Capped Wheatear (South Africa)

[Dorian Anderson]

This bird would not let me get close, so I went with something wider since I like the vegetation and setting.

Canon 600mm f/4 IS II + 1.4x III on EOS R5
1/1250 at f/5.6, ISO 1600
Processed in LR CC and Topaz DN

194518

[Randy Stout]

Dorian:

I think the comp. is effective, with creamy background, but interesting detail in the foreground. Nice POV, head. turn, clear view of legs. I wonder if you could tease out anymore detail on the whites on the breast near the collar? The numbers are good re: exposure in the image as presented, but were they a little hot in the original?

It has been fun seeing a number of new species (for me) from your wanderings!

Cheers

Randy

[Jonathan Ashton]

Nice composition, I don't know if I am the only one but I sense your recent posts have been looking as though they carry too much yellow.

[Randy Stout]

Dorian:

I do agree with Jon that this image has quite a yellow hue to it.

Randy

[Volkan Akgul]

hi Dorian,

I agree with the comments. nice work as always.

[Dorian Anderson]

Dorian:

I think the comp. is effective, with creamy background, but interesting detail in the foreground. Nice POV, head. turn, clear view of legs. I wonder if you could tease out anymore detail on the whites on the breast near the collar? The numbers are good re: exposure in the image as presented, but were they a little hot in the original?

It has been fun seeing a number of new species (for me) from your wanderings!

Cheers

Randy

Yes, I tamed the whites a bit. But will revisit and see what more I can do. Cheers.

[Dorian Anderson]

Nice composition, I don't know if I am the only one but I sense your recent posts have been looking as though they carry too much yellow.

Yes, John. You are completely right. And the problem is persistent, specifically since I switched to the R5 about a year ago. Some are going to say it's a monitor issue, but I think it's more of a 'me' issue
and I do no fundamentally understand white balance; I just move the blue/yellow slider around and hope for the best. Short of taking a test shot of a white card in the field after each shot (not a realistic
solution), I'm not sure how to combat this. Like I said, the R5 had given me more issues the the mirror bodied. And I particularly struggle with images captured under cloud. I'm also better when there's
lots of blue (i.e. illuminated water) in the frame. So, this image is a double whammy: cloud and no blue! I've toggled between AWB and specific lighting conditions (i.e. cloud, sun) in the camera with
similarly yellow results after processing, so I'm really not sure what the issue is. Any advice is welcome. Cheers.

[Dorian Anderson]

Thank you Volkan!

[Dorian Anderson]

Dorian:

I do agree with Jon that this image has quite a yellow hue to it.

Randy

Randy - Please see my reply to Jon. Curious if you have an additional feedback/ideas to offer! Thanks.

[Randy Stout]

Dorian:

In Photoshop, I will often use the curves layer adjustment to start the process to balance colors. It is not full proof, but often gets you closer. There is a small box in the upper right hand corner that says auto. I will tick that and see what it does. Sometimes it works very well, other times, not, but it is a good starting point. I will sometimes reduces the opacity of that adjustment, if I feel it is too strong. If I am still not happy with it, then I will use the three eye droppers along the left hand side of the box, to check for black point, gray point, and white point. You may have to try several different spots for each eye dropper to get the best result.
There are many ways to adjust the color balance, I find this works nicely quite often.

[Randy Stout]

Dorian:

Here is your photo with the auto adjustment in the curves layer applied. You can easily tweak the opacity to adjust it further if you feel this is too cool. The image above is 100% opacity. I tried it at several different opacities, and thought that 75% might be a good balance, some warmth, but not dominated by the yellows.

The second image is the auto adjustment I showed originally, but with opacity reduced to 48% followed by using the black eye dropper to remove any remaining magenta. The blacks were set at around 25 to maintain some detail.

There are always many ways to get to the final result in PS.

Randy

[Joseph Przybyla]

Hi Dorian, I like the image. Nice composition and color palette. I agree with those that commenting on the yellow. It might be how your white balances is set in the camera, maybe biased towards warm/yellow. Also in Lightroom the Profile you choose to begin processing a image is important. Nice image, thank you for sharing.

[Steve Kaluski]

Yes, John. You are completely right. And the problem is persistent, specifically since I switched to the R5 about a year ago. Some are going to say it's a monitor issue, but I think it's more of a 'me' issue
and I do no fundamentally understand white balance; I just move the blue/yellow slider around and hope for the best. Short of taking a test shot of a white card in the field after each shot (not a realistic
solution), I'm not sure how to combat this. Like I said, the R5 had given me more issues the the mirror bodied. And I particularly struggle with images captured under cloud. I'm also better when there's
lots of blue (i.e. illuminated water) in the frame. So, this image is a double whammy: cloud and no blue! I've toggled between AWB and specific lighting conditions (i.e. cloud, sun) in the camera with
similarly yellow results after processing, so I'm really not sure what the issue is. Any advice is welcome. Cheers.

I think Dorian all of this I had been covered off in a previous thread, however:

Screen calibration is a must, you have to be on a level playing field, without it, you are a rabbit caught in headlights not knowing where to turn Dorian
Changing the profiles to Cloudy, Landscape are pointless IMHO, they will just give the file a slight push towards a colour bias ie landscape is a tad cooler bluer. However..., once you are more confident then occasional using them, but refining can have its place.
You use Lr so the WB profile should be Adobe standard as I have said, the other profiles offered, again are pointless.
Cannot see any issue with the R5, no colour shift from capture to exporting from your card, unless the camera is incorrectly set up. The colours are very reflective in the capture.
I have suggested a book to get which would help you process, but...

As presented the image is too yellow as stated, the whites lack detail, the plumage carrys very little fine detail. To my eye I think Randy's RP carry more magenta visible in the 'blacks'. You don't indicate Dorian how much of a crop this is, this too can impact on the final result. Using Topaz DN prior to output for web again is not good.

Dorian, you need to keep a very simple workflow, have your monitor calibrated and think Lr for Global, PS for the refined tweaks. I will offer again, if you wish to fire of a Raw, not a Tiff or JPEG and I will see if there is anything within the camera set up that might highlight an issue. I very much appreciate it can be a mine field, but keeping basic steps without going off piste is your best bet here Dorian, and so the image looks closer to your recollection.

All the best
Steve

[Andreas Liedmann]

Hi Dorian ... i do like the image with the bird being tiny in the frame.
All works for me , apart from the yellow cast .... which is a bit strong . Agree with Steve about the subject not being 100 % tack sharp .

Will not repeat the detailed info of Steve about the technical side of color , in which i do agree for the very most part .

I do not undrstand that you blame the R5 ... it is the man behind the camera and computer who is causing potential issues . So work on your skills ..... :bg3:.

I took the freedom to create a very simple approach to maybe make the image a bit better from the color POV ... not saying it is correct !!! But at least the color cast is gone .... with neutral darks and almost neutral whites . All done with one click with the eyedropper on a curves layer ..... plus tweak the HL in the blue and green channel ( took me 20 sec ) .

Wonder what you say .... BTW the same thing can be done in LR , i guess .

TFS Andreas

[Andreas Liedmann]

Dorian:

Here is your photo with the auto adjustment in the curves layer applied. You can easily tweak the opacity to adjust it further if you feel this is too cool. The image above is 100% opacity. I tried it at several different opacities, and thought that 75% might be a good balance, some warmth, but not dominated by the yellows.

Randy

Hi Randy personal taste ... for me it is off on the color front , and hitiing the auto button is never a wise choice , IMHO , but your call . Hope you do not mind my straight forward opinion :bg3:

Cheers Andreas

[Daniel Cadieux]

I've found that most of the Canon bodies I've had have been heavy on the yellows when it comes to greens, especially when green is the dominant colour of a scene such as the BG you have here. My 7DII was notorious for this, and I find the R6 does this as well, but not as aggressively. I've only ever adjusted this by adding some blues to the yellow channel in "Selective Colour". In the repost here I added 40 points of cyans and reduced 20 points of yellows. Easy peasy (in this case). You do not seem to have this issue apart from "cloudy" days or with other colours as you say, so this could be the culprit.

Of course that is just one theory, but at least it gives you another option to investigate. My repost Looks similar to Andreas' repost and also took no more than 20 seconds so there are many ways to skin a cat with PS! :-)

[Dorian Anderson]

Everyone - here is the file nearly straight-out-of-camera. I say nearly because I made the following changes in LR (none affect WB).

1) I cropped away about 20% of frame.
2) I cloned some crap in the fore- and backgrounds.
3) I increased exposure by 0.25.
4) I dropped highlights by 40 and increased shadows by 40 (numbers are relative program to program though).

I'm hoping someone will see something in this relatively-unmanipulated image that will help me address my WB issues.

Steve (and anyone else who wants to chime in) - it is at this point, with only those basic adjustments, that I would bounce the equivalent tiff into Topaz and do NR (thought I'm not sure this image needs it). I usually use ~10 points of DN and maybe 5 of sharpening and 5 detail recovery; since I rarely shoot above ISO 3200, so my minimal DN settings are usually enough. I never use 'Auto' as it applies too much of everything. After Topaz kicks out a noise-reduced tiff, I import that into LR and perform the remainder of my manipulations there: clarity, dehaze (if necessary), vib/sat, curves, sharpening, etc. I then export for web with some additional output sharpening. I do not understand the various sorts of sharpening. THERE IS NO PHOTOSHOP INVOLVED IN MY WORKFLOW. I am too busy leading birding tours, pet-sitting my way around the country, and writing my own book to learn it at this time. I have not spent more than 7 nights in any one bed, house, or hotel this year, but I'll have more stability when I return home to SF in April. Book should be done as well, so I'll have more time to overhaul my workflow then.

So, what are the weak points in my CURRENT workflow? You always tell me the wrong ways to DN and sharpen, but I'm hoping you can tell me the best way to do it given the confines my current method (i.e. no PS)
Thanks in advance.

194532

[Dorian Anderson]

Andreas and Dan,

Both of those versions do look better, thanks.

Andreas - I don't blame the camera; it's just taking me longer to how it plays with software under certain conditions.

Dan - I don't know how to change blues and yellows in dependently in LR. I just move the slider one way or the other; a increase in one is necessarily a decreased in the other.

[Daniel Cadieux]

Ah yes, LR only for you. You can tweak individual colours in the Development panel, down lower in the right column you find the colors that you can adjust individually. If you choose the yellow channel and tweak the "Hue" to the right it will render them cooler, more toward green.

The workflow you describe in your repost, is that for image in pane# 17 or for the original post? Asking as they look so much different (repost on pane #17 being better).

[Dorian Anderson]

Ah yes, LR only for you. You can tweak individual colours in the Development panel, down lower in the right column you find the colors that you can adjust individually. If you choose the yellow channel and tweak the "Hue" to the right it will render them cooler, more toward green.

The workflow you describe in your repost, is that for image in pane# 17 or for the original post? Asking as they look so much different (repost on pane #17 being better).

OK, that panel looks familiar. I sometimes use it to knock down the luminosity in select color channels, like if blue water appears a bit bright.
I hadn't though to use it to tweak WB as the single Blue-Yellow temp slider is my default. Good to know I have finer control than I realized.

Given the feedback I received on the original post, I scrapped my original rendering and went back to the RAW to generate panel #17.
If I thought it needed more than the basic NR which LR offers, I'd next bounce the equivalent TIFF into Topaz, do the NR, then send that
TIFF back to LR for everything else. So, panel #17 represents about the first 1/3 of my workflow, if that makes sense. Knowing it looks
decent for that stage of the process, I'll try to run that image through the remaining 2/3 later today and post the result this evening. Cheers.

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Dorian, will reply tomorrow, however if you don’t use PS, then critical stages can’t be addressed.

Yes, you can export from Lr and use the functions within the Export window, but after a month I found it was less than ideal and came back to PS for Save for Web and ultimately sharpening which is still the best by far.

[Dorian Anderson]

OK, took some of the suggestions and generated this. I think the colors are much closer to what Andreas and Dan generated.

I also tamed the highlights and eased up on the blacks a bit. Cheers.

194537

[Steve Kaluski]

Firstly Dorian, this is a general reply and not a specific reply, just my take, nor is it going to be/can be a definitive/silver bullet on how to process an image. That is a separate topic for another part of the forum, but again, it can only be a general step guide as each image needs top be treated on it’s own merits. Yes if multiple images shot in the same light, can perhaps be viewed as a form of ‘batch processing’, but again each image after that is reviewed for fine tuning.

Calibration has been covered, it's now your call which way you go, not to calibrate, or to calibrate and be on the same Hymn sheet.


From what you have said I think you are wanting to do all your PP under one roof within Lr and that simply won’t work, irrespective if you used ACR, C1, DPP, DXO, Lr or any other raw converter as they all have their limitations and need additional support as in PS. Yes they all have come a long way, most now have masks/layers which you can apply even more adjustments, but just having some basic grasps in PS is key to further enhancing your capture. Layers & masks, Adjustment panel, Blend modes are just three areas that take less than an hour to understand and grasp, but will have a huge/positive/significant input to your images, in addition PS offers the best sharpening tools and Export, Save for web (Legacy) is perfect for prepping images for the web. Rarely will anyone ever understand the full potential of PS because it covers a wealth of areas, however, knowing some basic things makes all the difference. Most will have around 10%, and no denying it can be a daunting software, or complicated at times, but simplicity is the key.


The added bonus with Lr & PS is that you can export your raw file after Global changes to PS, make changes/tweaks, save back to Lr, you then have both the Raw & Tiff together and can still make changes to the Tiff within Lr as you already do. Crop the Tiff in Lr, then Export it as you do, but now it then opens up in PS where you sharpen for output at the given size ie 1920. 1600, 1200… flatten, Save for web, job done.


Knowing exactly what the image requires within the PP workflow is the hard word work, the application is easy. But you then soon get into a rhythm and find/realise not ALL sliders need to be applied, often the less used the better the image, but you begin to build your workflow and the way raw Converters are built you just simply drill down at each stage ready to output to PS.


Regarding Topaz, whether you apply it at the raw stage or on the baked Tiff, the jury is out for me. I still will do any NR at the raw stage, but always at full size because you never know how it will be cropped, and never at the final stage ie output. Yes Topaz when left on auto often flattens out stuff, personally I feel the amount is too much, so pegging the numbers back to numbers in below 10 often is better, plus zeroing any additional sharpening, which it’s not meant to be, this is where PS comes into play, output sharpening. Yes you again have multiple options in choices of what to use, but USM is probably the most common and easy to use/apply, but again input number are kept low to avoid halos.


If you do decide to invest via Adobe CC and get PS you need to be aware that both Lr & PS talk in the same manner ie settings, in PS under Edit Colour settings are changed and not left default so if in Lr you are using ProPhoto RGB, when exported to PS it too has the same Working space. Lr > Export is correctly set, ie File Settings, Image sizing, Metadata, Watermark, Post-production but leaving Output sharpening unchecked. Then as the file opens in PS, sharpen, Save for web (Legacy) has the relevant checked boxes, Optimise file is set to a figure to meet the 600kb rule and ‘Quality’ is correctly set and when Saving the image, it goes to the correct folder.




It’s all about being orderly and using the right tools for the job and PS is a must and a key element in PP, Dorian you can do it and your images will suddenly be transform over night. :wave: