I shot this in July. Canon 5D3, Canon 600mm f/4 II + 1.4X, big Gitzo with Wimberley II, ISO 1600, 1/500, f/10. About 65% of full frame. Foggy morning. Coming to our feeders. They don't like to sit still, do they?
They're almost as entertaining as woodpeckers in that they won't take no for an answer that they are not big enough to break into the squirrel feeder to steal peanuts. I'd leave the lid up just to see what one would actually DO with a peanut (in the shell) but the bluejays get there first.
I would go back to the drawing board in PP.
Way too crunchy, this beautiful little bird looks like it went through plastic surgery......
Loosen the crop and ease off the sharpening would be my suggestion.
Hi Diane. My main concern with this image, given that it is a set-up, is with the DOF. I think it would have been fine with these camera settings if you were running the naked 600 mm f/4 II. Regards, Ian
Lovely bird and shot, a case of less is more, I think it is a little large in the frame. Having got the birds coming in I would suggest having a look for different perches - some with or without leaves/berries/mosses/lichens, also try some dead plants they make delicate perches.
This perch is one where I generally hope to shoot larger birds but when a nuthatch landed there and sat still for a while, I shot it. They don't pose often, and almost never on a perch. I chose the tighter crop because the BG was pretty boring and the perch wasn't ideal -- but primarily because I thought the detail captured in the feathers was quite nice, although the head was a little disheveled-looking.
The light was low and I was already on the verge of too slow a SS so I chose a wider aperture. I don't care for ISOs above 1600 if I can avoid them.
As far as the comments in the first panel, I suppose I could use a cheap consumer zoom and handhold to get a softer image. The only processing here is pulling the highlights down halfway in LR (the whites were unfortunately too hot) and then in PS, although it was hardly needed, I did NR using Nik's Dfine (global -- it is intelligent and subtle and there is rarely a need to mask it to the BG), darkened the ends of the perch using Viveza's sophisticated masking, and did a careful sharpening on the head only with Neat Image, and then reduced the opacity of that layer to about 50%. That's hardly what I would call heavy-handed processing. It's what I would call a sharp capture in the first place. (And the original presentation was more than a 50% crop.)
Here is a 100% view of the raw file, with only the highight reduction mentioned above:
And here is the final file. Both of these and the OP were exported directly from LR with the Standard sharpening setting, which gives an identical appearance to the files in LR.
Last edited by Diane Miller; 10-27-2014 at 09:35 AM.
I dig the over the shoulder look back pose....you really don't see a whole lot of that for this species. The plumage does look a little scruffy but I wonder if that is because the bird wasn't recently in a nest cavity, (given the time of year you made the image). As a matter of personal taste, I think (as has been suggested in previous posts), that using different perches is something you could explore...Great background control and nice soft light quality.
Diane, not sure about the breeding program over there but most of the birds in the UK have that scruffy look about the head after breeding, like the pose and detail, BG perch is what it is.
Valid critique is never offensive, and I do certainly appreciate and value differences of opinion. No apology needed, Grace. Your stunning images validate your critique. I just wished to make the point that this was simply a sharp image in-camera that hasn't been sharpened or processed further than the very conservative LR defaults to make up for the anti-alias filter and re-sizing on export, and a slight sharpening on the head, which I often see recommended here.
White-Breasted Nuthatch
Reply With Quote
