Results 1 to 22 of 22

Thread: 1-800-GOT-JUNC

  1. #1
    BPN Member Brian Sump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    1,398
    Threads
    131
    Thank You Posts

    Default 1-800-GOT-JUNC

    Name:  20201006-R5-Dark-eyed-Junco-Rocks-ONE-Brian-SumpBMS_0622-FORUM-SIG-USM137-brush-final-v4.jpg
Views: 132
Size:  583.2 KB

    Dark Eyed Junco. One of the earlier shots I made with the R5.

    Fairly notable crop.

    R5
    600mm + 1.4x
    Handheld
    ISO 1250
    1/3200
    f5.6

    LR and PS. Cleaned up a couple spots on rock.
    Last edited by Brian Sump; 11-13-2020 at 06:00 PM.

  2. Thanks Volkan Akgul thanked for this post
  3. #2
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Lakeland, FL
    Posts
    6,089
    Threads
    1,643
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Sweet Image, Brian. Lovely feather detail, pure background, interesting rock perch. Thank you for sharing.
    Joe Przybyla

    "Sometimes I do get to places just as God is ready to have somebody click the shutter"... Ansel Adams

    www.amazinglight.smugmug.com

  4. #3
    Super Moderator Daniel Cadieux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    25,048
    Threads
    3,832
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Oooh, the Red-backed variant! I'd love to see this as we only get the Slate-colored here (and very rarely the Oregon). Looks good to me. The finicky part in me wishes the tail's shadow was not on the rock, but overall there is nothing "junc" about this image!

  5. #4
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Waynesville, Ohio, United States
    Posts
    864
    Threads
    152
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Just lovely Brian like the rock different. Have to agree with others nice. I may have cloned the oof part of the rock in the center. Just looks odd may not be a part of the rock TFS

  6. #5
    BPN Member dankearl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    8,310
    Threads
    1,252
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Just an observation on a critique site.
    I have no bias against any camera system, they all have plus and minus.
    The Canon images you have posted are not nearly as good as the ones with
    Nikon equipment.
    They are all big crops. Detail not as good.
    Maybe just what you have posted.
    My 2 cents.
    Dan Kearl

  7. #6
    Avian Moderator gail bisson's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Nova Scotia
    Posts
    12,431
    Threads
    888
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I had never heard of this type of junco. We get the dark-eyed and Oregon's in Nova Scotia but never this guy.
    Nice BG and I like the rock perch.
    What do you mean by "notable" crop?
    Gail

  8. #7
    BPN Member Brian Sump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    1,398
    Threads
    131
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Przybyla View Post
    Sweet Image, Brian. Lovely feather detail, pure background, interesting rock perch. Thank you for sharing.
    Joe, grateful for your comments. Thanks for chiming in!

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel Cadieux View Post
    Oooh, the Red-backed variant! I'd love to see this as we only get the Slate-colored here (and very rarely the Oregon). Looks good to me. The finicky part in me wishes the tail's shadow was not on the rock, but overall there is nothing "junc" about this image!

    Daniel, I actually didn't know this was the Red-backed; thanks for the education. And great eye, that's something I guess I got a bit lazy on and would benefit without the shadow for sure. Thank you!

    Quote Originally Posted by kevin Hice View Post
    Just lovely Brian like the rock different. Have to agree with others nice. I may have cloned the oof part of the rock in the center. Just looks odd may not be a part of the rock TFS
    Kevin, thanks for the perspective. I presume you mean the red rock?

    Quote Originally Posted by dankearl View Post
    Just an observation on a critique site.
    I have no bias against any camera system, they all have plus and minus.
    The Canon images you have posted are not nearly as good as the ones with
    Nikon equipment.
    They are all big crops. Detail not as good.
    Maybe just what you have posted.
    My 2 cents.
    Dan, fair enough. But let's give it a little time and see how I am able to progress. Here are a few thoughts:

    1. During the summer I was able to scout heavily and get birds in my well-known spots, many with audio. And thus I was able to get closer than most of my subjects lately.
    2. I have never scouted this time of year so I'm still learning areas where I can get closer to subjects. This crop is only about 2700 pixels remaining out of 8192 at full size - that's immense, yet I still feel like the IQ held up enough to share. Maybe not for some...
    3. The post processing is just flat different with mirrorless. I mean I am able to use the same work flow, but how images respond to DN, sharpening and even some of the Nik filters I use are different. I need more practice
    4. I am shooting with a 2.0x for the first time. A main issue I am dealing with is atmospheric distortion. Had this conversation with Arash multiple times and Artie lately. I don't know if high elevation factors in, but I am noticing it much more lately esp with the 2.0x at ground level. Example being the recent Gadwall hen; it was one of the only ones out of tens and tens that was tack sharp. I had many Killdeer and several other ducks on water and land that were distorted and you could see clear evidence of shimmers in the bkg and the common 'fuzzy' subject. The water and ground are still warm from summer (hence the crazy fires from lack of moisture and cooler weather). Further, this is a main reason you did not see many birds on water from me in the summer. It was horrible even with the D850 and 1.4x
    5. I do have several shots at or near MFD and I can produce 18-20 in a row, tack sharp with this set up so I know it's not gear.
    6. Panning with this set up is SO much different. The EVF takes a lot of adjusting as do understanding the zone and AF + Animal eye transfer (acquire with one and usually transfer to the other). It took me a long time to get used to keeping the sensor on the subject with the D850 this year and in some ways it's equally as challenging adjusting to this rig. I find myself improving little by little and once you get it right, the focus is much stickier
    7. Recently, the Green-winged Teal, Northern Pintail, "Merg Viper" and Loon were all substantial crops. The Cormorant, Drake Shoveler and Gadwall portrait were not. Feel free to review and see what you think.
    8. I will make an effort to post shots this week that were closer to the sensor. They many not be show worthy compositions, but you can say what you think. Maybe no mirrorless will ever be the same as a DSLR quality at the pixel level (as evidenced by some shots shared here by other members in recent weeks, IMO). However my capture rate is well worth it to me.


    Quote Originally Posted by gail bisson View Post
    I had never heard of this type of junco. We get the dark-eyed and Oregon's in Nova Scotia but never this guy.
    Nice BG and I like the rock perch.
    What do you mean by "notable" crop?
    Gail
    Gail, thank you. We have 2-3 variety here but as mentioned to Daniel, I wasn't aware this was Red-backed.

    This was 2700 pixels before resizing and the full frame image was 8200, so... pretty drastic. You can probably see a bit of IQ degradation?
    Last edited by Brian Sump; 11-13-2020 at 10:11 PM.

  9. #8
    BPN Member Paul Burdett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    1,575
    Threads
    246
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Brian. No major nits from me...I'm sure you'll progress with the new gear. However, for me the head looks a little over sharpened? I've been getting similar results from the Topaz plugins in some situations...just got to know when to pull back a tad.

  10. #9
    BPN Member Brian Sump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    1,398
    Threads
    131
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Burdett View Post
    Hi Brian. No major nits from me...I'm sure you'll progress with the new gear. However, for me the head looks a little over sharpened? I've been getting similar results from the Topaz plugins in some situations...just got to know when to pull back a tad.
    Yes, perhaps I could brush the head area down to a lower layer a touch. I did not sharpen in Topaz, fyi.

    Thanks Paul.

  11. #10
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    18,279
    Threads
    1,098
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    However, for me the head looks a little over sharpened?
    Paul, it's stemming partly from LR inputs and also Contrast/Clarity added, when removed the image is sharp and the 'sootiness' behind the subject less prominent and more pleasing IMHO.

    Brian I would remove the hint of red bolder in the BKG, an easy fix and darken the FG rock.

    TFS
    Steve
    Post Production: Itís ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  12. #11
    BPN Member Brian Sump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    1,398
    Threads
    131
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski View Post
    Paul, it's stemming partly from LR inputs and also Contrast/Clarity added, when removed the image is sharp and the 'sootiness' behind the subject less prominent and more pleasing IMHO.

    Brian I would remove the hint of red bolder in the BKG, an easy fix and darken the FG rock.

    TFS
    Steve
    Steve, feels like every Junco I post you use the word Sooty. I'm ok with you commenting, but I've never understood the meaning of that.

    I do not ever add contrast or clarity using sliders, if perhaps that's what you meant. Do I prefer contrast, yes as we discussed. I do occasionally use the exposure adj tool in PS (offset or gamma) just to eliminate haziness or produce 'clarity' if need be.

    Sorry I don't understand your meaning. And I really feel like this particular image is less contrasty than most I post. It's a large crop. If it needs slightly less sharpening, comments welcome but it feels close to me.

  13. #12
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    18,279
    Threads
    1,098
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Steve, feels like every Junco I post you use the word Sooty. I'm ok with you commenting, but I've never understood the meaning of that.
    OK Brian, I'll try to explain as I've covered what LR does 1000 times, imagine the soot from a chimney, now take your image and gently give it a dusting, but like iron fillings it only attaches itself to the darker areas ie in the BKG creating what i and others refer too as a sooty look. I will attach your OP and later a RP so you can see the comparison and hopefully everything will be clear.

    do not ever add contrast or clarity using sliders, if perhaps that's what you meant. Do I prefer contrast, yes as we discussed. I do occasionally use the exposure adj tool in PS (offset or gamma) just to eliminate haziness or produce 'clarity' if need be.
    OK, if you don't add Contrast and or blacks then the heavy 'contrast look' stems from the LR preset Adobe colour, (or any PS adjustment ie levels), but I know you use another form of Profiles however, Contrast, Clarity etc are all forms of Contrast sharpening as I have highlighted, so you may not intentionally add it in, but if you either leave Black at zero or add coupled with sharpening it can appear too sharp if the Adobe profile is used. In addition, if folk are using a 'glossy' screen then ramping up these areas can 'visually' appear great, but can also be misleading when departing from a monitor to prints say, so the simple question is, is your monitor Glossy or which tends to be the case over here, for processing/retouching/repro monitors are more flatter shall we say.

    Hope this helps, wish we were a lot closer as you can see instantly the difference.
    Post Production: Itís ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  14. #13
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    18,279
    Threads
    1,098
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Brian, when things are controlled, the BKG looks better and the head cleaner with more detail and the original sharpening looks spot on.
    Post Production: Itís ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  15. #14
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    18,279
    Threads
    1,098
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    It's all just food for thought Brian, but when you consider from where you started, then changing raw converters, then cameras I think the whole journey has been so beneficial and in the eleven plus years I have been on BPN, I doubt I have seen anyone come so far and keep progressing as you have done. You have taken on the whole learning curve both in PP & in camera brands head on, so a huge kudos.
    Post Production: Itís ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  16. #15
    BPN Member Brian Sump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    1,398
    Threads
    131
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski View Post
    OK Brian, I'll try to explain as I've covered what LR does 1000 times, imagine the soot from a chimney, now take your image and gently give it a dusting, but like iron fillings it only attaches itself to the darker areas ie in the BKG creating what i and others refer too as a sooty look. I will attach your OP and later a RP so you can see the comparison and hopefully everything will be clear.



    OK, if you don't add Contrast and or blacks then the heavy 'contrast look' stems from the LR preset Adobe colour, (or any PS adjustment ie levels), but I know you use another form of Profiles however, Contrast, Clarity etc are all forms of Contrast sharpening as I have highlighted, so you may not intentionally add it in, but if you either leave Black at zero or add coupled with sharpening it can appear too sharp if the Adobe profile is used. In addition, if folk are using a 'glossy' screen then ramping up these areas can 'visually' appear great, but can also be misleading when departing from a monitor to prints say, so the simple question is, is your monitor Glossy or which tends to be the case over here, for processing/retouching/repro monitors are more flatter shall we say.

    Hope this helps, wish we were a lot closer as you can see instantly the difference.
    Ok Steve, this certainly clarifies for me. Thank you.

    I kept reviewing the subject in terms of looking for sootiness and struggled to apply the reasoning, but I can see more of it in context on the bkg area you highlighted.

    Okay, so I use the NEC PA271Q professional 27", color calibrated monitor. It has more of a matte finish to your point but I can understand why that may impact PP.

    Your experience in PP is very evident and you have given a LOT of your time without being compensated to help people here learn. That is very gracious and apprecaited. The conundrum I see happening here in the forum seems to be the balance between getting a deep, rich (if not contrasty) feel to the images but retaining detail. For instance, your repost removed some of the 'sootiness' you refer to and such, but in lifting blacks does tend to make images feel thinner and more washed out to me (of course you were just editing a jpg, we get that). Again, that's the beauty of art and interpretive processing - what is most pleasing to you and your audience. No right or wrong way.

    I am going to focus on posting some images this week that are closer to the sensor as some of my images lately are larger crops. I do feel that impacts the final posted product.

    Again Steve, thank you for your very kind and encouraging words!

  17. #16
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    18,279
    Threads
    1,098
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Sorry for the late reply, didn’t get the notification so just on the iPhone.

    I think we are quite close in terms of screens, mine are all Eizo. It’s just my personal perspective is that yes things like the Apple are so rich and vibrant making things very sexy and that’s fine..., but after many years I just find the look & feel not so reflective of ‘the scene’ and you can never really replicate what you seen on screen to a degree, but...

    Getting back on track, there is something in the workflow that perhaps I see and perhaps Paul, where darks & sharpening is clashing creating an over sharp look. This may be a factor from DNAI and the sharpening you may add, coupled with the ‘output’ sharpening that is always required after cropping and ready for uploading to the web.

    If I was a gambler I would say DNAI sharpening (unless dialled back), plus additional output sharpening where amount & radius is just too aggressive.

    Just my take Brian, however let’s see what this week brings and any tweaks you may choose to implement, albeit I will be working away from home. Have a great weekend.
    Post Production: Itís ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  18. #17
    BPN Member Brian Sump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    1,398
    Threads
    131
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski View Post
    Sorry for the late reply, didn’t get the notification so just on the iPhone.

    I think we are quite close in terms of screens, mine are all Eizo. It’s just my personal perspective is that yes things like the Apple are so rich and vibrant making things very sexy and that’s fine..., but after many years I just find the look & feel not so reflective of ‘the scene’ and you can never really replicate what you seen on screen to a degree, but...

    Getting back on track, there is something in the workflow that perhaps I see and perhaps Paul, where darks & sharpening is clashing creating an over sharp look. This may be a factor from DNAI and the sharpening you may add, coupled with the ‘output’ sharpening that is always required after cropping and ready for uploading to the web.

    If I was a gambler I would say DNAI sharpening (unless dialled back), plus additional output sharpening where amount & radius is just too aggressive.

    Just my take Brian, however let’s see what this week brings and any tweaks you may choose to implement, albeit I will be working away from home. Have a great weekend.
    Steve, about 2 weeks ago I stopped sharpening in DNAI. To clarify, I set the sharpening to 1 always and let my final sharpening process do the work. I also typically brush blacks on the Topaz layer down to the raw layer because I believe Topaz over darkens blacks.

    All said, I have been using 40 and 1.0 as the sharpening standard in LR on the mirrorless files. I saw your discussion with Gail a few weeks ago and while I think her files are usually dead on, I am going to start using 40/0.8 moving forward and see what that might do.

    You have a great one yourself my friend!

  19. #18
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    18,279
    Threads
    1,098
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Brian, can you do me a favour, drop me a line indicating the following:

    LR sharpening inputs
    No additional sharpening applied then until output, yes?
    Once cropped and ready for output, what is used ie USM, Smart sharpen etc and respective values.

    I think it just needs refining from what you have indicated.
    Post Production: Itís ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  20. #19
    BPN Member Dorian Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    San Mateo, CA
    Posts
    2,253
    Threads
    201
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Late to the party, but I like the original image best. Steve's rework shows more detail in the black but lacks contrast and punch.

    So curious about processing the R5 files versus DX files. Either way, your processing workflow is so complicated compared to mine.
    I just go into LR, move some sliders around, and that's about it. I just wonder if you're over-complicating things.

  21. #20
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    18,279
    Threads
    1,098
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Either way, your processing workflow is so complicated compared to mine. I just go into LR, move some sliders around, and that's about it. I just wonder if you're over-complicating things.
    LOL Dorian, after over 15 years with LR I kind of know the Pros & Cons and what is good and what is bad with it and so when tackling an image I already know what needs to be done straight away after importing, but how I achieve that will be with some of the sliders you may side step, but working Globally folk miss so much that LR can offer. Also with over 25 years plus working with PS commercially in Design & Advertising I've had to know how to achieve certain 'processes' like Luminosity masks via PS because software like TK wasn't invented then and so Calculations, Alpha channels, BleniF are all fantastic tools to get the best from your raw capture, but fundamentally it's all about using the right tools and some you may not think of. I probably spend around the same time as you processing an image, 15-25 mins, but we both just come at it from different directions. In addition, I might also shoot differently at times because I know in PP I can achieve a better file, but if you saw my raws you would shake your head as they are as dull as ditch water, no Contrast, Saturation, Sharpening etc as I want the file to just have the data and not be swayed by anything else.

    Ultimately all we all want to do is to portray our images in the best light possible, sorry for the pun.
    Post Production: Itís ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  22. #21
    BPN Member Dorian Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    San Mateo, CA
    Posts
    2,253
    Threads
    201
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski View Post
    LOL Dorian, after over 15 years with LR I kind of know the Pros & Cons and what is good and what is bad with it and so when tackling an image I already know what needs to be done straight away after importing, but how I achieve that will be with some of the sliders you may side step, but working Globally folk miss so much that LR can offer. Also with over 25 years plus working with PS commercially in Design & Advertising I've had to know how to achieve certain 'processes' like Luminosity masks via PS because software like TK wasn't invented then and so Calculations, Alpha channels, BleniF are all fantastic tools to get the best from your raw capture, but fundamentally it's all about using the right tools and some you may not think of. I probably spend around the same time as you processing an image, 15-25 mins, but we both just come at it from different directions. In addition, I might also shoot differently at times because I know in PP I can achieve a better file, but if you saw my raws you would shake your head as they are as dull as ditch water, no Contrast, Saturation, Sharpening etc as I want the file to just have the data and not be swayed by anything else.

    Ultimately all we all want to do is to portray our images in the best light possible, sorry for the pun.
    Steve, that comment was about Brian's workflow. I'm not sure how/why you took it as an attack on your processing. You are very good at processing; we just have different styles and emphasize different aspects of the final image. I realize LR can be limiting, and I'm sure I'll learn other methods and software in the future. I agree about dull RAWs and shooting to conditions; it's all about
    input data.

  23. #22
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    18,279
    Threads
    1,098
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    My misunderstanding Dorian, all good, no issues at all in anything. I do agree that often folk make things way complicated in their Workflow when really they don’t, simplicity is key, less is more... Often folk feel they need to apply so much because they see so much on the web, but in all honesty, if the file is well exposed then minimal work is required and let the real capture shine through.

    All the best
    Steve
    Post Production: Itís ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

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