Printable View
This Swamp Harrier has already taken 4 of this year's Cygnets from the Edithvale Wetlands.
Image captured on Canon EOS 1D MKIII with EF 400 f/5.6 L + 1.4X Convertor (560mm) at f/8, 1/2500 sec. ISO 640, Pattern Metering, Aperature Priority, +0.3 step, hand held.
[IMG]file:///C:/DOCUME%7E1/Chris/LOCALS%7E1/Temp/moz-screenshot-9.png[/IMG]
Hi Chris.
Very nice bird and eye contact. Really nice over wing details.
For some reason this fella don't look too sharp, even though the high shutter speed. The BG looks a little noise too.
Hi Juan
No NR done very minor sharpening.
I see what you mean.Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher C.M. Cooke
Yes Juan I will have achieved my goal when I can produced RAW photographs which require NO PP.
May never happen but one has to have goals, as far as NR is concerned I consider that to be an excessive requirement given the circumstances that we shoot under.
This is not studio work but "in the wild" work and I do not want to take average photographs and then tweak them into works of art.:)
Swamp Harriers are arguably one of the shyest raptors in Oz. It baffles me how you could get so close. Or is this a BIG crop? :) I remember I asked you about a Black-shouldered Kite before whether you'd mind posting the original (right here) and you never seemed to have bothered to respond. And you always have a comeback, for pretty much all comments people post. Including medicine, possum rehab, post processing and whatever else. :)
On the NR note and other PP comments you are making Chris, I personally think you need to understand that practically all digitally captured images needs some post processing. I am surprised you even think and say what you are saying. Noise reduction and basic PP is not going over the top. Although if you read your histogram and know how to interpret it, you will be able minimize the need for NR.
Keep working on that goal mate. Just keep working. :)
Great capture, I agree with Juan it is a little soft ... in particular the head of the bird. Maybe selective sharpening would improve it.
Geraldo
Nice eye contact and near wing position, less favorable far wing position. head turn and eye contact is a plus light is a bit flat and lacks contrast. could also benefit from elaborate sharpening since it seems to be a tight crop.
Nice capture here of a bird I imagine isn't easy to photograph. The bird definitely needs some sharpening and NR. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a RAW picture that doesn't need PP. Would love to see a repost of this after some PP b/c it really is a beauty.
[QUOTE]On the NR note and other PP comments you are making Chris, I personally think you need to understand that practically all digitally captured images needs some post processing. I am surprised you even think and say what you are saying. Noise reduction and basic PP is not going over the top. Although if you read your histogram and know how to interpret it, you will be able minimize the need for NR.
Keep working on that goal mate. Just keep working. :)
Thanks Akos I will.:)
Nothing ventured nothing gained.:)
I have always been one that sets goals that others see beyond their reach and on the odd occasion I reach them.
Those that need to use help may well reach them more often than I do, but I doubt that they gain the satisfaction that is mine.
Feel free to breach the goals I set for myself and I will feel free to continue to keep trying.:)
Photography is not an art form which rules all must adhere to, and I of all folk understand that, if you feel that you must follow the pack feel free to do so, I have never followed any pack.
Cheers Akos.
Oh I do have one!Quote:
Nice capture here of a bird I imagine isn't easy to photograph. The bird definitely needs some sharpening and NR. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as a RAW picture that doesn't need PP. Would love to see a repost of this after some PP b/c it really is a beauty.
<!-- / message -->
The TIFF of this image is shortly to be on a brochure here in Australia but I wanted to get the response from this forum as many of our Australian members have ceased posting here as the result of what they consider "over critical" art images and I must agree with them.
We tend to like "real" images and this forum does not seem to react well to them.
Never mind, to each their own.:)
Chris don't get m wrong ... what has sharpening to do with "over critical art" .... You don't make a setup with artifical bg you don't remove things with photoshop .... I like real images very much but I like them as sharp as possible.
Geraldo
<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CChris%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsoh tml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument> <w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom> <w:Compatibility> <w:BreakWrappedTables/> <w:SnapToGridInCell/> <w:WrapTextWithPunct/> <w:UseAsianBreakRules/> </w:Compatibility> <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel> </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!-- /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:35.4pt; mso-footer-margin:35.4pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]--> Thank you Gerald for your comment.Quote:
I like real images very much but I like them as sharp as possible.
Geraldo
I spend about 100 + plus hours a week photographing birds here in "Orzstralia" and I love them as I see them. About 80% are discarded and the rest are placed in my library for the benefit of my progeny.
I keep about 5% for my own pleasure.
I do not sell any images but give many to schools and to the many groups of environmentalists that I belong to, including two Universities.
<o></o>
The Ornithology Dept. uses my “real” photographs in their research projects as well as my observations regarding, feeding, mating, hunting, nesting and most importantly their movements within our suburban environment.
<o></o>
I suspect that our observations and reports may well do more to help the cause of our hobby than all the PP and NR that you may see as important.
ChrisQuote:
Originally Posted by Christopher C.M. Cooke
May be I am starting to understand you.
There are many talented photographers in this forum, of course, I am not one of those, but one thing I have clear, and that is that I want to show not just a picture that describes the natural history of a subject, but I want to go beyond that.
I want to show all its beauty, and in order to do that I must use Photoshop, don't get me wrong, I don't want to make a composite, any ways, no matter how much knowledge you have on post processing, if in the field one can't get a good image, Photoshop won't make it good, as John Shaw says: "Photoshop can make a bad picture big".
That said, I can only respect your style, but I will keep on applying NR on a BG if it need it, and sharpening on a subject most of the times.:D
Now please let me ask you something: do see any major change in your picture? I have not altered the natural history of the subject, and besides, I am sure this bird was not so soft in the real life, so do you want to render what your eyes see? then you should sharpen a bit.
I also contribute with pictures to our ornithological association here in Costa Rica, and they will always want the image sharpened since is fundamental in the identification of some genera, for instance Empidonax, Contopus and Myiarchus, all of them tyrant flycatchers. A sharpened image can make a big difference when it comes to ID.
My intention by working on your image is not to bother you, just look at it and tell me which image would make it easier for a beginner birder to identify the species.
I really hope you don't mind.
jc
Like Juan and others said nearly every file from a digital SLR needs at least some sharpening, ... and there is nothing wrong with this IMHO. If you shoot JPG the camera will do all this basic picture treatments so why not take control of it your self?
And for my eyes the second picture looks more real...
Geraldo
Thank you Juan that looks very nice and of course I don't mind at all.
I will alter images to suit others that wish them altered as I have with my Tiffs but I feel the need to improve my work and do so by much practice and failing often which does not bother me a bit.
I appreciate all the comments and help here as I always have and I learn a great deal from them and I love the work that other photographers produce and post here.
I suspect that I just enjoy my hobby so much that I see more in the results than mere art and attempted perfection and I love my interaction with the wildlife that I take images of.
One day when broadband over here has improved and space on websites is not at a premium we may be able to post Tiffs and then I may post some "improved" images.:)
Till then thank you all so much for your contributions.
