Lens - Nikkor 600 f/4,
ISO - 200
EV - -0.3
Lens - Nikkor 600 f/4,
ISO - 200
EV - -0.3
Last edited by Peter Kes; 12-25-2012 at 07:04 AM.
Hi Vikram, Interesting two tone colour to the bill, and posed against a lovely smooth BG. The plumage looks a touch underexposed, and wonder if you could tease some more detail out of it. There also seems to be a greenish cast on it too.
Lovely bird but I agree with Stuart on the green cast.
Nice pose captured, Vikram.
It could be me but it seems to me that the bird is not sharp enough especially on the head area.
I also would tone down the greens and as Stuart suggested, try to get some more details out of the dark area of the bird.
Welcome Vikram, This is actually a fine image that needed better processing and some tender loving care. For the repost I corrected the green cast with about a 75% average blur color balance, ran NIK Color Efex Pro Detail Extractor (with a Quick Selection Tool selection) and Tonal Contrast (via a Hide All Mask) on the bird only, did a bit of bill clean-up, and sharpened the face with a Quick Mask and a 15/65/0 contrast mask.
All as described in detail in Digital Basics. You can save 15% on all NIK products (including Color Efex Pro, Silver Efex Pro, and Viveza) by following this link and scrolling down.
I love the pose and the bird and the background. There seems to have been some foliage between you and the bird's tail and the face could have been a tad sharper--you may have focused on the back....
Last edited by Arthur Morris; 12-24-2012 at 08:04 PM.
Thanks Stuart, Stan & Karl. I agree on your observations.
Dear Arthur, thanks for the magic touch to the image.
PS: EV-.3 does not make much sense in soft light. Were you getting any blinkies at zero or +1/3?
Awesome image and a lovely bird you got here , Vikram . Arthur has made it look over the top with his great PP skills . I am sure you can eke out more details with the RAW image !!
I beautiful image with some additional processing.
I find the original too green and Artie's repost too magenta and there is a halo around the head.
Both images lack the potential detail that can be recovered with deconvolution.
Here is my try. I made some colors more neutral, some dodging, and used only curves and color balance tools in photoshop. Then I brought the image into imagesplus and ran Richardson-Lucy deconvolution with 1) 3x3 and 30 iterations then 5x5 with 3 iterations. I blended the pre-deconvolution background with the deconvolved subject and branch. Will work much better on 16-bit data, and with other setting might turn out even better. I use minimal and the very basic tools in photoshop (usually just selections and curves) and Richardson-Lucy deconvolution for most of my photo work.
Roger thanks for the PP.
The colors have come out nicely but the shine on the the bird looks bit unnatural.
Well, not having every seen one of these birds, I have no idea. What is unnatural about it? That is what is in the data, or are you saying the color balance is off?
Hi Roger, Thanks for your efforts on PP on my Toucan image.
I mean to say that the bird diid not have the shine/glow on its black color back. The color balance is just slightly off.
Roger, please do not take this personally but the back of the bird in your repost looks plain horrible from here: pixilated and over-sharpened at best. Respectfully.
No, I do not take it personally. I think what you mean is posterized. In raising the level on the dark bird using the compressed jpeg, I noticed the image became quite posterized. It would be much better to work with the 16-bit image. A recent example of Richardson-Lucy deconvolution is here (see pane 15}:
Virkam, if you would like, I'll process your raw image, of a 16-bit tiff. Just email it to me.
Thanks for the info Roger. Image optimization will always go better when you are starting with a RAW file or a TIFF rather than a 150kb jpeg.
Thanks Roger and Arthur Will mail RAW file.
Hey Vikram, Thanks again for letting me use your image in today's blog post. You can check it out here as I added a bit of new info.