Jamie's posting below prompted me to look again at some of the bear images I captured in June 2008 when I was on the Bear Boat with Robert O'Toole at Katmai. So this bear was nicknamed 'Mabel' - I have no idea why - but she was a beautiful blonde who was good enough to demonstrate all her poses to us as she lazed around on the sedge grass.
I wanted to see if I could improve on earlier renditions of the subject with my improved PP skills and techniques. I think, the DPP made a much better conversion than I previously achieved with Lightroom. My objective was to get a sharp image where the fur retained it's softness and still looked 'cuddly'! Biggest issue was that the light was flat and so the original image was also flat.
Canon EOS-1D Mark III, EF500mm f/4L IS USM +2.0x
1/320, f/8.0, ISO 400
RAW conversion in DPP; levels, curves, saturation and dodging in Photoshop CS5, Neat Image for NR and Smart Sharpen in CS5
beautiful soft light and hues here Gerald...
I normally prefer a bit more FG but I quite like how you framed it here...
not too sure on the dead-centre placement of the face, though?
Perhaps a vertical crop or more body on the LHS would work better? Again, just my take
I think you've achieved your goal very well, she looks pretty soft and cuddly in a bear sort of way. Love the background. I see Morkel's point re the central position but I don't think it detracts very much because the space is quite attractive, both in the way it looks and the room it gives in front of the bear.
Hi Gerald - Very nice image and she does look both soft and cuddly (and a bit ferocious too). Nice detail too. I'm going to go against the grain and say that as posted with the bit of fg I want more below but if you crop out the fg completely (easy to do with a scroll crop), you avoid that feeling. BG and space to the rhs are fine for me.
Hi Gerald, firstly I take my hat off to you for using the 2x, as the old one was 'pants' compared to the MKIII and so to achieve this image is great IMHO.
I can see why some may feel it's a little too central, perhaps if you have the room moving the whole crop about an inch to the right may help, but all personal preference. With the killer BKG and colours I wish that the 'bushes' to the right were not there, as the image would be lovely and clean, but that's in an ideal world. The space at the bottom is perhaps just on the point, so again, if you had some more that would be great, but just a sliver. The techs look spot on, especially with the kit used and the detail in the fur could be a model for Stieff. I also like the slight HA too. I just wonder if and I know you get these lovely 'blonde' bears if the image overall needs a hint more oomph to bring out more depth, I've used Levels, Curves and selective colour, plus a tweak in a channel, and a bit of brightness in the eye, perhaps somewhere between the two, but hopefully you can see what I mean about bringing more depth to the image.
TFS
Steve
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Many thanks for taking the time to comment and assist me. Looking back on it, the time we spent with this lovely bear was precious! And it is especially nice to go back and reprocess a number of the images.
Steve, thanks for the time and the re-post. I have looked at it and then looked at it again. Your treatment does give the third dimension more than the OP, so it appeals on that level. But, I do find it way too dark and the background over saturated. The blue in the background is distant mountains; it may have given you a false lead if you thought it was sky.
You did get me working on it though and I think my repost is an improvement - most of the difference coming from adjusting the brightness and contrast with a contrast/luminosity mask. I also upped the saturation slightly and fiddled with the levels and curves. I think I ended up moving towards your version, but only a small distance.
The repost is full frame, moving Mabel out of the centre of the image, giving her a little more space to look into and more of the environment.
Agreed, the 2x II was 'pants'; I traded it in for a MkIII earlier this year and it is significantly better - even on the older 500 lens.
I knew I had pushed it, but going as far as I did, I felt it gave scope for you to look and see if you could extract more from the original image, of which you did and IMHO, the image is far better and stronger in it's overall depth/presence.
Worth the rework Gerald, congratulations on this one.
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Beautiful portrait... I think somewhere in between Steve's post and your second one for the saturation , Steve's image does pop nicely ..probably from a curves adj .. Personally a square crop would have worked for me .. But it's subjective.. Congrats on lovely image