-
-
Hi David. Very nice close-up! Love the colouring in this bird and the BG compliments nicely. Looks like the focus is more on the beak than the head/eye? but I guess being further away would have added more dof. I'm also seeing a touch of colour noise near the head area. Cheers.
-
Post a Thank You. - 1 Thanks
-
-
Looks much better David. The noise I see in the op is in the area below the beak, but you've taken care of that now. Not sure about my "eagle eyes"...just had my eye doctor remove some eyelashes that have grown in the wrong direction in my right eye following some surgery some months ago. He said the numbing injection would sting a bit...he was right! Then he used a freeze gun to destroy the follicle before plucking the rogue hairs! All good now. Cheers!
-
Post a Thank You. - 1 Thanks
-
Super Moderator
Yes, the noise is much better controlled n the repost. Typical grackle territorial display - I love it when they look up to the sky like this. It's odd critiquing a bare lens f/7.1 image as "wide open" as I was going to suggest stopping down then saw the aperture, then realized it is indeed wide open. Anyhow, you had quite low light so already pushing it. The bill does look sharper than the eye to me as well.
-
Post a Thank You. - 1 Thanks
-
Wildlife Moderator
Hi David, I like the pose and HA, the grey/green backdrop I feel is quite neutral so colour pop well. How much of a crop is this David?
Based on the OP you needed to push the ISO to gain more SS and DoF IMHO, (irrespective of the EV and HH) and here I would have gone for manually moving the FP rather than relying on AED. I push these to 10-12,800k and the files are excellent so I'm not sure what's happening here unless under exposed? Also I feel you must have lifted the image, as I've not seen as much colour noise in an image especially one from the R6. If this was bang on the eye then it's front focusing as per Dan's comment, the beak is definitely sharper than the eye, but it's Mirrorless, so....There also seems to be some blurring in the chest plumage, what was the lens Mode set to, I would assume Mode 1?
To get good files David, then having a well exposed file is key, especially with high ISO, you must trust that histogram and even go a tad lighter. Occasionally it's better to go lighter then darken in PP, than lightening the file, however, there are occasions when the opposite is required too.
The RP is much better, but I can't help think there is more to come.
Well done in pushing the envelope and don't be afraid of ISO.
TFS
Steve
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
-
Post a Thank You. - 1 Thanks
-
Originally Posted by
Steve Kaluski
Hi David, I like the pose and HA, the grey/green backdrop I feel is quite neutral so colour pop well. How much of a crop is this David?
Based on the OP you needed to push the ISO to gain more SS and DoF IMHO,
(irrespective of the EV and HH) and here I would have gone for manually moving the FP rather than relying on AED. I push these to 10-12,800k and the files are excellent so I'm not sure what's happening here unless under exposed? Also I feel you must have lifted the image, as I've not seen as much colour noise in an image especially one from the R6. If this was bang on the eye then it's front focusing as per Dan's comment, the beak is definitely sharper than the eye, but it's Mirrorless, so....There also seems to be some blurring in the chest plumage, what was the lens Mode set to, I would assume Mode 1?
To get good files David, then having a well exposed file is key, especially with high ISO, you must trust that histogram and even go a tad lighter. Occasionally it's better to go lighter then darken in PP, than lightening the file, however, there are occasions when the opposite is required too.
The RP is much better, but I can't help think there is more to come.
Well done in pushing the envelope and don't be afraid of ISO.
TFS
Steve
The crop was just some off the top and a sliver to the right from vertical. I wanted to spend the morning on AED just to know limits. You are spot on in saying I am afraid to push ISO far enough. Here, it was just the shiny part of beak that was getting close. And when I get home on computer, they almost always look underexposed. More to improve on and thanks to all for help.
-
Wildlife Moderator
Here, it was just the shiny part of beak that was getting close.
I think you had more to play with, but could have dealt with the beak in PP.
David, you are doing the right thing in my book, getting to know the camera and how far to push it and or adapt to other settings. Push things when you need it, but be mindful. Not sure if you are using ISO to move the EV or going to Auto ISO and manually changing the EV, but experimenting and exploring makes for fun and greater knowledge of your kit, but there are things you can also do in PP, but that's another 'Chapter'.
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
-
Post a Thank You. - 1 Thanks
-
Such an underrated bird! The colors are lovely, and the pose adds interest. The original is really soft, but the repost is a huge improvement. I take a lot of headshots, and they really need to be tack sharp to work; without action to carry the frame, it's all about the detail. Your biggest problem here were the input conditions: 1/200 and ISO 6400. I leave the camera and go birding on these sorts of dark days.
I also appreciate the Sir Mix-a-Lot reference.....
-
Post a Thank You. - 1 Thanks