Printable View
This is a file I have revisited, the hand held image was captured in April 2020. I don't know the entire reason why but I think the image looks reasonable on the web but when I look at the web sized image in PSCC it shows much better detail.
Olympus: E-M1X
Focal Length : 420.0mm (300mm & MC14)
Focal length in 35 mm film : 841.0mm
Exposure mode : Manual exposure
ISO Sensitivity : 6400
Exposure compensation : 0.0 EV
Shutter : 1/1600 sec
Aperture : F5.6
Flash : OFF
Jon, a sweet subject and one I envy to shoot. Looks like nice even light and pretty setting.
Looks pretty solid for ISO 6400. Love the fine feathers on the bridge of the beak.
Perhaps you could deal with the noise on the subject just a bit more, specifically around the eye and neutrals on the near wing. The rest looks pretty decent. A touch more left in frame might be nice too.
Glad you like it Brian - did you notice the difference in PSCC?
The noise was not really apparent to me - probably because I don't go looking for it, I have stopped pixel peeping I think it is destructive I now look at images purely to enjoy rather than deliberately find fault. If I see something more obvious like colours or composition then of course I would comment. Having said that I must admit to being a little obsessive about detail.
Jon, I cannot notice any difference in PS vs here. Would one expect to? Are you using dark mode or light mode? Sometimes it makes a difference when you post on BPN with the bright white margins.
FWIW, I hear ya. However, first glance usually tells a good bit about what we're seeing and I noticed the graininess in the face pretty quickly. Perhaps pixel peeping is more at the raw/full size TIF level anyway? Hard to pp at 1900 across.
I am beginning to wonder if 1900 px and 595kb is not a good combination. I see the graininess and probably a reduction in sharpening and maybe a tad less luminosity would improve that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Sump
Jon, do you think 1900px is actually what you see on screen, or could it actually be a lot smaller????? Have you checked that your screen is displaying the correct size. If not after measuring you may need to adjust based on ‘print’ size in PSCC.
Hi Jon, a beautiful bird I have never had the opportunity to photograph. I love the colors and feathers of the bird, perfect background. Really like this image, thank you for sharing.
Sorry I don't understand how big should a 1900px be in mm on a 27" screen, it is approx 52.8cm. It certainly changes size when I view in a new window i.e. it goes smaller to fit the screen if there is an image made to a large height (1900px) dimension.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski
Did you do what we discussed earlier today, ie measure a 5x4 and does the screen exactly a 5x4 or is it out?
Hi Jon ... nice one , just think it would have been a bit nicer with a tighter turn towards the viewer . But this is many times not in our hands ....and you have tried your best I think .
In terms of tone and color I am fine with the BG , just think the subject could go a bit deeper in the tonal range . The HL do look very flat ?? Have you recovered them ??
TFS Andreas
The view of the back plumage is beautiful, but the lack of eye contact smoothed facial details make really hurt. It would also be nice to see more of that far wing. Position in the frame with lots of room to the left is perfect.
My favorite part of this image is that pattern on the owls back.
Hi Jon, I think the overall IQ is lacking sadly, albeit I feel there is more 'clarity' towards the back end rather than the face. Overall it does look flat, and I feel you could just perk it up, how far is personal prefs. The dark blob in the middle of the trim at the foot must go.
Sorry image still had it in on the RP.
TFS
Steve
