Not very happy with shots taken at a Barn Owl site that I visit, I look at these images and see a lot of problems with the image qaulity ,would like to see what others think and see if they see the same problems with the image as myself. Difficult conditions with failing light and the building facing east with what light there was coming from the west .
Steve I was hoping you and others might see things wrong with the IQ ,with a fresh look and me not giving any clues to my thoughts on my self critique, I have lots of images of these birds but am not sure if they are up to scratch. Used - the EV?thinking it might give me more light.
Thanks Keith.
Unless Nikon work the other way, I would + the EV but without blowing the whites, but then you will be fighting SS.
Overall it seems under exposed by at least a whole stop, perhaps +1.10, like wise you could bring the whites up too. BKG has a lot of NR applied as the wood & ivy are so smooth. Looks like some blurring or overlapping masking on the arch of the back. Some more USM on the main plumage would bring out things more, as you do have detail. Might have tried f/2.8 just for a tad more SS, but then it's a trade off.
Forgot to also mention Keith, the 'black' appears just solid to me, as if it had been pushed a bit, would have expected it to be no so dense, if that makes sense. I just feel it would not have been as dark, there would have been some light creeping in & vignetting, even for a out building????
You have some good advice from Steve there. I really like the owl itself though and you seem to have captured some nice detail in the whites.
To me the owl feels a bit tight at the top. It looks like it is ducking to stay in the frame. I think I would crop most of the white planks to have a crop just be low the feet.
I agree the BG is a bit dark. Not sure why you chose a negative exposure compensation. I think a boost in contrast (preferably with the raw parameters) could be good. It does feel crowded at the top and could lose some of the fence below. But the IQ seems OK -- hard to judge at this size, though.
Thanks Steve, Iain, and Diane, Steve inside that barn it is pitched black is it still showing noise in the black? My eyes are alright with it, put the ev down to a senior moment. I did select the bird for my Nr could this have caused (Looks like some blurring or overlapping masking on the arch of the back)but that is all. Hope to have these Owls in a better showing next year ,but do put a lot of this down to my lack of experience, thanks for the stuff you e mailed me.
Iain thanks for your input, my main concern is what I thought was a lack of quality on the Owl itself and the noise in the Bg(I really like the owl itself though and you seem to have captured some nice detail in the whites)this as answered some of my doubts.
Diane still on a bid learning curve which is harder the older you get, but I am enjoying trying to improve even though some times it seems like taking a step backwards( But the IQ seems OK -- hard to judge at this size, though.
Thanks a lot Keith.
Hi Keith, I think it's time Mrs M put pen to paper and posted that note to Santa on your behalf for a bit of 'hand holding' however you must never put things down to age etc, look how far you have come from previous days of old, you have moved further in a short space of time, got out there and shot new stuff, not archive.
Yes there are some basic steps that do need to be drilled in and some may think I'm harsh, but then I cannot repeat the words you said to me, so...
Keith getting the basics right in camera as I have said before makes PP a breeze, it really does and you do not need the most up to date software or truck loads of software to do the job, IMHO is all 'kings clothes/smoke & mirrors'. Agreed with the new cameras you do need some elements, but not a whole warehouse. Get your exposure right via the Histogram in camera, use the screen on the back for composition only, not for colours, and ensure your DoF/SS is right, you can do it, you have proved it before time & time again and so there is no reason why you just cannot repeat things. People get bogged down after shooting with a lot of PP which often takes the image so far away from the original capture, look & feel that often you question wether it's the same image, just keep it simple.
So, back to the BO, without seeing the RAW I can only assume as per my reply. Expose for the BO, don't let the metering fool you and base itself on the BKG. Expose to the right so you capture as much info as possible without blowing the Whites/ Highlights, take a shot, check everything, then fire off a few frames, job done and in the bag, then try something new with regard to format and or DoF you might surprise yourself . You are getting out there, so make the most of it, but ultimately ENJOY it.
Drop me a line and I will give Mrs M a shopping list for you to read up on and browse, Homework will start in 2015. You are doing great, let 2015 be a great year of further development.
People often ask about IQ here, but it isn't possible to make a close judgement for a posted JPEG, unless it's obviously bad. Look at the raw file after your adjustments at 100%, and then the various stages of processing in PS or whatever editor, also at 100%, and you will know what the IQ is. When people are first learning, it can take some experience to know what a really sharp file looks like, but after you've seen one it will jump out at you. A related item to IQ is exposure and tonal qualities, and the histogram is your light meter for that, to be trusted much more than a monitor.
It's all a learning curve, but it's so satisfying when it all works to create a beautiful image!
Barn Owl
. You are getting out there, so make the most of it, but ultimately ENJOY it.
Posting Permissions
