I captured this image along Joe Overstreet Road in Kenansville, Florida. Comments and critique welcomed and appreciated. Thank you for viewing.
Nikon D7000
Nikon 80-400mm F/4.5-5.6 VRII AF-S ED HH
1/2000 F/5.6 Matrix Metering EV 0 ISO 560 Auto WB, image captured at 400mm
Post processed in Lightroom Classic, Photoshop CC 2020 and Neat Image for noise reduction when needed
Cropped for composition and presentation
Joe Przybyla
"Sometimes I do get to places just as God is ready to have somebody click the shutter"... Ansel Adams
Nice, clean and simple Joe and the banding BKG works, like the overall palette as the subject standout well. The rustic post has good detail and I don't mind it, others may as it's man made, but hey...
Well done.
TFS
Steve
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
As mentioned, love the transitioning bkg color. Pose is good, gave you just enough HA. Bird looks sharp!
If mine, I might give it a touch more oomph in the mids by adjusting the curves slider or adding a touch of blacks to neutrals but I know others might hold off.
Also I sensed a touch of blue but couldn't trust my eyes so I imported to LR and took a gander. I normally am not one for placing a repost in someone's thread but I thought it might be worth a look (I reduced cyan a bit too as I noticed a little in the white in the wing and it took some from the sky):
Hi Brian, thanks for taking the time to show how you would improve the image, your edit and repost look good. I agree that adding black to the midtones would most likely add ompppf but that also smothers fine detail in the midtones as too much contrast does. Every time I think about doing it I hear Steve whispering in my ear about how too much black, contrast and clarity smothers detail. I err on the conservative side. Regarding the cyan in the whites measuring them in LR they are slightly blue/cyan, as you mentioned. The question I struggle with is... should I make them white. Most time I don't know, so I leave it as captured figuring it was the light at the time the image was taken. Arash and I have conversed on this that pure white would be technically correct but maybe that was not how the light was when the image was captured. Thanks again for chiming in and doing the edit, the changes are subtle but look good. Stay healthy...
Joe Przybyla
"Sometimes I do get to places just as God is ready to have somebody click the shutter"... Ansel Adams
Hi Joe FWIW, OK if we take the OP there is a slight coolness to the overall image, a hint of blue, so sampling say near the back of the back on the OP you get a Temp +1 and a Tint +3 this kills the coolness and brings a bit more 'warmth' overall, which way you then take it is personal, but that's your starting point for a neutral grey. For you, selectively reduce the blue say around 70%, gives the bill a natural look. Now if take the OP and address the Contrast & Black that LR adds in, I then can almost achieve what Brian has, but in mine it's subtle areas it's more open hard to see but it's there. The post is slo less green and the BKG a bit more ramped.
Every time I think about doing it I hear Steve whispering in my ear about how too much black, contrast and clarity smothers detail. I err on the conservative side.
OH dear am I that bad Joe... but there are reasons - one is because of LR as constanly mentioned, but also that Canon files are crap for blacks compared to Nikon who are much better, albeit the MK3, R5 & 6 are far better, you just need to be aware of both, less so for you, but control things is a good move. Heavy blacks & Contrast may visually look good to the naked eye, but invariably they are choked and when printed or supplied would be a disaster, plus do the subjects really look like that dense black, no, well not to my eye. The areas are made up of shades/tones of black & white and this also helps to get your tonal range to give your form & detail, but detail too.
Keep up the hard work Joe, there is some nice stuff coming out.
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.
Hi Joe FWIW, OK if we take the OP there is a slight coolness to the overall image, a hint of blue, so sampling say near the back of the back on the OP you get a Temp +1 and a Tint +3 this kills the coolness and brings a bit more 'warmth' overall, which way you then take it is personal, but that's your starting point for a neutral grey. For you, selectively reduce the blue say around 70%, gives the bill a natural look. Now if take the OP and address the Contrast & Black that LR adds in, I then can almost achieve what Brian has, but in mine it's subtle areas it's more open hard to see but it's there. The post is slo less green and the BKG a bit more ramped.
OH dear am I that bad Joe... but there are reasons - one is because of LR as constanly mentioned, but also that Canon files are crap for blacks compared to Nikon who are much better, albeit the MK3, R5 & 6 are far better, you just need to be aware of both, less so for you, but control things is a good move. Heavy blacks & Contrast may visually look good to the naked eye, but invariably they are choked and when printed or supplied would be a disaster, plus do the subjects really look like that dense black, no, well not to my eye. The areas are made up of shades/tones of black & white and this also helps to get your tonal range to give your form & detail, but detail too.
Keep up the hard work Joe, there is some nice stuff coming out.
Hi Steve, thanks for taking time to edit and explain I yours and Brian's edit there are changes but I struggle to see them unless I put the images side by side. I think Nikon's Auto WB and files are biased on the cool side and I think my tendency is to develop images on the cool side. I know when I check the RBG of the whites blue most times is stronger than the red and green. Lightroom was getting slammed by the critics that other software's imported images looked better and sharper. So in a recent version of LR they upped the contrast behind the scene and set the default sharpening to 40. Also the default in LR is to clip the blacks slightly. I agree with you that Adobe Color is crap. I get around that setting by setting the Picture Control in my camera to Camera Flat. When I import an image into LR the profile is set to Camera Flat instead of Adobe Color. It is a very flat looking image that I begin post processing on.
Since you told me to watch the blacks and contrast I can see a difference in the fine detail. I am not having to sharpen as much trying to bring out the detail. Also anything the is clipped in the black has no detail just like white. Anyways, I am working on it, the changes mentioned above have helped a lot, much easier starting from a flat image and also not using Adobe Color as a profile. Keep pushing me, your in my head now.
Joe Przybyla
"Sometimes I do get to places just as God is ready to have somebody click the shutter"... Ansel Adams
Hey Joe, thanks for the reply, Nikon was definitely better for rich blacks, Canon’s were pretty poor in comparison, but slowly getting better. I think you should try Cloudy for WB in camera and use Adobe Standard for LR, it’s far less aggressive for the blacks & contrast and Adobe color should say ‘made for folk who can’t process’ but I don’t think it would sell.
I’m really pleased to hear you are seeing and benefitting from reducing things, it makes, as you know so much of a difference, but sadly some folk choose a different route, that’s fine if you like that type of image, certainly hard to replicate when printed and overall not a desirable end result.
All the best and as Brian would say - ‘keep reaching for the stars’
Post Production: It’s ALL about what you do with the tools and not, which brand of tool you use.