Tricolored Heron

[annmpacheco]

Nice fly-by opportunity... I processed in DPP, 0 luminance, 1 chrominance, PS I applied NR to BG although I am not certain what settings are optimal but i selected strength "6" ( preserve details ?60, reduce color noise 45, and sharpening 25?) Remove dust spots, image sized, then SSharpen at 100% .5 radius. Any suggestions, should there be more definition in the wing? What do i do about the inside wing shadow? Thanks for your help...

1D-X
500mm
iso 500
1/2500
f 9

[arash_hazeghi]

yes the IQ isn't great. Is it a very big crop ? or maybe resizing went wrong ? What version of PS do you have? make sure you use "bicubic" method for resizing.

[stuart wanuck]

nicely done good sharpness

[gail bisson]

Hi Ann,
Lovely incoming position with a very nice wing position.
Head and neck look a bit crunchy to me. Is this a big crop? If not, then you may have oversharpened a bit or maybe the head was not tack sharp to begin with. Hard to tell
from here.
My settings for images sized for BPN ie 1200 x 900 are as follows (but remember I often adjust a bit here and there depending on the image)
Noise Reduction
I will eyeball the image and adjust anywhere from 5 to 10 depending on the BG (usually need more for darker BG and higher ISO). I click on the check mark to see what I am doing and the changes that result in the little 100% viewbox.
2.Preserve details is always set at 0 for NR on the background. I do change this if I need to do a little bit of NR on the bird which is very rare.
3.Reduce color noise is always set to 0
4.Sharpen details is at a default of 30% (Artie told me this and I cannot remember why...
I personally use unsharp mask for sharpening and my general staring points are
1. Unsharp mask is anywhere from 10 to 35%
2.Radius 0.3 pixels
3. Threshold level 0
I would leave the shadow alone because it is supposed to be there.
Hope this helps,
Gail
PS I see Arash noticed IQ issues as well. We were typing at the same time!

[annmpacheco]

yes the IQ isn't great. Is it a very big crop ? or maybe resizing went wrong ? What version of PS do you have? make sure you use "bicubic" method for resizing.

I have PS CC 15, used bicubic, crop is not very big, about 60% of frame, and when i resize image i put in 1200W and 300 resolution...

[annmpacheco]

Hi Ann,
Lovely incoming position with a very nice wing position.
Head and neck look a bit crunchy to me. Is this a big crop? If not, then you may have oversharpened a bit or maybe the head was not tack sharp to begin with. Hard to tell
from here.
My settings for images sized for BPN ie 1200 x 900 are as follows (but remember I often adjust a bit here and there depending on the image)
Noise Reduction
I will eyeball the image and adjust anywhere from 5 to 10 depending on the BG (usually need more for darker BG and higher ISO). I click on the check mark to see what I am doing and the changes that result in the little 100% viewbox.
2.Preserve details is always set at 0 for NR on the background. I do change this if I need to do a little bit of NR on the bird which is very rare.
3.Reduce color noise is always set to 0
4.Sharpen details is at a default of 30% (Artie told me this and I cannot remember why...
I personally use unsharp mask for sharpening and my general staring points are
1. Unsharp mask is anywhere from 10 to 35%
2.Radius 0.3 pixels
3. Threshold level 0
I would leave the shadow alone because it is supposed to be there.
Hope this helps,
Gail
PS I see Arash noticed IQ issues as well. We were typing at the same time!

Thanks Gail, I am persevering, hoping to make more sense of this. I appreciate your help.

[Joseph Przybyla]

Beautiful bird, nice wing position and background. A lot of potential for a good flight image. Arash and Gail have good advice. Thank you for sharing.

[Jim Crosswell]

I like the flight angle, water color, trailing feet and composition. Good advice above. Nice image Ann!

[Diane Miller]

Excellent catch!

It does look a little off for sharpness and detail. Was the raw file tack sharp?

I never sharpen the master file beyond the default in raw for countering the softening effect of the anti-alias filter. After creating the resized JPEG I will often bring it back into PS and use Smart Sharpen with Remove set to Lens Blur and a very small radius.

For noise reduction, I love Nik's Dfine. (That is done on the master file.)

[Arthur Morris]

I think that the bird looks great. The middle BKGR does look a bit funky. I keep things very simple. I do 99.9% of my NR in DPP 4 using the values recommended by Arash in our DPP 4 RAW Conversion guide. I often run a contrast mask on the bird's face only. Then save my master file as a TIFF. Then I crop to 1200 wide or 900 tall and use Unsharp Mask on the whole image. Yes, the whole image. At 110/.3/0 for most Canon bodies, 130-150/.3/0 for the 5DS R. I save for web at < 395kb. Fast, simple, and folks rarely, rarely have anything to say about the sharpening of my JPEGs. And the same goes for noise.... artie

ps: I know that what I do flies in the face of what is recommended but it works and has been working quite well for many years :) The proof as they say is in the pudding.

[arash_hazeghi]

can you post the RAW Ann?

[annmpacheco]

can you post the RAW Ann?

hi Arash, here's the link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fggpn4mp17...X5359.CR2?dl=0

[arash_hazeghi]

Hi Ann,

This is a HUGE crop. after I crop the image it is only 5 mega pixels. That is only 5/18 or 27% of the the full frame 1DX file. You need to use your TC to get the bird large in the frame or the IQ will suffer. With the 1DX the AF doesn't take any hit when adding a TC so don't hesitate to put the 1.4 or the 2X. You want to get the bird at least 50% of the frame, that is at least 9 Mega Pixels after cropping. Despite the huge crop, since the RAW file was tack sharp (great job with focus), I was able to produce a good file for web posting.

I don't know what's happening in your workflow that's causing the details to suffer. I feel like I need to sit down with you and go step by step through your flow to debug it

[annmpacheco]

Hi Ann,

This is a HUGE crop. after I crop the image it is only 5 mega pixels. That is only 5/18 or 27% of the the full frame 1DX file. You need to use your TC to get the bird large in the frame or the IQ will suffer. With the 1DX the AF doesn't take any hit when adding a TC so don't hesitate to put the 1.4 or the 2X. You want to get the bird at least 50% of the frame, that is at least 9 Mega Pixels after cropping. Despite the huge crop, since the RAW file was tack sharp (great job with focus), I was able to produce a good file for web posting.

I don't know what's happening in your workflow that's causing the details to suffer. I feel like I need to sit down with you and go step by step through your flow to debug it

Thanks Arash, I will PM you tomorrow

[Daniel Cadieux]

Hi Ann, I have nothing substantial to add except that you are getting good advice and you are open and willing to learn. A great recipe in my book! The pose of the heron is really good, and the techs well chosen.

ps: I know that what I do flies in the face of what is recommended but it works and has been working quite well for many years :) The proof as they say is in the pudding.

I know what you mean Artie. I apply NR to the BG only and then sharpen the whole image, even where I already ran NR. Works for me, always has, but people look at me with weird crooked eyes when I tell them what I do.

[Diane Miller]

An important factor in a discussion of the various ways people do processing is the quality of the raw file. If someone starts with an excellent file that is tack-sharp, low noise, perfectly lighted and not heavily cropped, then they can “get away with” a different processing method than a typical beginner who starts with a soft and underexposed raw file and resorts to stronger processing to try to make it the equivalent of a good file. The good initial file needs a lot less sharpening, noise reduction and tonal adjustments, so the details of how and when they are done are much less likely to contribute to image degradation.

Procedures that might work well on excellent files can cause problems for a less-experienced user with less-than-excellent files, a less-developed understanding of the limitations of certain procedures and a less-practiced eye.

Even with an excellent file, someone who is new to the digital darkroom can make the common mistake of thinking there are absolute rules to follow, or that what worked on one image would work equally well on a different one.

[annmpacheco]

An important factor in a discussion of the various ways people do processing is the quality of the raw file. If someone starts with an excellent file that is tack-sharp, low noise, perfectly lighted and not heavily cropped, then they can “get away with” a different processing method than a typical beginner who starts with a soft and underexposed raw file and resorts to stronger processing to try to make it the equivalent of a good file. The good initial file needs a lot less sharpening, noise reduction and tonal adjustments, so the details of how and when they are done are much less likely to contribute to image degradation.

Procedures that might work well on excellent files can cause problems for a less-experienced user with less-than-excellent files, a less-developed understanding of the limitations of certain procedures and a less-practiced eye.

Even with an excellent file, someone who is new to the digital darkroom can make the common mistake of thinking there are absolute rules to follow, or that what worked on one image would work equally well on a different one.

Thanks Diane, how very true and I keep spinning my wheels and feel very lost. I appreciate everyone's input and I continue to utilize suggestions along with "ebooks". For me, I know more this year than last but it still isn't helping me get to where i want to go. Every image is different and has different PP "demands", so that particular roadmap isn't going to be the route i may need to be on for an image and the next one etc, ... I think I should be concentrating on an excellent file and mastering basic adjustments.

[Diane Miller]

As should everyone! Your raw file here is as close to excellent as one could get, given the crop. Although filling the frame is always best, we all sometimes get an image we like that needs a pretty big crop. I rarely find fault with that for a very sharp and well-exposed starting file, and you have the equipment for that.

Just stay with the basics -- that's all you need for this one. You'll soon learn what needs most attention for a given file, and where to quit. Less is usually best, and rigid formulas don't work. The best learning tool we have is a 100% view, to really see what is in an image, and the ability to step back in history to compare what you have done.

You'll soon become experienced. Don't get frustrated!

[Arthur Morris]

hi Arash, here's the link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fggpn4mp17...X5359.CR2?dl=0

HI Ann, I downloaded and save the RAW. But when I opened I saved the RAW file I saw a white crop box. When I attempted to convert the file in DPP 4 I was restricted by the crop box. Any clues as to what is going on? I never saw that before.... a

[annmpacheco]

HI Ann, I downloaded and save the RAW. But when I opened I saved the RAW file I saw a white crop box. When I attempted to convert the file in DPP 4 I was restricted by the crop box. Any clues as to what is going on? I never saw that before.... a

Hi Artie, i opened it in DPP and it also had the white crop box so i uncropped and put it back into dropbox, should be good now... heres a new link:https://www.dropbox.com/s/fggpn4mp17...X5359.CR2?dl=0 thanks, ann

[arash_hazeghi]

You can undo the crop by going to the crop tab and pressing reset

[Arthur Morris]

You can undo the crop by going to the crop tab and pressing reset

Thanks Arash. That helped. Y'all let me know what you think of the repost...

[annmpacheco]

Thanks Arash. That helped. Y'all let me know what you think of the repost...

Hi Artie, thanks for the repost, i think this image is swell! Although it is a large crop, the focus was critical and landed me a tack sharp image. I really like the feather definitions in all areas of the wing... Thanks for your time and suggestions.