Red-tailed landing

[arash_hazeghi]

This was kinda unusual, I was shooting with my WA gear as I noticed this baby was so close on the ground, I tried to approach but it quickly jumped off the ground establishing its authority by landing on the post.

http://www.stanford.edu/~ahazeghi/Photos/birds/red-tailed%20lnading.jpg

Taken with a "wide angle" lens:p
Nikon D700 24-70 f/2.8 AF-S 70mm@ f/2.8 1/640sec ISO 400

[Kim Rollins]

Wide angle? I am impressed!
I love this one. What a beautiful bird and I do like the talons stretched out to land.

You got a lot right with this one with good light, exposure, bg, color is wonderful IMO.
Well done.

I suggest your try a Level Adjustment Layer and clip about 10 points on the light side. Then do a final sharpening with twice the sharpening on the dark pixels as the light ones.

[arash_hazeghi]

here's a tighter crop (3:2 AR) plus more sharpening, the claws have some motion blur and dof was smaller than the size of the bird at f/2.8 but BG blur is nice in return:D

http://www.stanford.edu/~ahazeghi/Photos/birds/red-tailed%20lnading%202.jpg

[Stu Bowie]

Brilliant landing posture, and superb detail from the wings. Although beyond your control, a better perch would have been great. I feel your repost has been over sharpened a bit. Stands out nicely from the BG too. Very well captured.

[arash_hazeghi]

Thanks Stuart, I actually tried cloning the perch out and putting a better one but it didn't work cuz lightning was very different.ooops!:D

[david cramer]

It looks a tad over sharpened, but I love the pose and detail.

[Randy Stout]

Arash:

Very nice bird, technicals have been well covered. You mentioned trying to replace the post, I might try just removing it altogethor and see how it looks. I think it might fly (:)) Ok.

Its good to be alert to what else is going on around when shooting, sometimes you get an unexpected jewel.

Randy

[Arthur Morris]

Way sharp and a relatively nice BKGR considering the short focal length. I would not remove the post as the bird is so close to landing that it would pretty much an obvious fake. Replacing it might work.

[Arthur Morris]

I suggest your try a Level Adjustment Layer and clip about 10 points on the light side. Then do a final sharpening with twice the sharpening on the dark pixels as the light ones.

Kim, I am not too bad at Photoshop but I have no idea what you are saying above... Please explain with more detail to help folks learn.

Lastly, I have no idea why you would suggest clipping the highlights 10 points. That makes zero sense to me....

[Mark Dumbleton]

Interested to hear Kim's response on the clipping of the highlights!
Like the action captured here with the WA lens! Well done

[Doug Brown]

Beautiful bird and a great landing pose! I would brighten the bird just a little, but wouldn't change anything else.

[phillane]

Really like the pose and shot overall wings talons etc. The repost is over sharpened and should be redone, sharpening can be your best friend or worse enemy if over done. Anytime your highlights look pointilized you have gone too far. You can also use the lasso tool to isolate areas and sharpen them instead of an entire subject. Set the lasso feather option at least at two pixels and check the anit alias option as well. Last but not least the white of the wing tips have an iridescent look to them and need to be toned down a hair so they look less electric. I suggest going back to the original file and working from there. Really like this shot and would love to see the post processing done better. Artie is dead on, do not take the post out of the shot as it will look fake and ruin it.

[Randy Stout]

Arash:

I obviously will defer to Artie about what looks good, re: removing the post completely. I thought that because the bird so close to the bottom of the frame, it would be a believable image without the post.

Cheers

Randy

[Kim Rollins]

Arthur,

Since I began digital imaging the best learning tool that I can think of is probably critical critique by other of my own images but of course I must also mention "Experiment, experiment, experiment". However of great help too was the folks who not only critiqued but passed on a few suggestion for possible improvements. I try to "pass it on". Now because of time constraints specific details are not always included but I most always try to take the time to reply to question about those comment. That said, I would now be glad to try to explain and would hope afterward what I have suggested would make more then "zero sense" to you as "zero sense" doesn't seem like much to me. ;)

Possibly the best photography advice I ever got was- "Use the histogram." but in regards to pp it probably was - "What should be done to an image in pp is always image dependent."

THIS RT IMAGE - arash gave me an advantage in making recommendations because he left EXIF data in image file & from there I could see what software he uses (PSCS3 Win.).

From my very first viewing of the image there was lots I liked. Good exposure, colors, beautiful subject, BG is good,... etc. Maybe I was thinking -"I wish I would have captured that." and so that made me look closer. I assumed that it would take but little additional pp to POP IT. Realizing from looking at it that the exposure was good and there are not many "whites" in it I suspected very little and simple highlight adjustment may benefit it with some with added final sharpening as per my suggestions.
I have now taken it to PS (CS4) so that I can show you example of what I spoke of and to see if I was at error in my judgment and suggested technique. I will follow up on that below;

PP Work of this RT - Loaded it to PS and looked at the image in 'MY WORKSPACE' that has the Histogram set to Luminosity, All Channels View, and Show All Colors. My examination there showed or confirmed 'good exposure', 'no color cast of shadows or highlights that should be of concern' and 'little or no True Whites'.

http://www.pbase.com/kwr_01/image/111089307.jpg

This is what I expected when I made my suggestion as I assume that I could proceed with some adjustments of Highlights (brightening) without much fear of blowing them, few if no 'true white' exists so I would 'start simple' & 'start there'.
Simple to me is 'Levels Adjustments' thus - "Level Adjustment Layer and clip about 10 points on the light side".
I tried it & clipping the Right to 245- Screen Shot of Layer -

http://www.pbase.com/kwr_01/image/111089309.jpg

What I found from this experiment was it worked pretty well and I actually liked what it did to the bg but did not care for some slight color change (de-sat.) on the bird. I decided at this time to add one more simple step to my original suggestion. That step I hoped would boost the color of bird where needed but leave the bg as changed in step 1 (levels). I proceeded with a second "Adjustment Layer Vibrance" - Vibrance was increase (+70) but I did not change saturation, I then paint on mask over the bg with soft brush (black).
Screen Shot of Layers -
http://www.pbase.com/kwr_01/image/111089311.jpg

Now I liked where I am at with this and felt ready for some Final Sharpening. This is a place (or close) where a "Save As" of file and steps should take place so work is not lost. There are two options here to consider;

#1 is to "Save As"(copy) the file now with layers intact to .PSD, then flatten and proceed to duplicate the BG Layer and sharpen, .jpg saving for Web View. etc.

#2 is to make a New Layer that is a combination of all Layers and the work in them & then save the file (Layers intact) to PSD. After saving proceed with sharpening .jpg saving, etc.

Personally I go with #2 because I wish to save my work so that I can quickly go back and change or Sharpen for another use (print) should I decide to use it for that. I say this believing that Sharpening is dependent on different things including but not limited to what the image will be used for. I proceed with #2 Option above by activating top Layer in Layer Panel (as shown above) then using keyboard with Ctrl+Alt+Shift+E. This makes a New Layer (on top) that is a copy of the top and active Layer and all Layers/Changes beneath it. I would then rename the New Layer "Sharp" and then "Save As" to a PSD file with a "W" added to the front of file name. Once saved I can return and change anything I have done easily at any time and if I want to print it later I open that file and proceed to Sharpen for that.

For now and wanting this one for Web View I would activate Top Layer (Sharp) and do final sharpening for Web View and image size. Here and for this image I decided on Filter>Sharpen>USM 500./0.2/0. I then go to keyboard and Ctrl+J which gives me and exact copy of the Sharpen Layer- Yep I now have two copies of the same Sharp Layer (but not double Sharpening). In Layers Panel I active "Sharp" Layer (second from top) and in the box at top of Panel I change the Blending from Normal to Darken. Then I activate the Sharp Copy Layer (top) and change Blending from Normal to Lighten. Note that at this point the Sharpening as applied to the Image has not change but the Sharp Layers have. I now have one Sharp Layer with sharpening only of Darkened Pixel and one Sharp Copy Layer that is the sharpening of only the Lightened Pixels. I will not turn both of these off (click on eye icons at these layers) while watching the Image. When both are off Sharpening I have done is off too. Now I turn the Darken Sharp Layer on and watch the image, On/off/on/off and I like it so leave it off an turn only the Lighten Sharp Layer on. On/off/on/off needs reduction IMO so in order to adjust opacity I activate that layer (blue) and reduce opacity as I watch the image, slide opacity down, down, watch, down and it does look good at the 50% I estimated (could go down to 40% or so though). Stop there and turn on Darken Sharp Layer too - LOOK SEE with both Sharp Layers on. OK? More adjustment Dark or Light needed? If so make sure that layer is activated and change opacity of it.
http://upload.pbase.com/image/111095426/original.jpg

Hint- Often the Darken Layer will be fine but usually the Lighten Layer will need reduction. Image dependent but IMO Lighten Layer will need go down sometimes to 25% or lower. One can click the eye icons on and off, adjust until looks right and proceed to "Save As" .jpg for Web Viewing, etc.

[Kim Rollins]

http://www.pbase.com/kwr_01/image/111089304.jpg

Results as per above technique outlined

[arash_hazeghi]

Kim,
Thanks a bunch for taking the time to post detailed description of your pp, I really appreciate the effort. I actually did not use PSCS3 to convert/edit the Nikon NEF file, I used Nikon Capture NX2 so it's a little bit different than CS3/CS4. I then resized and did some smart sharpen in CS3 that's why EXIF says CS3. I too think that the repost was over sharpened but I guess visible sharpness is also a function of the screen you are using, I use a very high DPI LCD so sometimes what looks sharp on my screen looks not as good on some (especially laptop) screens. Your version looks good as well but I can see some subtle halo artifacts in the highlights in the upper edge of the wings, I'd personally take the original sharpening with your level adjustments, I am going to apply these to the original and then try to see if I can find a nicer perch for this baby. Fortunately this shot is large enough for a nice 12X8 print in my room:D

BTW, I just became a BPN member! I am pleased to get so many helpful comments from the experts on this site:o
Thank you all guys

[Kim Rollins]

arash -
You are welcome.
It is indeed a nice one to hang on your wall.The perch doesn't bother me as here in the High Desert they are usually perched on a post or pole and I am used to that but a perch change is fine too.

The "some subtle halo artifacts in the highlights in the upper edge of the wings" are probably from my sloppy brushing (black) job over the bg after the Vibrance Adjustment Layer as now that I think of it I was pretty 'quick and sloppy' with that brushing step (at least I do not think it was from the Sharpening).


One thing I forgot to mention is immediately after Sharpening I go Edit>Fade Sharpening>Luminosity>OK and this is to to avoid the Sharpening artifacts. The reason I forgot to include that is I have a 'script' set to run immediately after Sharpening that does that Fade step automatically so I will not forget to run it.