Wish I had seen this first.

[Amy DeStefanis]

Hi everyone,

I went ahead and posted my first image in the main Avian forum, but clearly, I need some help with processing this image. The original that I posted had been through several generations, getting it down to the proper size - so you can see that even the copyright printed on it is not sharp.

So, I posted this image - which is pretty much straight from the RAW file, just resized and saved as JPG. The next picture (next post) is one I've edited (conrast, black, white and color points, and unsharp mask), and then resized and saved straight to JPG - without going through multiple generations....

Any comments?

Thanks,
Amy D.

[Amy DeStefanis]

This is the image with edits, but without going through so many generations.

[Jim Poor]

The first thing I would mention is that you can go up to 800 pixels to give people more to look at and help with.

The color in your edited version looks pretty good, but I can't really judge more than that at this size.

Please tell me you have more images of the battle for the fish that was sure to follow this one!

To keep from degrading images with multiple editing sessions, save as TIFF instead of JPG until you are finished.

[LeeOtsubo]

Amy,
This is fantastic but, as Jim says, I'd like to see it as big as the site allows (800 pixels wide). How close were you to this action? The Exif data reports FL as 86mm. Either iEXIF isn't working correctly or I'm going to throw my cameras in the pond if you were standing next to this action.

[Alfred Forns]

Amy the interaction is fantastic Second post looks much better Do try posting at max size to be able to see better Big Congrats on this one !!!!

[George DeCamp]

Hey Amy,

Agree the 2nd one is way better but would be nice to see a full 800pixel image. The first one was also saved as a larger size yet it is 134.0 KB vs 146.4 KB for the smaller image so different quality settings on resize.

[Amy DeStefanis]

Amy,
This is fantastic but, as Jim says, I'd like to see it as big as the site allows (800 pixels wide). How close were you to this action? The Exif data reports FL as 86mm. Either iEXIF isn't working correctly or I'm going to throw my cameras in the pond if you were standing next to this action.
I wasn't exactly standing - I was sitting - in a kayak, and yes - I was only about 25-50 feet away. When the heron arrived I was zoomed in on the hawk eating his fish - and I zoomed out because I thought someone was about to fly away and I wanted to catch it. So, I was close, and the focal length is correct - but this is cropped in - it's about half the area of the original frame (so I wasn't THAT close). I had let my kayak drift up against a tree that was lying in the river - so, less than 50 feet for sure. I stayed zoomed out because I really thought one was going to fly away with the fish, and all I'd have is a pair of feet.

I'd been shooting the hawk for a while, so I think he was comfortable with my being there. About 5 minutes before this shot, some kind of squabble took place, and all I have is a couple of frames of blurry feathers to show for it - I didn't know what had happened, but then the heron came back. I think the first time, it was surprised off by my being there.... I had dismissed it - figured he had gone.... But he must have been watching and realized I wasn't a threat.

After the feathers were folded back up, it was a stand-off. The two of them standing on the log, eyeing each other, eyeing me. I stayed stark still. At some point I realized (oh yeah - I forgot to mention this) that the hawk had only one eye. The missing eye was on the side that the heron was on. So, I felt kind of guilty that he also had to watch me too.... But I was afraid that if I moved, the distraction would tip the scales. (and the kayak)

So, yes, I do have pictures of the stand-off. It's funny to see a contact-sheet because the horizon starts getting crooked. My arms were getting tired (gotta start working out!). Every now and then, the heron would take a swipe at the hawk, and the hawk would bristle.

Then, the hawk turned his attention back to the fish, and seemed to be frantically trying to do SOMETHING. The heron finally got too close for comfort, and the hawk managed to get the fish off the ground - in BETWEEN his legs... which I thought was odd (but then, why I would expect anything else, I don't know).

I suspect that this fish was scavenged by the hawk, and was originally the heron's. I never thought that hawks would scavenge, but this one might have been injured very young, and this was his survival tactic??? I dunno - maybe some bird behaviour experts out there can shed some light.

[Amy DeStefanis]

The first thing I would mention is that you can go up to 800 pixels to give people more to look at and help with.

The color in your edited version looks pretty good, but I can't really judge more than that at this size.

Please tell me you have more images of the battle for the fish that was sure to follow this one!

To keep from degrading images with multiple editing sessions, save as TIFF instead of JPG until you are finished.
HI Jim,

I would like to see it here in 800 pixels too, but every time I do, it's still over the size allowance - and that's using "Good Quality" saving JPG in Capture NX. That was the problem with the first post in the other forum - It was JPG to begin with (I'd put it in PS - Elements to add the copyright), and then I kept resizing it down.... and each time the colors became more garish, and the clarity just disappeared. Should I be using the "Good Balance" setting?

I did at least learn to go back to the original NEF file before saving a new copy - which is why I wish I'd posted this here first - to get the most I could out of it.

[Jim Poor]

HI Jim,

I would like to see it here in 800 pixels too, but every time I do, it's still over the size allowance - and that's using "Good Quality" saving JPG in Capture NX. That was the problem with the first post in the other forum - It was JPG to begin with (I'd put it in PS - Elements to add the copyright), and then I kept resizing it down.... and each time the colors became more garish, and the clarity just disappeared. Should I be using the "Good Balance" setting?

I did at least learn to go back to the original NEF file before saving a new copy - which is why I wish I'd posted this here first - to get the most I could out of it.


I don't use Capture NX so I can't say. Save for Web in Photoshopd does a good job of optimizing to the size you specify unless there is an extreme amount of detail in the BG. Then it gets a little trickier.

[Amy DeStefanis]

One problem with Photoshop is that it's Photoshop Elements - and it can't open the RAW file produced by the Nikon D80. (D70, yes) So, I tried it again, using Nikon Capture NX, and saved it at 800pixels, with a quality of 50. That makes it 146.2k. We'll see how it goes.

This is the version that I edited the color on, saved back to a new RAW file, and now have opened, resized, and saved as JPG.

Looks like it worked!

[David Lowell]

Thanks for posting Amy. Wonderful photograph and narrative.

[Harold Davis]

really nice job, amy!!! that last pic is fantastic!!!!

[LeeOtsubo]

One problem with Photoshop is that it's Photoshop Elements - and it can't open the RAW file produced by the Nikon D80. (D70, yes) So, I tried it again, using Nikon Capture NX, and saved it at 800pixels, with a quality of 50. That makes it 146.2k. We'll see how it goes.

This is the version that I edited the color on, saved back to a new RAW file, and now have opened, resized, and saved as JPG.

Looks like it worked!
Hi Amy,
It looks wonderful. The minor technical issues are completely overshadowed by the drama.

Photoshop Elements 3 (PSE3) or better will convert D80 NEF if you have Adobe Camera RAW (ACR) 3.6 or better. You can d/l ACR 3.6 here (http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/product.jsp?product=106&platform=Windows). The advantage to using ACR is that you can stay in PSE from start to finish instead of converting to JPEG in Nikon Capture NX before editing in PSE.

Unless you plan to upgrade to PS CS3, you might consider PSE 6. Both Mac and PC versions are now available. ACR gives you quite a bit of non-destructive editing power in the converter. A photo like this can be enhanced totally using the tools in ACR and the original will never be touched. All edits are saved in a separate file so you always have the original. PSE 6 can be had for as little as $49.95 on sale. Hope that helps.

[Amy DeStefanis]

Thanks Lee,

I'll have to check my version of PS Elements. When I try to open an NEF file, it tells me it can't open it. Thought I did have the latest version, but I'll double check.

Thanks for the feedback on the picture - this is definitely an emotional favorite. Now whenever we go down the river, we look out for our one-eyed hawk. It was quite an experience.