I'm still learning about the new rig. Looks soft. I suspect the focus was on the gravel, but not sure. (next time -- manual focus)
Tried to save with NIK:
(in order) Dfine2 130%Control and 130% Color (just in case)
Viveza2 control pt on bird 22% contrast and 22% structure
Output Sharpener adaptive 30%
Camera data: Nikon D7100 ISO 1600, f10, 1/1600s, 600mm with new Tamron 150-600
Hi Jess, This is cute little fellow. Is this cropped? Things that I might look at it if it were mine. I'd lose the OOF FG and also crop a little off the RHS and top. The gravel line looks levelish but the waves in the BG are causing the image not to look level. I think a little CCR may help. The whites on his belly and face look a little blown. Are you using ACR? You maybe able to recover some of those whites.
These birds are a joy to see and photograph. Thanks for posting this, Jess.
I wonder if there is enough room on the LHS to add a bit of crop. I might also remove some on the right. Glennie is most often spot on with cropping observations. Leveling can be a problem for us, as the outdoors doesn't always lend itself to straight, horizontal lines. I thought the same thing about the waves that Glennie mentioned. Thanks for sharing this one.
Thanks, Glennie and Jim. I did crop, and then leveled the water line to the whole image. But could have done same to waves. I'll play with that.
Jim, if I removed some of the RHS that might solve the balance question. Glennie, I'm always forgetting ACR, as LR doesn't give me the opportunity. Diane says LR provides the same improvements as ACR, but that's no help for me, as i usually jump right to the new stuff, like NIK.
You two have inspired me to pay more attention to the basics. I'll do that and report back. BTW, as near as i can figure, the bird is a Black Bellied Plover in winter plumage. Might also be an immature.
REF: a just-received copy of The Shorebird Guide, by O'Brien, Crossley and Karlson; fascinating stuff for a biologist who didn't take the ornithology course. I took limnology instead
(but still all fish look alike ;-(
Good advice above. (If I'm late to class my teaching assistants do all the work for me!!)
Focus looks like it did hit the rocks -- just use the center point whenever possible for a small bird, and the Nikon equivalent of continuous AF to follow small changed in distance. A fraction of an inch can be critical.
If you pull back the Highlight slider (and maybe Exposure) you'll have more detail in the bird. Whites are blown out here.
Definitely don't jump right to PS from the raw converter. You have so much more overhead for adjusting tonalities in LR (or ACR -- same engine, different interface). Go to the Develop module in LR and play with sliders. (See my tutorial page below my signature here for a new pair of LR tutorials.)
Hi, Diane. Glennie and Jim gave me some good advice, I think. Certainly, the whites were blown, so I began the process anew with LR Develop -- cropped the NEF and tried to resolve the wave level vs the shoreline level. Also reduced the white and highlight levels to, hopefully, reduce that part of the problem. In addition, I played a bit with clarity and vibrance.
The resulting image presented a bluer water BG, which I like. The bird also looked sharper to me (maybe wishful thinking there).
Then I took it to PS and cropped some more, hoping again to resolve the 'horizon' issue of waves vs shoreline. To no avail, I think -- the waves are coming from the SE, while the shoreline wants them running from NE. I see the problem in composition, of course. If I were painting the scene, that's the way I'd arrange it. Jim, I took some of the RH side of the photo away, but that's all the image I had to work with. I could play around with layers, of course, but I doubt you'd approve of a composite image (now that you've seen the original...;-)
All in all, I like this new image.
One more comment about the species: This may be a juvenile, but even adult Black Bellied Plovers in winter plumage don't have black bellies, as they do in mating season. All, according to the book have black spots under their wings (axillary region) but this one was too modest to show those.
Last edited by Jess M. McKenzie; 01-11-2016 at 01:00 AM.
Thanks, jack and Diane. I'll try more cropping. As to focus, I wonder if ISO 1600 might have effected the soft look. Certainly would have done using the D70s. With that camera, anything above its basic ISO of 200 pushes the noise sky high. The D7100 has much better amplifier electronics. If we get a sunny day, I'll try some shorebirds at ISO 100 and same AF set up.... ciao...
At some point high ISO will give a softer look, for sure, and can be a big factor if you crop well down. I don't know that camera but I'd guess it might be a combination of both that and less than perfect focus and some very small movement (subject or camera). All will rob sharpness. Looking at shots at 100% is the best way to see how one rates. I also don't know that lens but some of the Tamrons have been reputed to be a bit soft at the long end. There are always compromises with a zoom lens, and keeping the cost and size down will be balanced against sharpness. But if all other factors are ideal, it is probably not a deal-breaker.
Re your original post, I meant to add that I would trust good AF more than manual for most situations. Use one focus point, and continuous AF. At 600 you'll want a very sturdy support for the lens -- either your ability to hold it (and your body) rock-solid or a tripod or beanbag. If the camera has AF microadjustment it's good thing to check with that lens. I like FocusTune -- it seems very accurate and precise if used carefully.
Thanks again, Diane. As to the lens -- it seems to be well thought of. For example, Ken Nanney down in TX gets some great shots with it and his D800 and D7200. See: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nanney.../in/datetaken/
I'm adding a moonshot here, hand-held and no post processing. Which is not to say that I can always hold rock-solid. And, speaking of rocks, I had to climb some and balance on one to get that plover shot.
Tomorrow, I'll submit another image, shot with a different lens and processed according to your advice (I think...;-). Please look for it.
Jess, I like your repost much better. The whites are much better. I can see what you mean about the direction of the waves. A bit hard to handle. Agree with Diane about removing some more at the bottom and the top. The blue water looks a little too blue, but I'm not at my usual computer.
Plover_PostNIK
