leaving a message for you, but I will add my thoughts too.

Colours look good to me, but on this occasion I think you could afford to drop the Shadows for a bit more of a richer look to the plumage. In the real darks it is minimally clipped, something to look at for any prints, but easily addressed with a quick adjustment brush. I might also just burn the nearest foot for a little more 'tonal balance', but personal taste. If I'm correct, I think you may have added some Vibrance witch I might reduce or remove, it just adds that tinge of yellow IMHO and so the whites become a tad 'cleaner'. Agree that the yellow triangle is removed and the yellow in the rock too, by your sign off. I also think from recollection the rock was more 'cooler', however I might get a bit more detail from the rock in ACR, but being a 'softer ' look in the OP, some folk may prefer that, as it does not distract from the clarity & nice detail within the subject.

Cheers
Steve

Me thinks that we might be delving too deeply into the minutiae our craft ...

with love, artie

PS: mi·nu·ti·ae: the small, precise, or trivial details of something.

[Steve Kaluski]

Perhaps Artie :S3:, but sometimes it’s the the little things that can make the biggest difference. :w3

[Arthur Morris]

Perhaps Artie :S3:, but sometimes it’s the the little things that can make the biggest difference. :w3

I agree Steve. I am fine with discussing the little things. But the miniscule gives me a headache!

with love, artie

[Steve Kaluski]

Lol, sorry Artie wasn’t planning to give you a headache, but FYI Jon and I have had many discussions about ‘refining’ images and with his Scientific background he has an enquiring mind!!!
Perhaps we should keep the ‘micro’ detail just between ourselves and keep to a more broader approach. :wave:

[annmpacheco]

Anne I presented the puffin pretty much well as it appeared on the day. Most people don't understand that their appearances vary with age and under different lighting conditions. If that sounds condescending I apologise it is not intended.
I distinctly remember seeing the blacks as they are here, or very close to this. I was indeed a little surprised how pale some of the blacks were. If you see other posts I made you will note some are indeed richer.

The histogram is just about perfect no whites blown and no blacks clipped, I start using Camera Neutral, if you use "Standard" you are starting from Adobe's version or Canon's version which are instantly visually richer so you will instantly be impressed by the more vibrant colours and you will be biased. I start from Neutral it is totally flat and then I add curves, contrast highlights etc with saturation and or a little vibrance to achieve what I recall. If you set your camera to Neutral the histogram of the jpeg will give a better reflection of the dynamic range, Standard applies contrast so the histogram will be pinched, I suspect this is why you thought my histogram would have been blown.

Artie there is a subtle difference in colours and I like your version very much, hand on heart I don't know if I prefer yours or mine or which is closer to reality. Thanks for taking the time to make a repost I really appreciate it. I like what you did to the rock but I am not clearly understanding what/how you did it.
I also have my screen very accurately colour calibrated and set to a luminance of 100 I think most people have in the region of 120, but I currently have mine at 100 because it seems to be reasonably close to good for prints/proofing and because I now have a larger screen I find that brighter can be a bit overbearing and it makes my eyes tired. My study is low ambient light. I cannot stress how much ambient light can affect your judgement, it has caught me out numerous times.

Thank you Jon for your explanation. I will experiment with camera Neutral and compare. Appreciate your time...

[Jonathan Ashton]

Steve thanks for the repost - looks good. The plumage looks a little better in yours I think. Yes you caught me at it with the vibrance, I use use it a little more than usual in this image! Your whites are certainly cleaner than mine.

[Steve Kaluski]

Yes you caught me at it with the vibrance, I use use it a little more than usual in this image! Your whites are certainly cleaner than mine.

Hi Jon, I guess, like you, our 'previous' lives can often come into play within the field of Photography and so sometimes it's hard to keep our thoughts contained. Hope you had a good weekend, catch up soon. :S3:

[David Salem]

I don't care who's repost it is but I love this one and think its one of your best images posted!! Everything looks spot on to me besides some minor personal preference tweaks. Fantastic Johnathan!!