Sanderling

[WIlliam Maroldo]

This image was taken on a cloudy day at Quintana, Texas beach. I like the reflection, almost being sepia-toned, the subdued lighting, and the water surface wave patterns. The problems are that the bird plumage is not as sharp as I would like, and there is no eye catch-light. I used Noise Ninja on the ISO 400 image as well has high pass sharpening, and this was about as good as I could get it. Suggestions on improvement or would be appreciated.
Sony A-700 Tamron 200-500mm @ 500mm IS) 400 1/1250sec f6.3
regards~Bill

[Raymond Barlow]

It looks to me like the focus sensor was not on the bird William, and what a shame, a beautiful scene. Keep the sun behind you, and work on holding the camera steady as you can, bring something to rest it on, or use a tripod. You may want to track down some other users of this lens, and learn what techniques and settings work best.

[Doug Brown]

Here's a repost with additional sharpening. I also boosted brightness and contrast in the bird. I added canvas on the left. And I added a slight catchlight in the eye. It's tough to get this one looking good, because it's fairly soft as posted.

[Dean Ingwersen]

Doug's repost pretty much deals with what I was going to suggest...pity it's not quite sharp enough.

[WIlliam Maroldo]

Raymond: it does seem likely that there was a focusing error, now that that mention it. It was overcast, no sun visible at all. The poor lighting no doubt was a major contributing factor, not only in auto-focus acquistion but my ability to verify it in the viewfinder. The error was very likely the sensor position, and less likely to do with shutter-speed, camera shake, or lack of a tripod. 1/1250 of a second should have been adequate, especially with image stabilization. I've shot more than 80,000 images with the lens and pretty well know what works best, and dim lighting conditions are definitely a problem, especially at 500mm and maximum aperture. A flash would have helped, but I forgot to use it. I appreciate your input.
Doug: Nice try. Thanks.

I went back to the RAW file and processed again. This time I created a layer, used high pass filter, and then multiply instead of overlay as a blend mode. Then lightened the resulting darkened image. Better? regards~Bill

[Linda Robbins]

I love the pose, the color palette, and the water patterns, but unfortunately, if the image is actually unsharp at capture it is destined to be deleted. A shame, because this would have been a nice image.

[WIlliam Maroldo]

No! Not the recycle bin. I'll never see another sanderling! I think I can deal with. Anyway, I was wondering, given the same poor lighting conditions, that I should have cranked up the IS0 to 800, or higher, got the increased depth of field, and dealt with the noise in post processing? Or should I just wait for better lighting conditions? Usually I do the later, yet in this image the lack of shadows seemed to be an asset. Anyway thanks for the comments. regards~Bill

[Doug Brown]

I don't think DOF is the problem here; the entire bird is soft. Even in good light I wouldn't have shot this at less than f/8, which isn't even a full stop from f/6.3. I would think about some subtle fill flash for lighting like this.

[Raymond Barlow]

well, the first point of improvement (or what you could have done in the field) would be to get on the other side of the bird., it looks like backlighting, even though it was an overcast day., yes, the ss was plenty., I would have tried f8 and less ss., also, in this case I would use a single sensor for focusing, and try to keep it on the head. When I am shooting shore birds, I lay down in the rocks/sand/ mud, use a small table top tripod under my 200-400, shoot at iso 200 or 250, sun at my back, and get the f stop as high as I can do it, while maintaining a decent ss, as these birds are fast and eratic movers.

I like your last edit, looks a lot better.

[WIlliam Maroldo]

Doug: it seems to me that the ripples just behind the birds right foot are in focus. That is why I was thinking of the focusing error, in that the lens was focused just behind the bird. Also I was not using continuous AF, which I usually use for flight captures. As Raymond pointed out these birds are fast and erratic movers, and not surprising that focusing correctly is difficult.
Raymond: as a matter of fact I always use center weighted AF and try for the head, and further back (like the neck) for larger birds. The ISO 200-250, sun at my back, as low view point point as possible, etc, is pretty much my normal MO. The overcast skies are something I previously avoided taking pictures under. I guess this was a test to see if my recently acquired Noise Ninja would help under such circumstances. Not as far as I can see, yet I am new to the program. Focusing on the other of the bird, and considering where the sun was even if not visible, sounds right. It would seem to be at least a little brighter on the sun's side, and is something I had not considered.
One more thing. I am having much better results using high-pass sharpening as opposed to USM, which seems to create more sharpening artifacts. Any one else using both techniques? I'd like to hear the pros and cons of both methods. regards~Bill

[Raymond Barlow]

Hi William

very good, we have a good idea of what happened here,.. for shore birds, I find that direct light is almost a must, to acheive a reasonable degree of colour, and detail., also, to get the best images form your lens., worth a try though.

As for sharpening software, is use a plug in for my PSCS., www.focusmagic.com They give you 10 free cracks at it, and then you will be hooked.

[WIlliam Maroldo]

Thanks for your assistance Raymond. You've been most helpful. regards~Bill

[Raymond Barlow]

Thanks for your assistance Raymond. You've been most helpful. regards~Bill

My pleasure, glad to help.