Black Grouse - Hen

Taken in a hide in a wetland the northern parts of Sweden during the blackcock's calls this spring - this is (one of) the price(s) for the winner. Taken with a D800, ISO800, 500 mm @f/6.3, 1/500.
Basic stuff in LR5 - white balance was the main difficulty since the shot was from the very early morning (a little after three) and I have warmed it quite a bit. In Photoshop I have done noise reduction using Define 2, dodging of the shadows on the bird by using a fill layer (50% grey in overlay mode), a little bit of curves and levels, luminance sharpening (Photokit). Any improvement tips would be appreciated.

A reasonable process for reducing the number of shots to be processed would also be appreciated. My way in LR is to first delete the worst crap (took me from 1000 to 800), then mark the fair shots by one star (800 to 100), mark the best of these with two stars (100 to 25). After that I process these shots in LR to feel if they are worthwhile and then three stars (25 to 12) which I intend to process in Photoshop. It is taking me a very long time to do and I wonder if anyone has a better method ?!?

I wish I had more to add. Grasses don't always do well when out of focus, the ones in the far background are nice (maybe could be toned down a bit?) but where they intersect the bird's head and body and in the foreground are troublesome for me. I like the detail in the bird, too bad the light couldn't quite catch the face.

As far as LR, if I only eliminated 20% on the first round, I would be in a world of hurt. What are you planning to do with the fair ones? Every time I go out, I find I mark quite a few more with the 'X' key and they CTRL-Backspace to delete them. I don't star them, I just flag the ones that are sharp and expect are worth further inspection. I currently end up deleting about 2/3 of any shoot, and should delete more. I also need to concentrate more on shooting less and only pressing the shutter when there's a good chance of something worth keeping. I get better at that over time also.

I can't help much with the processing, as I'm not too good at it myself. I might try another curves level bringing down the highlights in the grass and bumping up the mid-tones of the bird. As for workflow, I tend to do as Jon. If I think a photo will need too much correction, I tend to delete it. On many days, that's all of them! :w3

One other thought on LR processing. I usually work with groups of photos in LR simultaneously (usually after a first weeding pass, but sometimes before--especially if I've exposed to the right). I find the first and last photo taken in from the same position/subject/lighting, find a good sharp one in the set to use as the "master", then adjust sliders in the basic panel, sometimes make adjustments in the detail panel for sharpness and noise reduction. Once I have it close , then I select that photo first then all other members of the group and then click Sync to apply the same adjustments to the set. I then only keep the ones that really jump out for sharpness and detail, if I've shot several of the same pose, I'll sometimes use the compare function in the Library module (Select a group of frames, 'C' to compare, or click the compare icon, shift-tab to go full screen, shift-tab again to restore panels), I delete any I don't choose using compare. I'll occasionally purposefully overdo the contrast/clarity as it helps identify the best ones (dependent on subject), and then pull it back later.

good subject, PP....I seem to spend more time deciding on deletions than working with photos :) . I also am learning to click less and study more, especially head angle, lighting and background. Nice bird and photo...... wow, 3 AM!

A very nice grouse shot! I like the colors with the subdued warms against cool grays. It's too easy to go overboard warming things, with too much yellow and orange saturation creeping in. You got a good balance here.

I shoot too much and delete a lot; I'm also trying to not be so trigger-happy. In addition to several rounds of initial deleting, almost every time I go back to a folder I do more.

Thanks for your comments. They were appreciated even though I do not agree to everything :w3.

I am (or at least used to be) an engineer so I like a structured workflow when it gets to selecting what images to work on :e3. The process described above I picked up in a LR book by Martin Evening and works well for me and also makes it quite easy to delete the worst stuff when I need to.

With respect to the number of images I shoot when out, I have to admit that I am going in the opposite direction and is shooting more when out in the field. The reason is mainly that I looked at Arties examples on head angles and eye contact a couple of years ago. I feel that I need to sit in front of the computer to be able to find the best shots and since I cannot judge the small differences in these aspects in the field I tend to taken more shots. It is always easier to delete than to go back and try to reshoot an image.

Anyway I guess it is good that not everyone agrees on everything :S3:.

May be talking about 2 different things. I have had the tendency to shoot when there's no reason (back of bird, too far distant, etc.) And that's the behavior I'm trying to change because it means wasted time at the computer. When there's a chance of something good the more frames the better. Artie had a recent blog on the 1D X: http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/2014/...rs-of-opinion/

Excerpt: "Eighty-one frames in 20 seconds. Seven keepers, the three best of those presented here. While the frame rate sounds impressive, it is but a fraction of what the Canon EOS-1D X is capable of. I could have created well more than 200 images in those 20 seconds but I fired only when there was a chance that the tern’s head would be in a decent position relative to its body. And I paused several times to re-focus."

81 images instead of well over 200. Taking 81 --> 7 --> 3 is better than 250 --> 81 --> 7 --> 3. I think being more selective about when to shoot, and then shooting as many as you can in short bursts is good practice. It's one thing to be at the computer trying to decide favorites among 10 shots that all had potential, versus 10 groups of 10 shots each where 9 of the groups weren't worth shooting in the first place.