Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Nuthatch

  1. #1
    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 Nuthatch

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Posting more for fun than anything else, as this was more of a grab shot, simply because when setting up we had place some moss on the fence for another perch and disregarded that anything would land on it.... wrong!

    The Nuthatch picked some seed and promptly landed on the fence to then swallow it and then fly. After which I removed the moss and he/she still then landed on it, but it gives a more simpler aspect with less distracting elements to compete with the subject.

    Anyone struggling to get good images from the R5 around ISO3200-6400 you need to re look at your camera set-up, this is at ISO5000 and SS 1/640 and it's razor sharp, for the R6/3 this isn't a problem.

    Thanks to those who commented or viewed the last posting.

    Steve

    Subject: Nuthatch (Sitta europaea)
    Location: UK
    Camera: Canon EOS R5
    Lens: EF200-400mm f/4L IS USM EXT
    Exposure: 1/640s at f/6.3 ISO5000
    Original format: Landscape, almost FF on width
    Processed via: LRCC 10.5 & PSCC 22.5.1
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  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

    Attached Images Attached Images
     
    Now without the moss.

    Techs changed to: 1/1000SS f/7.1 ISO5000
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  3. #3
    BPN Member Dorian Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    San Mateo, CA
    Posts
    3,617
    Threads
    393
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Bird looks great, for sure. Head tilt in second frame is awesome. Fence isn't ideal with or without moss, but it is what it is.

    Switching gears, it's easy to say ISO 6400 works great when you can lure a bird hella close at a backyard feeder or blind. Noise is a much greater concern when
    cropping is required -- i.e. when wary subjects need be stalked under more natural and distant circumstances --- so using a set-up as a baseline is kinda pointless.
    Also, Arash has demonstrated that the same capture can have ~2 stops more or less visible noise when it's opened in different software; you might not need NR
    in your software at ISO 3200 whereas I always do in Lightroom. Do I need to learn other/better software? Sure, but my images aren't suffering from too much noise
    right now. Who cares if ghetto-*** LR forces me to use Topaz at ISOs your software tolerates if we get to the same general place? And I'm taking nothing away from
    your processing skills because they're generally excellent. Mine would be better with better software, but I'm too lazy and technologically-challenged to learn how to
    use it. I need a user-friendly and idiot-proof interface. That's why I stay with LR and use Topaz on ISOs you don't. I'd love to get away from $10/month, but I don't
    know how. ****, I couldn't even figure out DPP!

  4. #4
    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 Dorian and thanks.

    Switching gears, it's easy to say ISO 6400 works great when you can lure a bird hella close at a backyard feeder or blind.
    Well it is and it isn't, doing test images and reviewing the Histogram helps, but with the mirrorless and understanding the Histogram in the EVF really is a great asset as once you have the exposure set, and the light doesn't change you are good to go.

    Noise is a much greater concern when cropping is required -- i.e. when wary subjects need be stalked under more natural and distant circumstances --- so using a set-up as a baseline is kinda pointless.
    Providing you expose correctly ie ETTR, to the point where you might get the odd blinkies the image will be pretty spot on, if you need to drop the exposure in PP that's fine, it's when you have to open the exposure up but a stop or more you will begin to have issues, but noise is generally in the dark/shadow areas, I think what you might be seeing is Contrast, especially with Lr and or you add blacks, Clarity globally and use a Profile Adobe Color. Remember I'm used to photographing animals so I can appreciate what you mean by more 'natural circumstances'. Also what you see on screen may not be seen on a print, especially even some areas that you might have concerns over?

    you might not need NR in your software at ISO 3200 whereas I always do in Lightroom.
    I do use NR and have never stated/said I don't, it's just the way I treat my files both prior and post production and with Lr I have over the years explained the issues with this and what to do to avoid letting Lr apply the crap it does behind the scenes. Many years ago it upgraded and opened the doors, allowing more folk to 'simply process' and instantly - it looks great, but 'technically' the output is pants, hence knowing the beast and perhaps needing more NR. Also NR has to be applied to the raw, not a baked Tiff, it will work but less than ideal, hence why NR is always within the Raw converter.

    Do I need to learn other/better software? Sure, but my images aren't suffering from too much noise right now. Who cares if ghetto-*** LR forces me to use Topaz at ISOs your software tolerates
    Learning, that all comes with time like everything Dorian as you know, other/better software, then that might mean more time to get to grips and stuff like C1 will take you down so many rabbit holes you will easily loose yourself. Yes its very good, I started using it in 2006, now its got way more sophisticated and you would need to take time out to really understand what each module does and we all like to spend more time out in the field than behind a monitor. I flit from Lr to another brand and that is even more complex, even Arash would need to sit in a dark room for over a week to get to grips with, I'm still learning after 3 years, but Lr is my go to and it dovetails so well with PS and this for me is where the majority of my PP is done.

    I need a user-friendly and idiot-proof interface. That's why I stay with LR and use Topaz on ISOs you don't. I'd love to get away from $10/month, but I don't know how. ****, I couldn't even figure out DPP!
    No you don't, what you have is perfect, but using Lr on it's own isn't, learning some of what PS has to offer will certainly create greater and quicker results. Keeping a simple Workflow is key, updating that workflow as you learn builds a more robust and efficient workflow.

    If the software works for you no need to change and yes, I do find DPP clunky too, others do not and so who's to say which is better. Take a look at Andreas Muskrat in Wildlife, you might be surprised???
    Last edited by Steve Kaluski; 01-31-2022 at 04:38 PM.
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  5. #5
    BPN Member Dorian Anderson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    San Mateo, CA
    Posts
    3,617
    Threads
    393
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Yes, the EVF with histogram is so great. I do exactly as you suggest; slightly overexpose the brightest parts of the image knowing 1) I can recover that detail and 2) lift shadows with less noise penalty.

    You are right that LR is quite cryptic. I mean, I know how to move the LR noise slider, but I'm not sure when that NR is being applied, probably to the TIFF rather than the RAW as you suggest.
    I also don't uderstand the difference between sharpening and output sharpening even though I use them both. What I need to find is a better but easy-to-use RAW converter since LR's sucks; I
    can then put the TIFF into LR and go from there. I only really us PS to add canvas, and that's a real rarity for me. I just can't handle all the pulldown menus and submenus in PS. It doesn't
    follow any of logical order.

  6. #6
    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 Dorian, thanks for the reply and I know where you are coming from. I will drop you a PM to the above as it might be deemed as going off topic, I think it’s more beneficial, however. I will also answer how you can see NR being applied too. Plus explain re pre/post sharpening and if you are using Topaz.

    If you were closer I would be happy to give you a quick crash course on Lr, as it doesn’t suck , it’s like everything, you just need to understand it and create a Workflow that works for you coupled with some basics of PS. PS is daunting but it is without question the best bit of software out, you can never learn it all, but knowing some of it’s strengths it will, make you images better and more importantly easier to manipulate without gimmicks.
    Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.

  7. #7
    BPN Member Andreas Liedmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Dortmund / Germany
    Posts
    10,906
    Threads
    1,196
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Steve has the answer written under each of his postings ... at least IMHO .

    " Post production : It's ALL about what you do with the tools and not , which brand of tools you use . "

    I might like to add .... " Post Production : Do not let the piece of software control you , rather control the software yourself . "
    Last edited by Andreas Liedmann; 02-01-2022 at 02:33 PM.

  8. #8
    BPN Member Andreas Liedmann's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Dortmund / Germany
    Posts
    10,906
    Threads
    1,196
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Steve ... the Nuthatch looks great for a grab shot , interesting that you processed theme differently in terms of tone and color ( at least locally ) . Love that eye with the clarity and the well defined pupil !!!
    Colors looking good , as does the tones and the fine details showing up are ...as good as expected .
    As this is more a fun image ... I will overlook the not ideal and attractive perch .

    TFS Andreas

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