Gotta Love Lake Blue Cypress

[Doug Brown]

So many of my Osprey photos in the past were against sky BGs. One of the things that makes Lake Blue Cypress so special is the opportunity to photograph these birds against non-sky BGs. I think that non-sky BGs definitely take flight images to the next level.

92838

Canon 1D Mark IV, 500mm, f/5, 1/2000, ISO 500, manual exposure, hand held

[Kiran Poonacha]

Sure Doug Bhai, I dont even consider trying to work a sky BG flight shot, unless the bird is a lifer for me, great pop of the Bird from the BG. Nice PP too sir.. :5

[Ofer Levy]

Great stuff Doug!!

[Troy Lim]

BG makes it special for this shot.
Glad you had a great time!

[Keith Bauer]

Beautiful pose. The background looks like it has had additional blurring applied. True? False?

[Stu Bowie]

I agree Doug, non sky BG's always work so much better. Good diagonal pose across the frame, and overall sharp, and well exposed. Looks like you had a productive trip.

[Doug Brown]

Beautiful pose. The background looks like it has had additional blurring applied. True? False?

No additional BG blurring was applied Keith.

[arash_hazeghi]

Awesome Doug, love the pose and of course the green BG!

[Krijn Trimbos]

Gorgeous shot. I looks like you guys had a lot of fun with these beautiful birds! Love the BG, pose and sharpness capture. I must say that it does seem like the bird is stiched on the BG though.....For me the bird is a little big in the frame. I wish it was mine!

[Doug Brown]

I must say that it does seem like the bird is stiched on the BG though

Thanks Krijn! I think the bird has a cut and paste look to it because of the white feather edges. Here's a 100% RAW file crop that shows the feather edges up close.

92846

[Allen Hirsch]

Wow, Doug! Gotta love that detail in the osprey's feet, even at 100%. Man that's sharp!

[Kaustubh Deshpande]

Doug, agree that the BG is what makes it so good. It has just the right amount of blur. Dynamic pose showing the typical Osprey wing shape.

Compositionally, very strong image. Since its a diagonal comp, you could really make the best use of the real estate...enough room to fly and still have the impact of a tight flight shot.

[Peter Hawrylyshyn]

Doug
It's a great BIF photo. The bkgd adds a lot to it

I had the same debate with Arash about the white feather edges and their impact on a "cut and paste" look

Whatever you did in postprocessing has accentuated the natural white borders/lines as shown below. This is what i think adds to the "cut and paste look". Some people like their edges sharp, others prefer them softer

Looks like you applied some NR , did you make any selections or apply any sharpening? Maybe this effect is a result of Saving JPEG image for web?

Either way, these comments are only intended for academic discussion, and not meant to detract from your excellent shot

[arash_hazeghi]

Peter,

I strongly disagree with you, both this photo and the OC look natural to me, you have blown up a down-sampled the JPEG crop to the point of pixelation and put it side by side to a 100% crop from RAW, what is this supposed to prove or mean? Of course they will look different, it's a no brainier isn't it. I am sorry but it makes no sense to me at all.

The photo is natural and just the way it should be. If you like certain way of processing or soft photos you are welcomed to process your own photographs that way and present them on this forum for people to see, I feel it is more productive :)

[Peter Hawrylyshyn]

arash

Both you and Doug have suggested that the "cut and paste" look which some of us are perceiving is entirely attributable to the bird (ie- its white feather edges)

i took the crops from the jpegs that Doug posted - didn't do any processing and posted at same resolution

if you look at the photos, the original post clearly has brighter, sharper white edges/borders which are less evident in the Raw image. No one is denying the birds have white feather edges - it's what you do the the edge in post processing that can ultimately determines how sharp and bright the white/contrast will be

Obviously if that doesn't bother you and still looks 100% natural - that's fine

To others (perhaps a minority), the sharper high contrast edges give the image a "cut and paste" look which they might try to reduce

Many birds have white feather edges which will be impacted by lighting and sun angle. But post processing can accentuate or reduce the white edge/border - it's not just the bird. That's all i'm saying.

[Ofer Levy]

To be honest, I find all this debate about the "cut and paste effect" a bit silly.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
This is an excellent flight shot. Period.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p> </o:p>
I would say it has a wonderful 3D effect which for me is a great bonus. Trying to conclude all kind of "scientific" conclusions by blowing up tiny jpeg images - doesn't serve any purpose really.<o:p></o:p>

[Doug Brown]

I did some selective sharpening of the bird and some selective NR of the BG. After viewing all phases of post processing of this image, I see no evidence of accentuated white feather borders at any stage of the development process.

Here's a look at the 3 stages of development. On the left is the RAW export from PS into LR. In the middle is the post-NR stage. And on the right is the post-sharpening stage. The wing edges all look the same to me. What you're seeing may have something to do with JPEG conversion and downsizing for web, but to me the web version is a faithful representation of what the camera photographed.

92867

[Peter Hawrylyshyn]

Arash
if you truly believe that edge selection, NR, sharpening options ... along or across a high contrast white border have no impact on the final image, you need to review basic post processing. I can't see why you won't accept this and instead keep insisting it's just the bird.

I never inferred a cause/explanation for Doug's photo - that's why i asked what post processing he did apply. If he applied none - then that's the best natural edge he could attain.

"The photo is natural and just the way it should be" - you forgot to add "according to me". I would hope at BPN whether it is perfect, a "cut and paste" look, a 3D look - members would still be allowed to express their individual opinions without rude replies, otherwise why bother posting a reply.

Bottom line:As i had already said - it is an excellent BIF image in the style Doug obviously prefers

[Peter Hawrylyshyn]

DOug - Only saw this after my previous post. Thanks for the explanation. So obviously in this case, your "selective" post processing technique didn't impact the borders . Like i said - an excellent BIF photo

[Dumay de Boulle]

Yop class image Doug...great comp, IQ and BG...Eye looks superb and the PP looks spot on

[arash_hazeghi]

Thanks for posting the steps Doug, results speak for themselves :bg3:

Once again you did an excellent job, sharp and clean, faithful to the scene...looking forward to more!

[Dan Avelon]

This is an excellent shot! love the natural separation between subject and BG! very sharp focus as well.

I see no such thing as "cut and paste" look, if you haven't seen an ospreys or can't take a shot as good as this it is more productive to ask Doug Brown about his technique and how he got this great shot instead of downloading his image, cropping it and blowing it up to prove it is unnatural. If I were him, I would be offended.

Both Arash and Doug are among the best photographers on this site and their photographs is a testament to their technical skill, It is ironic that someone who has never posted a single photograph trying to "teach" them how to process their images :w3

[Mike Tracy]

Maybe a tad tight lower left for me but all the same a excellent image.

[Hendri Venter]

Wow, this pops from the BG. Fantastic image Doug.

[Doug Brown]

Thank you everyone for the comments and discussion!

[paul leverington]

Arash
if you truly believe that edge selection, NR, sharpening options ... along or across a high contrast white border have no impact on the final image, you need to review basic post processing. I can't see why you won't accept this and instead keep insisting it's just the bird.

I never inferred a cause/explanation for Doug's photo - that's why i asked what post processing he did apply. If he applied none - then that's the best natural edge he could attain.

"The photo is natural and just the way it should be" - you forgot to add "according to me". I would hope at BPN whether it is perfect, a "cut and paste" look, a 3D look - members would still be allowed to express their individual opinions without rude replies, otherwise why bother posting a reply.

Bottom line:As i had already said - it is an excellent BIF image in the style Doug obviously prefers



Here-here! Opinions--no matter what they are should be encouraged-- not stifled. We'll all learn more that way. The worst thing about this thread is not that anyone critiqued the image and may have been wrong, but that anyone feels compelled to critique the person that made the critique. I think Doug handled everything perfectly--others should back off so that the rest of us will be more encouraged to express our views without contempt being piled on us--even if the critique was wrong or off. I don't think anyone was rude or disrespectful--in fact quite polite even if direct. Again Doug you handled things perfectly IMO.

That said for me the jpg does look "cut and pasty". But the posted raw and full size crops look ok. Might be one has to see the real deal tif

On a separate note some desat, on the greens might be a good thing. And the point made originally for a bg other than sky is to be well taken IMO.

Paul

[paul leverington]

To be honest, I find all this debate about the "cut and paste effect" a bit silly.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
This is an excellent flight shot. Period.<o:p></o:p>
<o:p></o:p>
I would say it has a wonderful 3D effect which for me is a great bonus. Trying to conclude all kind of "scientific" conclusions by blowing up tiny jpeg images - doesn't serve any purpose really.<o:p></o:p>


I disagree.

Paul