Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Bald Eagle Fly By

  1. #1
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Rosemount, Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    269
    Threads
    106
    Thank You Posts

    Default Bald Eagle Fly By

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Was out photographing some bald eagles Tuesday and pulled over and had to quickly get set up as they were in an unexpected spot.

    Nikon D500, 800mm lens, 1/2000, f5.6, ISO 800.

    Overall I'm finding having only been out a couple of times that it seems to be focusing better than the 5D IV did.

  2. #2
    BPN Member dankearl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    8,833
    Threads
    1,358
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    It is pretty noisy for a D500 at iso800, either a big crop or underexposed?
    If it is a big crop with an 800mm and crop sensor on an Eagle, I would try to get closer.
    Dan Kearl

  3. #3
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Rosemount, Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    269
    Threads
    106
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Dan, I did run it again with a little noise reduction.

    Name:  z eagle fly by 5.jpg
Views: 105
Size:  426.4 KB

  4. #4
    Super Moderator arash_hazeghi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, California, United States
    Posts
    18,553
    Threads
    1,320
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    repost is better but still a bit contrasty, exposure looks good, looks like the critical focus was on the tail area .... the other issue with this image is the steep shooting angle , would have been ideal if you had caught him lower in the sky

    TFS
    New! Sony Capture One Pro Guide 2022
    https://arihazeghiphotography.com/Gu.../Sony_C1P.html


    ------------------------------------------------
    Visit my blog
    http://www.arihazeghiphotography.com/blog

  5. #5
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,688
    Threads
    1,296
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Hi Paul, agree that the RP is better, but like Dan, I do question if the image is under exposed. I also agree with Arash that the image does appear quite contrasty, again controlling these will help, but are you shooting via the method of ETTR (expose to the right), if not you should, as you will have better files to work with, more data to have to hand.

    If you hold the Alt key down when moving the Black/White sliders you should see where the blacks and whites clip and so you can avoid this.

    The attached is less than ideal from working with the OP, but just balancing and adjusting the Blacks and Contrast you start to see far more IMHO.

    TFS
    Steve

  6. #6
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Rosemount, Minnesota, United States
    Posts
    269
    Threads
    106
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski View Post
    Hi Paul, agree that the RP is better, but like Dan, I do question if the image is under exposed. I also agree with Arash that the image does appear quite contrasty, again controlling these will help, but are you shooting via the method of ETTR (expose to the right), if not you should, as you will have better files to work with, more data to have to hand.

    If you hold the Alt key down when moving the Black/White sliders you should see where the blacks and whites clip and so you can avoid this.

    The attached is less than ideal from working with the OP, but just balancing and adjusting the Blacks and Contrast you start to see far more IMHO.

    TFS
    Steve
    Hi Steve, I appreciate it. I wonder if there is a difference at all in RAW files from Canon and Nikon; I've been processing the same way on Canon for nearly a decade, so maybe need to think a little differently.

    My main concern is sharpness; hopefully the eye is sharp enough. Obviously it's a small target. I tried to not be as contrasty on this, and lower whites and blacks in RAW and in post; I usually run two layers for contrast color adjust and detail extractor using NIK Filters, and a third to darken the areas slightly around the bird, then a fourth layer for selective sharpening on the eye.

    This one is ISO 1600, but I reduced noise around the bird using Define.

    Name:  z eagle 5.jpg
Views: 61
Size:  463.3 KB

  7. #7
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,688
    Threads
    1,296
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I wonder if there is a difference at all in RAW files from Canon and Nikon
    Hi Paul, yes there is, I'm not going have a pop at Canon, but Nikon are invariably cleaner and I do feel having files that are uncompressed compared to Canon's helps, but there again I've got used to processing Canon's files and kind of know what works, I think .

    With the changes and developments over the last 10 years I do feel that you should constantly update and change your Workflow with the knowledge you gain, as often 'sliders' have become far more sensitive and adaptive, but overall better and so adjustments become smaller, however it ALL comes back to the Raw and how well the exposure is and ultimately - 'is it sharp?' I've been using PS since the early- mid '90's and what you can now do is unbelievable, however most folk only scratch the first 10%.
    My advice would be to offer the raw to someone like Arash for appraisal, as trying to second guess on a posting is hard and we can only make assumptions. In addition, it could be partly how you shoot, the set-up of the camera, as having looked at many raws from members here, it's been the very simple things that have been the issue. Finally, and I know some folk poo poo the idea, but the kit could be out, ie it needs calibration.

    As I think ACR uses the same engine as LR then you could find that it runs more black & contrast behind the scenes, ss it does with sharpening even before you start, so it may put less for Nikon and more for Canon. Certainly in LR it does and so you have to make adjustments prior to any processing IMHO. I have no idea on Contrast colour adjustment you refer to and NIK is something I never would use, as I find there are better software programmes out there if you choose to use them. Again, there are better NR programmes available, however it all comes down to what works for you and I would never push someone into using a specific software just because I use it.

  8. #8
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    10,421
    Threads
    1,708
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Nice pose on the eagle. Agree with what the others have already said here.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Web Analytics