Oystercatcher Yoga

[Bill Dix]

Eurasian Oystercatcher from Flatey Island, Iceland. I believe this is called the Dancer Pose among practitioners of yoga (if not someone will correct me).

D500, Sigma 150-600C @ 600mm, ISO 3200, 1/2500s @ f/8 manual. HH

[arash_hazeghi]

nice pose, I like the grass but not the OOF rock. The pose is nice. The back feathers have almost no detail left from high ISO noise and NR. I would def drop the ISO below 3200 on both D500 and D850. It's a waste of time with these bodies IMO if you like to render a quality shot at such high ISO, unless you are shooting white birds....

TFS

[John Mack]

I like the pose and the setting. The feathers do look overly smooth.

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Bill, would agree to point with Arash. For me the image is dark and very warm/saturated and if you have 'pinched' the Histogram in Levels then I think this where things began to go wrong and so shadows & darks have no detail. I am also surprised that the leg has almost zero detail/texture, but the bill has an almost hi vis appearance, sorry, too saturated again I think masking any real detail/texture. There is also some odd 'blurring' below the eye and towards the back, like an NR masking issue?????

TFS
Steve

[Bill Dix]

Thank you all. I agree that the high ISO and NR haven't done any favors for the blacks. The image is a pretty close representation of the RAW file which show deep black and bright white but with no clipping of either. I did not "pinch" the Levels, or apply saturation. Sometimes these birds actually require de-saturation of the bill, although I didn't do that either. I do see some detail in the leg, although I think it may be just beyond the focal plane. I do not see the "blurring" that you refer to below the eye and towards the back.

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Bill thanks for getting back.

Personally ISO3200 isn't high in my book, but if light and conditions allow, then yes a lower ISO is always preferred.

The image is a pretty close representation of the RAW file which show deep black and bright white but with no clipping of either.

I would never think what the raw looks like is what the final output should be, to me there are too many variables and you are letting the camera/adobe dictate, rather than capturing the overall feel and then 'process' the file, but we all think and work in different ways. I think if folk saw a raw file of mine, the flat, lack of contrast and minimal colour would perhaps shock, but then I like to process. What do you sue to process the Raw, Nx, or ACR...?

I do not see the "blurring" that you refer to below the eye and towards the back.

Bill the attached hopefully highlights this, as you can see, to the right of the key line rectangle the plumage appears sharp, but it then tails off quickly in a blur and it's not lack of DoF, just trying to help.

Steve

[Bill Dix]

Thanks Steve. You misunderstand me; I didn't mean to suggest that the RAW file should necessarily represent the model for what I want the final image to look like. Just that in this case the RAW looked pretty good (except for some bothersome noise) and didn't suggest the need for much processing. I use Capture NxD for conversion.

In your repost I do see what you refer to (the repost is much lighter than the OP, so it is more apparent). I can't explain it other than to suggest that it might have to do with the way the light is reflecting off the bird. He had recently come back from a foray into the ocean and his head may still have been damp. All of my images of the species show the head as noticeably darker than the mantle, perhaps in part because of the finer feathers on the head absorbing more of the light. In any case I did nothing in the processing that treated the area in question any differently from the rest of the bird.

Thanks for your help.

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Bill, no worries and thanks for taking the time to explain re raw etc and what you use.

In your repost I do see what you refer to (the repost is much lighter than the OP, so it is more apparent).

I guess I needed to highlight to clarify.

In any case I did nothing in the processing that treated the area in question any differently from the rest of the bird.

That's fine Bill, I had to ask.