Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Hornbill with Bokeh Monster

  1. #1
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    337
    Threads
    34
    Thank You Posts

    Default Hornbill with Bokeh Monster

    Bird in captivity
    Was really looking forward to unleashing the Sigma 105 1.4 Art lens and took advantage of a posing hornbill. The detail that this lens can produce is outstanding in my view
    R5
    Sigma 105mm Art lens
    1/2000
    f1.4
    iso 400
    hand held
    Dxo Raw, LRC, Topaz Sharpen AI
    Crop to portraitName:  Hornbill Small.jpg
Views: 125
Size:  597.2 KB

  2. #2
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,549
    Threads
    1,284
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Wayne, I feel the shooting angle is a bit steep here and the highlight behind the bill edge needs addressing along with the top part of the bill in terms of brushing in some exposure to darken the edge. There is more detail to come from the bill as I like the texture. I might think as an option to bring some life back into the BKG, just to bring some richness into the image.

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

  3. #3
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Ithaca, NY
    Posts
    10,421
    Threads
    1,708
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Nice to see a portrait of a horn bill on here. I do like the framing. I would tone down the background some more.

  4. #4
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Jan 2018
    Location
    Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
    Posts
    2,545
    Threads
    383
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    The Sigma sounds like a great lens! Really like the detail in the plumage. Agree with Steve's comments re the bill and bg. Cheers.

  5. #5
    Avian Moderator Brian Sump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    2,658
    Threads
    230
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Wayne, what a cool subject. The red eye lores and layers of texture on the beak are sweet.

    You got some nice detail in the blacks which is great, but perhaps at the expense of overexposing the bridge of the beak. The top is pretty hot so maybe see if you can run a burn/multiply layer or selectively do so if you wish on the brightest area and see what you can recapture.

    I could use a touch of punch the the upper mids range, particularly to enhance the colors and tones in the eye, beak and gullet. Might also consider moving the subject a touch more right in frame to open it up in front.

    TFS!

  6. #6
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    337
    Threads
    34
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski View Post
    Hi Wayne, I feel the shooting angle is a bit steep here and the highlight behind the bill edge needs addressing along with the top part of the bill in terms of brushing in some exposure to darken the edge. There is more detail to come from the bill as I like the texture. I might think as an option to bring some life back into the BKG, just to bring some richness into the image.

    TFS
    Steve
    Hey Steve,

    Thank you for your help with this, I think I have some better angled shots will relook. ill then also look at incorportaing your other suggestions

    Cheers

  7. #7
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    337
    Threads
    34
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by John Mack View Post
    Nice to see a portrait of a horn bill on here. I do like the framing. I would tone down the background some more.
    Cheers John, valid suggestions will implement with RP. Thanks for your time

  8. #8
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    337
    Threads
    34
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Burdett View Post
    The Sigma sounds like a great lens! Really like the detail in the plumage. Agree with Steve's comments re the bill and bg. Cheers.
    Hey Paul,

    The Sigma is a beast of a lens for a 105mm, its heavy with no IS and a 105mm diameter front filter. It is heavier than my 70-200mm 2.8L ii. But man it is so good as a portrait kens, I am really hoping to get to use it more in the future. Will be RP and will update with your recommendations.

    Cheers and thanks for your time

  9. #9
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    337
    Threads
    34
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian Sump View Post
    Wayne, what a cool subject. The red eye lores and layers of texture on the beak are sweet.

    You got some nice detail in the blacks which is great, but perhaps at the expense of overexposing the bridge of the beak. The top is pretty hot so maybe see if you can run a burn/multiply layer or selectively do so if you wish on the brightest area and see what you can recapture.

    I could use a touch of punch the the upper mids range, particularly to enhance the colors and tones in the eye, beak and gullet. Might also consider moving the subject a touch more right in frame to open it up in front.

    TFS!
    Hey Brian

    Thank you very much for your detailed input I will definitely apply these changes to the RP. I will also look for another pic with more room in front and less steep angle.

    Thanks again for you comments and time

  10. #10
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,549
    Threads
    1,284
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Wayne did you 'lift' (lighten) the image at all, plus, is this FF or crop and if so was it a lot? I just feel there is a lot more within the images folk are shooting with the R5 & 6 and it's just not coming through.
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  11. #11
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,549
    Threads
    1,284
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    A couple of questions Wayne:

    1. Do you use the Histogram and if so, which one?
    2. What do you have your camera set to for Colour Space Adobe RGB or sRGB
    3. What do you have your camera set to for White balance
    4. Exposure Simulation in the EVF?
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  12. #12
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    337
    Threads
    34
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski View Post
    Wayne did you 'lift' (lighten) the image at all, plus, is this FF or crop and if so was it a lot? I just feel there is a lot more within the images folk are shooting with the R5 & 6 and it's just not coming through.
    Hey Steve

    I did lighten the image quite a lot, it was only cropped horizontally. Could I share the original Raw with you to have a look and see, I would really appreciate your view?

  13. #13
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,549
    Threads
    1,284
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Wayne I thought so, the plumage gave it away. Will drop you a pm to send the file but it has to be the Cr3, not the tiff.

    I will do it this afternoon or early morning tomorrow as I will then be traveling.

    thanks
    Steve
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  14. #14
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,549
    Threads
    1,284
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Hi Wayne, thanks for the file.

    OK, firstly there are three key issues that kill the image as shot, Composition, Exposure and Colour space in camera.

    Composition
    You put the subject way to far to the left, so zero space for the subject to look into or as Jon A would say 'the wall', so you needed to move the whole crop left. Yes you have the pixels to crop, but why through away pixels, keep as much as you can, IQ will be better.

    Exposure
    These days, with Mirrorless cameras there is NO excuse for not getting the exposure correct, use the Histogram and set the EVF, take a shot, review the image and Histogram, Adjust, shoot, but the image for me was 1.4 under exposed. So your ISO would have gone up, no problem, I'm shooting 3200, 6400, 8k with the R5 and no problems. Don't let ISO hamper your shooting! With the R5 I've swopped ages ago to the RGB values, but keep the single Histogram for the 1DX MKIII.

    Colour space
    Unless for some strange reason you are using JPEGs to work on, then both camera and your Raw converter should be in Adobe RGB, although I would suggest you use Adobe ProRGB in your converter if available.

    You must have been incredible close, but the image is very sharp, in fact, sharper than the majority of images I have been sent, so all good there and you had the FP bang on the eye. I've again kept the PP simple, WB was Temp 5100k and Tint +16, that gives you a perfect RGB value to start with.Colour is personal and again kept that tempered. I lifted the whole image by +1.40, tweaked some of the colours within the HSL panel which are global. Some minimal in-put sharpening, radius well below, push it to 1 or above and you are asking for trouble and in fact on the R5 I'm using a fraction less compared to the 1DX MKIII. NR was around 4, LN 3 CN 4 just to surpress anything from lightening the file. Exported the file as a 16 bit Tiff, Layers and Mask for feather, eye and bill adjustments, saved back to LR and output. I did extend the canvas to the LHS. The HLs and bright bill was simply down to poor PP, you had everything there. No idea why there is a blue hue in the bill?????

    Camera settings
    Your call, but as you are shooting not a huge amount I would go to Raw and not cRaw. You won't fill your card, plus you have no way to know what the camera throws away by shooting cRaw.
    Colour Space set to Adobe RGB
    Picture Style, unless you are using DPP then set it to Neutral and set all settings within that setting to zero or 1.

    Hope this helps.

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

  15. #15
    Avian Moderator Brian Sump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    2,658
    Threads
    230
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Steve, thank you for actually posting the detailed edits you made in your rp. I think it helps everyone.

    When you say NR was around 4, do you mean you moved the luminance slider here from 0-4?

    Name:  Screen Shot 2021-07-01 at 1.06.58 PM.png
Views: 40
Size:  33.9 KB
    Last edited by Brian Sump; 07-01-2021 at 02:07 PM.

  16. #16
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,549
    Threads
    1,284
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Brian, I don’t think Wayne’s OP was too far out, what let him down was the original capture and not having the camera correctly set up and using the tools it offers to maximise the capture. Not sure how informative the above was compared to one Artie did, but I hope with addressing his camera set up Wayne can maximise his shooting encounters, although it still may take another go to refine things. However, it’s not a lens I would take on Safari, but it is razor sharp!
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  17. #17
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    337
    Threads
    34
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hey Steve and Brian

    Found a better pic and tried to apply what you have proposed (probably still broke a few rules - but I think its much much better than my OP)
    BTW if you think the lens is sharp wide open at 1.4 I have some f2.8 pics that I think are even better - head to toe detail is crazy good. How on earth do you get your pic to below 600kb with that size and resolution BTW
    Name:  Hornbill 2 Small.jpg
Views: 38
Size:  594.2 KB

  18. #18
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,549
    Threads
    1,284
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Wayne, do you use PS, if so what version?
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  19. #19
    Forum Participant
    Join Date
    Mar 2021
    Posts
    337
    Threads
    34
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hey Steve,

    i have the 2021 version, but havent been using it. I have been only using LRC. Im guessing that im on the wrong path with that strategy

  20. #20
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,549
    Threads
    1,284
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Perhaps.

    LRC (raw conversion) export to PSCC for refunded adjustments, Saved back to LRC, export out.

    Once you get to grips let me know, however keep any contrast/black adjs in the Raw conversion to minimal or zero and the Profile in the Dev module to Adobe Standard, simple. If you don’t change that Profile, irrespective on what’s on the ‘Tinternet’, you are asking for trouble, it might look great on screen if you don’t change things, as it packs so much behind and in other profiles, your files will loose detail as detail is within your mid tones.
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  21. #21
    Wildlife Moderator Steve Kaluski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Somewhere in the world
    Posts
    20,549
    Threads
    1,284
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    When you say NR was around 4, do you mean you moved the luminance slider here from 0-4?
    Hi Brian, at ISO400 it looked OK, but I just felt a slight tweak in both Luminance and Colour helped, only those two sliders, but with NR it's a balancing act, smooth out you loose detail so you sharpen more, you add more NR... just be careful of the hamster wheel. However this is why they design NR in the raw module as i have told you, you never ever apply NR to a backed tiff.
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  22. #22
    BPN Member Andreas Liedmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Dortmund / Germany
    Posts
    10,906
    Threads
    1,196
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Wayne .... a great looking subject you have captured .
    The OP has some issues , as you might know by now .

    Steve gave you good suggestions with his RP and I think it does show clearly that in today's Digital world the work at the computer is as important as is the shooting , to get good output from your photography work .

    TFS Andreas

  23. #23
    Avian Moderator Brian Sump's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Golden, CO
    Posts
    2,658
    Threads
    230
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Kaluski View Post
    Hi Brian, at ISO400 it looked OK, but I just felt a slight tweak in both Luminance and Colour helped, only those two sliders, but with NR it's a balancing act, smooth out you loose detail so you sharpen more, you add more NR... just be careful of the hamster wheel. However this is why they design NR in the raw module as i have told you, you never ever apply NR to a backed tiff.
    Totally agree. Pushing too much, esp in LR can reduce critical detail. Out of curiosity if you are willing to share, do you typically do your NR in LR or with an external product?

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