Fishing

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 06-30-2009, 09:33 PM

Attached Images

Ákos Lumnitzer · 07-01-2009, 01:57 AM

What a great catch Jeff! Looks a touch oversharpened. Is this a large crop?

**Arthur Morris** · 07-01-2009, 05:11 AM

Great fish and timing but mega-oversharpened and way too contrasty. Whites are over-exposed. You need to start over after reading the various tutorials on saving the whites in ER.

Dave Barnes · 07-01-2009, 05:31 AM

Ditto Akos and Arthur, it also looks as though you have used a NR filter on the bird and lost detail?

**Stu Bowie** · 07-01-2009, 05:51 AM

Surely he is not going to swallow that fish. Great catch for both of you Jeff, and have to agree with the above comments. Do you select the BG when running your NR.

**Arthur Morris** · 07-01-2009, 05:57 AM

With all due respect, the problems with this image have very little if anything to do with NR....

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 06:13 AM

Artie, on the histogram nothing was clipped on the right, I will review. and repost tonight.

I ran Topaz, but did not filter out the subject.

Very little crop, almost full frame.

**Arthur Morris** · 07-01-2009, 06:19 AM

Jeff, not sure what happened between then and now but the image in the original post is mega-oversharpened and mega-contrasty with blown whites.

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 07:36 AM

Artie,

Not pushing back on anything you have said, you know that. I am wondering, could the light have been too harsh? Regaring sharpening, I used very little. I use Smart Sharpen (hold over from ETL days) and I used the smallest ever. 1.2 rad and 35 other. Should I move to USM?

The histogram was very flat towards the right.

I am at a loss too, I would never post anything with clipped whites, maybe I posted the wrong image, maybe I am losing my mind --anyway. You are correct as always. The picture looks weak, parts seem hot. I will post original tonight. If you have time look it over, so it goes.

**Arthur Morris** · 07-01-2009, 07:43 AM

Hi Jeff,

re:

Not pushing back on anything you have said, you know that. I am wondering, could the light have been too harsh?

Harsh light is one thing. Over-exposure is another. As is mega contrast. Decreasing contrast can do wonders with images created in harsh light; doing so can actually make such light look pleasing at times.

Regaring sharpening, I used very little. I use Smart Sharpen (hold over from ETL days) and I used the smallest ever. 1.2 rad and 35 other. Should I move to USM?

I do not use Smart Sharpen so I cannot comment on the settings. The over-sharpened look may be due to the mega contrast.

I am at a loss too, I would never post anything with clipped whites, maybe I posted the wrong image--anyway. You are correct as always. The picture looks terrible, parts under the neck are blown to bits. I will post original tonight. If you have time look it over, so it goes.

Thanks for being open. I subscribe to Reply Notifications and will be glad to help if I can.

**Morkel Erasmus** · 07-01-2009, 08:52 AM

not sure what the original looked like. I have found that Smart Sharpen works better than USM in most cases, except when using USM as a contrast mask.

for optimal settings with Smart Sharpen try never working on a larger radius than 0.3 pixels. you might have to run it twice but it prevents over-sharpening. I run 125%, 0.3px, gaussian.

great catch for you and the heron by the way...

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 09:52 AM

Morkel,

I will attach OP this evening and give your settings a try.

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 06:03 PM

Attached Images

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 06:14 PM

Attached Images

**Arthur Morris** · 07-01-2009, 07:37 PM

The image in pane 13the SOC version, is better than the OP, but there are still some hot spots. I am not sure what you did to the image in pane 14, but it looks horrific. Let's go back to basics: what are you using to convert your RAW files?

Dave Phillips · 07-01-2009, 07:41 PM

edit: oops cross posted with you Artie

Jeff I think you are now starting to deteriorate the image. And there are some hot areas
in all 3 channels......make a selection of just head/neck area and look at the histogram.

I tried a slight rework from your original post, which appears quite contrasty to me.
Also we need to be sure your monitor is seeing correctly......do you see all squares
below ranging from 255 to 0. Each square is also an equal mix of RGB values

Back to the heron......it appears generally soft, maybe too much crop, but good
to see you experimenting/learning.

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 08:09 PM

I see all channels and it is full frame.

I explained what was done in pane 14, look at narrative under picture (I also said I was experimenting). I was taking advise regarding negative contrast given above.

Anyway, I will repost the image later, thanks for all the advise. I need to assimilate it all and go from there.

Dave Phillips · 07-01-2009, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by Jeff Cashdollar

Anyway, I am asking for help with this one, let me know what you think about the original post .......... thanks.

well. I have my opinion/advise too sir. That's what is good about this forum.
Take it all in and decide for yourself what is working and not working

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 08:29 PM

Dave, send me a PM, talk later.

**Jackie Schuknecht** · 07-01-2009, 08:29 PM

Good initial image Jeff, PP itself is an art. You just have to find the right combination. This image will come out wonderfully, you just need to assess what should be sharp and what shouldn't be. Maybe local adjustments rather than global are what are needed here.

Dave Phillips · 07-01-2009, 08:33 PM

Originally Posted by Jeff Cashdollar

Dave, send me a PM, talk later.

got your pm Jeff....gave the critique already for all I can contribute

**Arthur Morris** · 07-01-2009, 08:38 PM

Originally Posted by Jeff Cashdollar

I explained what was done in pane 14, look at narrative under picture (I also said I was experimenting). I was taking advise regarding negative contrast given above.

Jeff, I read what you wrote. I was confused however by how bad the image in that pane looked.

Did you miss my question as to what you use to convert? (If you convert and the result is an image that is overexposed you cannot fix it. That is why I asked the question above and suggested that you start over.)

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 08:38 PM

Jackie,

Thanks, the great info from my friends is wonderful but as I told Dave. I need to talk this off-line and practice these concepts. From what I have learned in this thread, seems Artie is right about about the contrast on this image. I need to find the relationships between these techniques. I do not like to turn knobs w/o understanding the relationships. The histogram is not clipped and I do not want to spend too much time in post production.

Thanks, to all!

**Arthur Morris** · 07-01-2009, 08:41 PM

Jeff, This histogram is clipped on every image that you have posted here. I know because I opened each of them in Photoshop and opened a Levels ADJ layer.

**Jackie Schuknecht** · 07-01-2009, 08:42 PM

In this case Jeff maybe the contrast is because of some harsh light. Robert Amoruso recommends a reverse S curve in this kind of situation.

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 08:42 PM

Artie, I use LRII to convert and then interface to CS4.

I will start over and provide step by step detail, repost will be up later tonight.

Thanks, I really appreciate all your time and effort. To be able to talk to someone at your level is something I never want to take for granted.

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 08:48 PM

Jackie, I mentioned the harsh light above, I need to re-read that section, thanks!

**Jeff Cashdollar** · 07-01-2009, 09:12 PM

Artie, I sent you a PM.

Thread: Fishing

Thread Tools

Display

Fishing

SOC Image, No Adjustments

Posting Permissions