Red-billed Firefinch

[Bill Dix]

Our Botswana guides managed to put us on almost all of the birds on my target list, and some like this tiny beauty that weren't even on my radar. While negotiating the Land Cruiser over the winding tracks and watching for lion prints in the sand. the guide at Kwetsani somehow spotted this 4-inch bird in the foliage and put us in position for a shot.

D500, Sigma 150-600C @ 550mm, ISO 2000, 1/1250s @ f/6.3 manual.

[Daniel Cadieux]

What a great little bird this is!! I love the composition, and placement of leaves throughout the frame. Ideally the foot would not be partially concealed, but that is forgiven on an otherwise fantastic image.

[Isaac Grant]

Super cool little bird. Looks great in those surroundings. Love the inquisitive look. Image quality on the bird seems to have suffered a little. Also the shot looks very thin to me. These high ISO files need to be pushed to give them more depth. Did a quick rework just to show a bit where I think the file should go.
All adjustments were done with no more than 5 or 7 points.
Added 5 points black, reduced mid tones by 7 points.
Increased brightness a few ponts
In Viveza I increased brightness, upped saturation, added contrast and upped warmth (all a few points)
Then added 5 points saturation to just the bird
I think if you go back to the original you could push the exposure and colors more to really make it come to life.

[arash_hazeghi]

looks good Bill, I wish that perch was less cluttered the leaf blocking the foot is a bit unfortunate. if you could take a step to your left it may have opened up a better angle

TFS

[Bill Dix]

Thank you all. Isaac, thanks for taking the time. The OP does indeed look dull as compared with your RP. But then, it was a dull day, thus the high ISO. This raises once again the old question whether we want our images to reflect what we saw, or an enhanced version. I don't remember the bird as being nearly as vibrant as your repost shows. But I've argued on both sides of that issue, and generally agree that some enhanced interpretation is not a bad thing as long as it remains relatively true to the actual characteristics of the bird. In this case, I think everything you did improves the image, up to the last 5 points of saturation on the bird which may go too far. In any case, I appreciate the time.

Arash, I agree about the foot, but we were in a vehicle and taking a step to the left was not an option.

[Isaac Grant]

Hey Bill. I think you are thinking about it wrong. When the light is dim the birds are not flat. Muted sure but not so dull and drab and flat. I always feel like photos in dim light look like I'm looking through a dirty window. But in real life they aren't like that at all. The photos don't have depth and dimension. That has to be added back in post. You can choose the amount of saturation but the photo has to look like a bird on a stick and not something that lacks dimension. This is best added with adding blacks, warmth and brightness to bring the photos back to what our eyes see.

[Alex Becker]

Love the red bird against the green. I love how much it pops. Background looks good. Good discussion about post -- this is something I go back and forth with as well. TFS

[David Salem]

Hey Bill. I think you are thinking about it wrong. When the light is dim the birds are not flat. Muted sure but not so dull and drab and flat. I always feel like photos in dim light look like I'm looking through a dirty window. But in real life they aren't like that at all. The photos don't have depth and dimension. That has to be added back in post. You can choose the amount of saturation but the photo has to look like a bird on a stick and not something that lacks dimension. This is best added with adding blacks, warmth and brightness to bring the photos back to what our eyes see.

This is exactly what I preach and what I have gone over with Isaac in the past. You are trying to bring the subject back to the state at which it were sitting on a perch in good light in front of you. As Isaac mentioned, adding blacks to a muted, hazy, image really makes a big difference and then the saturation can be to personal preference. I personally like a fairly vivid looking image without being to saturated. So basically just like it would look like in optimal conditions. I guess I am spoiled from shooting in great light most of the time but I also think it gives me a pretty good eye for colors and contrast for that exact same reason. This is why I use this methodology to bring back less than optimal images.
Well done