Snowy Egret incoming

[Brian Sump]

Went out yesterday morning to try to improve my low-light shooting skills. I previously scouted a pond to the north where 5-6 Snowy Egrets reside and noticed a landing pattern along a certain shore.

Captured a few that I think may end up keepers, including this one. Still figuring out shooting in Manual with auto-ISO, need to bump EV for sure on shots against bright backdrops and bump EV down on brighter subjects. This one was quite noisy at ISO 1000 even with the D850..... I guess normal with this low light?

On this one, I deployed two new practices:

1. Topaz DeNoise. I had used this earlier this year but didn't have much knowledge on what a quality image looked like so I got another 30-day trial. The first export of the RAW file from Capture One that I processed produced a HORRIBLE final image as color and contrast drastically changed. So I imported a TIF file into Topaz and was pleasantly surprised. On this one I used 18 denoise and I think 5 sharpen. Felt slightly smooth on the head, but I also cropped 50% (still ended up around ~ 22mp probably)

2. Made my own luminance masks based on Kuyper's teachings. Reduced some highlights and raised shadows a touch. I will probably DL his free PS module, looks really cool

- Shot shortly after sunrise in overcast sky
- D850
- Sigma 500mm f4
- Handheld

ISO 1000
1/2500
f4

Tone and WB in C1P, denoise in Topaz and final touch-up and export sharpening in PS. Perhaps a touch of Structure in C1P could have helped

PS - thank you to several of you who have proactively reached out to help me. I feel blessed.

[William Dickson]

I personally think this is your best image posted, so far....Wow...this is looking good. Almost 3D effect here on the iMac. Very nice Brian, it sure brought my attention.

Well done

Will

[Bill Dix]

Ditto what Will said. Lovely shot. The bird may look just a bit smooth, but could be the low light. Not sure if you were using the same Topaz NR settings on both bird and BG. I hope not. Nicely done.

[Geoffrey Montagu]

Outstanding capture, Brian. First thought I had after taking in this beautiful flight capture, was smoothness Bill referred to, and on looking closer there's nice feather detail also. On my monitor I'm seeing a slight halo around the black legs and some masking artifacts between the toes. Easy fixes.


Geoffrey




http://500px.com/geoffreymontagu

[Brian Sump]

Ditto what Will said. Lovely shot. The bird may look just a bit smooth, but could be the low light. Not sure if you were using the same Topaz NR settings on both bird and BG. I hope not. Nicely done.

Bill, I did run the whole photo through. With the trial version it doesn't attach directly to PS so you have to import the photo into the Topaz module and export again. After the fact I realized I could have created a variant in C1P, processed one variant for noise on the background, masked the bird and copied that layer into the noise-reduced PS file. Lot of work but would have presumably helped with softness.

That said, here is the raw image cropped with only white, tone and minimal noise reduction. It appears a bit smooth here already?

[Brian Sump]

Outstanding capture, Brian. First thought I had after taking in this beautiful flight capture, was smoothness Bill referred to, and on looking closer there's nice feather detail also. On my monitor I'm seeing a slight halo around the black legs and some masking artifacts between the toes. Easy fixes.


Geoffrey

Crap, you're totally right.

I can fix the feet easily. For the halo on the legs, what's the easiest solution at this point? Try to use the brush tool in the mask selection to get closer to the legs?

[Joseph Przybyla]

Hi Brian, lovely pose on the bird, really nice background. With the conditions you described and the settings on the camera (manual with auto ISO) I would guess the image was underexposed. At that time of day, especially if overcast I am normally adding +1.0 to 2.0 EV even with a white bird. I think the smoothness on the feathers of the egret is the soft light from the overcast sky, no shadows. Most feather detail in a image is from shadows and micro shadows that the edges cast.

[Brian Sump]

Hi Brian, lovely pose on the bird, really nice background. With the conditions you described and the settings on the camera (manual with auto ISO) I would guess the image was underexposed. At that time of day, especially if overcast I am normally adding +1.0 to 2.0 EV even with a white bird. I think the smoothness on the feathers of the egret is the soft light from the overcast sky, no shadows. Most feather detail in a image is from shadows and micro shadows that the edges cast.

Super helpful, thank you Joe!

[Geoffrey Montagu]

Crap, you're totally right.

I can fix the feet easily. For the halo on the legs, what's the easiest solution at this point? Try to use the brush tool in the mask selection to get closer to the legs?

Looks as if you've done good work on a fix for the artifacts and the halos. There are many ways to remove halos, and depending on their location I've had good results by selecting (in this instance the legs) and then invert the selection and carefully run the clone tool over the halo keeping the cloned selection right next to the halo while staying at the same horizontal plane. This keeps any pattern behind the legs true while covering the halos. Hope this helps.


Geoffrey




http://500px.com/geoffreymontagu

[dankearl]

Nice image.
Not sure what you mean by:

"The first export of the RAW file from Capture One that I processed produced a HORRIBLE final image as color and contrast drastically changed. So I imported a TIF file into Topaz and was pleasantly surprised."

I load my SD card photos into Capture, click on a photo, make the adjustments I want and save as TIFF file.
I then open TIFF file in photoshop.
It does not change. I do not understand why yours would change?
After I open the Tiff file in photoshop, I crop to what I want. Select BG, run Topaz NR to my personal choice, I do not use the pre settings, I adjust.
I only run NR on bird if shot at iso6400 or something like that.
Then I save again as a Tiff file.
Takes me about 1 minute.
If I want to do something with that Tiff file, I open it, put my signature on and save as 1800 wide in TK panel
to sharpness of my choosing.
Takes another minute.
I do not use luminosity masks, I try to shoot and get sharp well exposed photos.
I delete the ones that are not.
It is not that complicated.
That is my workflow.
I only use Photoshop for cropping, running Topaz on Bg, Putting a signature on and sizing for web for Bird photography.
I use it more for Landscape and other stuff.

[Brian Sump]

Looks as if you've done good work on a fix for the artifacts and the halos. There are many ways to remove halos, and depending on their location I've had good results by selecting (in this instance the legs) and then invert the selection and carefully run the clone tool over the halo keeping the cloned selection right next to the halo while staying at the same horizontal plane. This keeps any pattern behind the legs true while covering the halos. Hope this helps.


Geoffrey

Geoffrey, I think I'm tracking with you. When you invert the leg selection, just not sure how cloning would work. Are you copying and pasting the inverted selection and then stamping?




http://500px.com/geoffreymontagu

[Brian Sump]

Nice image.
Not sure what you mean by:

"The first export of the RAW file from Capture One that I processed produced a HORRIBLE final image as color and contrast drastically changed. So I imported a TIF file into Topaz and was pleasantly surprised."

I load my SD card photos into Capture, click on a photo, make the adjustments I want and save as TIFF file.
I then open TIFF file in photoshop.
It does not change. I do not understand why yours would change?
After I open the Tiff file in photoshop, I crop to what I want. Select BG, run Topaz NR to my personal choice, I do not use the pre settings, I adjust.
I only run NR on bird if shot at iso6400 or something like that.
Then I save again as a Tiff file.
Takes me about 1 minute.
If I want to do something with that Tiff file, I open it, put my signature on and save as 1800 wide in TK panel
to sharpness of my choosing.
Takes another minute.
I do not use luminosity masks, I try to shoot and get sharp well exposed photos.
I delete the ones that are not.
It is not that complicated.
That is my workflow.
I only use Photoshop for cropping, running Topaz on Bg, Putting a signature on and sizing for web for Bird photography.
I use it more for Landscape and other stuff.

Dan, I'm using the trial so it doesn't attach inside PS. I tried just importing the raw file right from C!P but learned quickly that does not work. But yes, with paid version I think I can open Topaz right inside PS.

[dankearl]

Brian:
My point is, if you have to really work on photos, use masks etc. It was most likely
not a great shot. I know others think different here and I spent years "working" on photos.
Not a complete waste but getting good shots in the field is the best advice.
Spend time finding good subjects in the best light you have.
Make sharp photos. You can fix a lot, the only thing you cannot fix is focus.
The less time I spend processing a photo, the better it is.
The best photography you do is in the field.

[Steve Kaluski]

Brian, just check (if applicable) that when you Export from C1 that it's exporting is a 16bit Tiff and NOT an 8 bit. Folk often make this simple mistake, especially in ACR. EVERYTHING you do in PP after exporting from your chosen Raw converter should be at 16bit, it's probably in the Prefs of C1. All workings in PS should be kept in Adobe RGB and 16bit, retain then your Master tiff file with ALL of it's layers as you can then go back at a later date if required. The only time you you flatten your master file is when you crop and save for Web, but Save As the new file otherwise you will loose you Master file.

In LR you can save directly back to LR which is great, not sure if you can do this with C1, its great because you have both raw & hi res layer Tiff in one location. If not, just create another folder where you can keep your master file from that particular session.

[Geoffrey Montagu]

Geoffrey, I think I'm tracking with you. When you invert the leg selection, just not sure how cloning would work. Are you copying and pasting the inverted selection and then stamping?




http://500px.com/geoffreymontagu

You will be setting your clone tool sampling point in the inverted area next to the halo, click, hold and drag (make sure you're clone stamp circle is just a fraction wider than the halo width) along the halo. Remember to keep the clone tool at the same horizontal plane.

Hope this is a bit clearer, Brian.


Geoffrey




http://500px.com/geoffreymontagu

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Brian, unless the image was under exposed (which I think it was) and you had to ‘lift’ the image, lighten it, then at ISO 1000 and DNAI set to 22, it’s way too much. How are you making the calculation? If the image was correctly exposed then you wouldn't need any NR, however I would expect if you used DNAI then it to be anywhere between 4-9 at worse case. I'm assuming the halo is caused by over sharpening and if you added 'structure' (which I'm assuming is a form of Contrast sharpening, like Clarity/Texture in LR), then you are just adding even more sharpening, unless you target things by a layer mask

Seems a lot of working going on in PP, especially cloning, is it really required, is it the correct way???? Perhaps lessen the DN and sharpening, if you are adding any 'pre sharpening perhaps back that off and then only sharpen at the final output size.

[Andreas Liedmann]

Hi Brian late to the party ... and I have the advantage the I have seen the raw file . Quite noisy for Iso 1000 ...a result of underexposure and I think of the low contrast scene !!! And for my taste the crop is quite hard for my taste .... might be different for Nikon users .... but to me it is pixel bashing !!!

Brian .... you can do almost everything in C1 , you have layers , luminosity masks and all sorts of other stuff !!! Is that not written in your guide ???????
You can apply many rounds of NR to the BG on 1, 2, or even 3 layers with the internal NR , you can mask out the bird and go for the NR ..... no need for funky DNAI .... IMHO !!!!!
All layers can be reduced by opacity and can be masked with a classical brush or the lumo mask option , you can even tweak the mask with auto edge detection , blur the mask etc etc etc ..... it is all there !!!!!!

The luminosity masks are not as perfect as the ones created in PS manually or via .ie. Tony Kuyper´s panel ..... but for basic luminosity masking they are good enough for localized adjustments !!!!


Steve raised a good point about the export to PS ..... 16 bit and Adobe RGB

There is no way back from PS to C1 as with LR .....the way back to C1 is with the TIF or PSD , so you work basically on a copy , but you can use all tools inside C1 . From my understanding with the LR / PS combo you can stay the whole time in the " RAW STAGE " ... going back and forth .

Hope this helps a bit .... Brian

TFS Andreas

[Brian Sump]

Hi Brian, unless the image was under exposed (which I think it was) and you had to ‘lift’ the image, lighten it, then at ISO 1000 and DNAI set to 22, it’s way too much. How are you making the calculation? If the image was correctly exposed then you wouldn't need any NR, however I would expect if you used DNAI then it to be anywhere between 4-9 at worse case. I'm assuming the halo is caused by over sharpening and if you added 'structure' (which I'm assuming is a form of Contrast sharpening, like Clarity/Texture in LR), then you are just adding even more sharpening, unless you target things by a layer mask

Seems a lot of working going on in PP, especially cloning, is it really required, is it the correct way???? Perhaps lessen the DN and sharpening, if you are adding any 'pre sharpening perhaps back that off and then only sharpen at the final output size.

Steve, thanks for the replies.

Fortunately I have been working with 300dpi 16-bit files so far.

Regarding post, I guess I am overcoming my learning curve with a lot of PP work. It's just the stage I'm at right now.... That said, I wasn't at 22 in Topaz, I ended up at 18, which I guess is close anyway. It is just what appeared to smooth the noise in the image just enough without appearing overboard. I need to just purchase DN so I can process it in layers within PS instead of having to export files into the app.

As far as halos, I think it's because I masked the bird to lift some shadows and reduce some highlights. I didn't smooth the mask in the leg area as I probably forgot they were selected. Ultimately I did sharpen at export, just a little about 50/.5/1.

[Brian Sump]

Hi Brian late to the party ... and I have the advantage the I have seen the raw file . Quite noisy for Iso 1000 ...a result of underexposure and I think of the low contrast scene !!! And for my taste the crop is quite hard for my taste .... might be different for Nikon users .... but to me it is pixel bashing !!!

Brian .... you can do almost everything in C1 , you have layers , luminosity masks and all sorts of other stuff !!! Is that not written in your guide ???????
You can apply many rounds of NR to the BG on 1, 2, or even 3 layers with the internal NR , you can mask out the bird and go for the NR ..... no need for funky DNAI .... IMHO !!!!!
All layers can be reduced by opacity and can be masked with a classical brush or the lumo mask option , you can even tweak the mask with auto edge detection , blur the mask etc etc etc ..... it is all there !!!!!!

The luminosity masks are not as perfect as the ones created in PS manually or via .ie. Tony Kuyper´s panel ..... but for basic luminosity masking they are good enough for localized adjustments !!!!


Steve raised a good point about the export to PS ..... 16 bit and Adobe RGB

There is no way back from PS to C1 as with LR .....the way back to C1 is with the TIF or PSD , so you work basically on a copy , but you can use all tools inside C1 . From my understanding with the LR / PS combo you can stay the whole time in the " RAW STAGE " ... going back and forth .

Hope this helps a bit .... Brian

TFS Andreas

Always appreciate it.

The only guide I've followed so far is Arash's C1P guide, but it doesn't get into layers and masks. Need more time to learn it better.

Regarding crop, I don't like to. At least I'm shooting at 45mp so some reduction won't kill the file?

Until I can either get closer to subjects or upgrade gear, with which I can fill the frame better I have to play the cards I am dealt. I can not post here I suppose; I know my images have a long way to go but at least I can practice getting better at what I can control.

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Brian, 18 is still massive, but in time, if you shoot ETTR then the use of NR should become less, you shouldn't need it below 2000, but if under exposed....

The halo is jagged (known as stepping) and therefore I still think it's sharpening. 50/0.5/1 - Keep Threshold if that is the last, to zero, radius IMHO is also a bit high IMHO.

I bet your head is buzzing and perhaps download overload, but over time digest and re read as things will start to fall into place over time. I think it's a bit like driving a maniual car with gears, we blame everything apart from ourselves and then suddenly it all falls into place.

It's so great to see folk like you and Colin embracing all the various inputs as it can only help you climb this Curve.

[John Mack]

I like the first post the pose is nice and the bird looks very casual. The view of the feet is nice as well.

[Brian Sump]

I bet your head is buzzing and perhaps download overload, but over time digest and re read as things will start to fall into place over time. I think it's a bit like driving a maniual car with gears, we blame everything apart from ourselves and then suddenly it all falls into place.

It's so great to see folk like you and Colin embracing all the various inputs as it can only help you climb this Curve.

You have no idea lol......

Yeah there's a lot going through the head but slowly it's sinking in. Thanks again.