Red Tail Hawk

[david spital]

Canon 5d MKIII
100-400 f4.5-5.6L + TC1.4 II (560mm)
1/1600 f/9 ISO 2000 HH
Cranberry Lane Chatham Cape Cod
2019-08-20 08:01
DPP4 PS2020


second shot at this guy.
Found out why sRBG profile was missing... it happens in the export if you don't check the embed profile box!

[John Mack]

Nice to have the birds head in the sun. Pretty neat lichen on that perch as well. Nice blue sky background. The way the feet grip the perch is nice.

[gail bisson]

The hawk is nice and sharp but...there are several issues with this image. I hope you do not think I am picking on you and are here for honest critiques!
1. The sun was high ( or there was something creating a shadow) so it has created an unfortunate shadow on the back and tail.The shadowed areas have a magenta cast which can be addressed by "selecting" the shadowed area and in "color balance" reduce the magenta in the shadows and midtones.
2. I see some cloning artifact on the left side of the branch and a big dust spot on the right of chest.
3. Color balance is off- the moss and lichens are mint green and should be a soft green.Perhaps you added too much color saturation?
4. Your shooting angle is quite steep. It is always better to be at eye level or close to eye level if possible. Sometimes, backing up to decrease the angle of the shot and cropping more, will help.
5. Crop of an image is a personal thing but I think a less boxy crop would be better. I am thinking 4 x 6 .
6. I find the sky overwhelmingly blue and would desaturate the blues.
Finally, why were you at F9? I would have decreased aperture and SS to get a lower ISO.
Hope this helps,
Gail

[Dorian Anderson]

Yeah, Gail really nailed the critique here. I second everything she said. You're already paying a steep light price with the TC on that zoom lens, so don't make your life more difficult by closing down to f/9, as mentioned. Yeah, it's only
1/3 stop of noise (vs. max f/8), but better to do it in camera than post.

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi David,

Gail has given you some good advice, but I would also like to add to it if I may.

Although I'm not a bird photographer I don't feel the angle is that steep and probably have shot a similar way Techs, HH I'm OK with the SS at 1/1600, but may have gone to f/9 or f/11, this however would have boosted the ISO and I'm not sure on the 5D3 how well it holds, but ISO3200 on a sunny day I think would be fine. The dark plumage I think has been lightened and in fact what we see is colour noise rather than a cast. If I take your image and as suggested, correct the image to an even reading for all three channels then the WB goes warmer, however the sky is pushed and so you have this blue cast, reduce that and things begin to look a lot better. If you then add some NR the feathers are more 'neutral' with no colour noise, but to me the light looks strong, creating hard whites and strong blacks.

In addition, I would check how you output your files as the image is not an sRGB file with an embedded profile which may also add colour shift on the web, all files for the web or projected need an sRGB profile.

FYI the image is just to illustrate the points which are easily resolved, hope it helps.

Finally, check your camera data, as the owner name is different to yours and so it would be good David to just update that to avoid any confusion.

All the best.

TFS
Steve

[david spital]

The hawk is nice and sharp but...there are several issues with this image. I hope you do not think I am picking on you and are here for honest critiques!
1. The sun was high ( or there was something creating a shadow) so it has created an unfortunate shadow on the back and tail.The shadowed areas have a magenta cast which can be addressed by "selecting" the shadowed area and in "color balance" reduce the magenta in the shadows and midtones.
2. I see some cloning artifact on the left side of the branch and a big dust spot on the right of chest.
3. Color balance is off- the moss and lichens are mint green and should be a soft green.Perhaps you added too much color saturation?
4. Your shooting angle is quite steep. It is always better to be at eye level or close to eye level if possible. Sometimes, backing up to decrease the angle of the shot and cropping more, will help.
5. Crop of an image is a personal thing but I think a less boxy crop would be better. I am thinking 4 x 6 .
6. I find the sky overwhelmingly blue and would desaturate the blues.
Finally, why were you at F9? I would have decreased aperture and SS to get a lower ISO.
Hope this helps,
Gail

I don't think you are picking on me. I love the commentary, it gives me the info I need to make better decisions.
Anyway:
I think the photo was shot at 8 am so I don't think the Sun was that high of that low either. I did notice the shadows, probably created by the surrounding trees. This was shot into a wet dense bog with very limited access and a small window to the bird. There was no way outside of a ladder or stilts to change the angle.
I do see the cloning artifact you point out which I can clean up, I don't see the big dust spot you mention ?
The color balance always seems to be a bit different when I post a photo to this site, but I do see and agree with the color comments you make. I will address those issues and see if I can improve the colors and saturation levels
Crop suggestion noted and I will play with that.
Ahhh finally the F9 issue, so I shot a number of tests with this Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L and found that its sharpest f stop is F9. I was influenced at that time by those test results. Now not so much, I'd go for the lower ISO.
Maybe I'll repost with changes.
Gail thanks for the help.

[david spital]

Thanks Steve....I don't have that camera body any longer and I probably didn't update the camera data when I had it.
Interesting comments regarding color balance issues. I will look into them.
I not doing anything unique outputting the file so I'm not sure why a profile would be missing? I followed the suggestions in Arthur Morris's workflow guide for outputting the image. Am I losing the profile at an eariler stage? Maybe.
I need to look at that.
Thanks very helpful stuff.

[david spital]

Hi, I used F9 because testing showed that to be this lens sharpest setting. At this point I'd go for the slower ISO. I wish I had faster equipment ... maybe soon.

Thanks Dorian