Tree Swallow BIF REPOST

Gallery: AvianPosted May 4, 20161,982 views7 comments

This is a repost of the male tree swallow BIF I posted yesterday.
Thanks to Dennis Plank and Steve Thompson for noticing a noise problem I caused in processing. I don't know if it's 43 years of working with film before I got a digital camera, or just my old eyes, but I am not very sensitive to noise in my images. I guess I'll have to get my nose closer to the screen with my trifocals now. I still have a hard time seeing the noise, even after they mentioned it. :-( -- Is there a significant improvement in this version?

With changing light conditions on a cloudy, breezy day, I ended up slightly underexposing the bird. The noise came from a small boost in exposure and in shadow detail in ACR, but mostly from oversharpening. To tried to compensate for a shutter speed that was not fast enough to keep up with the little speedster, I tried the Photoshop "Shake Reduction" sharpening tool without really knowing how to use it. After Dennis and Steve pointed out the noise, I used less exposure compensation, and then took some time with that Shake Reduction sharpening tool, experimenting with the "Smoothing" and "Artifact Suppression" sliders. To help make up for slightly less sharpness, I added just a touch of contrast with Topaz Clarity to bring back the sparkle of the irridescent feathers. I ended up with this image, which I think is a better compromise between sharpness and induced noise.

All that work really makes me appreciate the importance of getting it right in the field. In this case, I was totally engrossed in trying to track and focus on these impossibly fast and erratic fliers, while getting blown around in my little canoe.

Canon 7D Mark II; Sigma 150-600 C @ 435 mm.
1/800 sec. @ f/7.1; ISO 640
25% of frame
Hand-held from canoe

Comments

7 comments

Comment posted by Raoul Breaux Jr on May 4, 2016 at 10:24 PM

Hi Wayne,

I like this repost better than the first--but more than just the relative comparison, it is a very nice image. I think the darker background looks so much better than the original. Its tonal value compliments the bird a lot more and creates a really nice overall look. And I love the blurred tip of the rear wing; I think it creates a dynamic quality that would be missing if it were sharp. If sharp, the bird would become static.

Like you, noise escapes me sometimes. I shot Tri-X and developed it in HC-110 so much in the old days, that I'm oblivious to noise! LOL

Registered on April 27, 2016, 20 Posts, 142 Comments

Comment posted by Kurt Bowman on May 4, 2016 at 10:46 PM

Nice repost on this Wayne. After seeing this a couple times, I am thinking it seems just a little close to feeling too centered. I might crop a tiny bit more (just a sliver) from the right (even adding it back to the left if you don't want to go smaller than 25% of FF). Just to be clear, I think this works either way, but think this might improve it further.

Registered on June 19, 2008, 1005 Posts, 8028 Comments

Comment posted by Jim DeWitt on May 4, 2016 at 11:54 PM

Nice repost, Wayne. Better than any of my swallow shots.

Registered on August 28, 2006, 1240 Posts, 8506 Comments

Comment posted by Steve Thompson on May 5, 2016 at 10:05 AM

Great job re-working this image Wayne. The iridescence of the blues shows very nicely. These little ones are so hard to lock onto, the degree of difficulty is very high. Nice work!

Registered on August 7, 2014, 125 Posts, 2319 Comments

Comment posted by Dennis Plank on May 5, 2016 at 12:41 PM

Now that you described what you did, Wayne, I can see it as sharpening artifact. Looking at the two images, I think I actually prefer the first. Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with the shake reduction tool or Topaz Clarity, so I'm unable to shed any light on how it might work better. I'd be very interested in seeing the image with minimum processing just to see what your starting point looked like.

devil

Registered on January 28, 2008, 1767 Posts, 23192 Comments

Comment posted by Wayne Jones on May 5, 2016 at 11:42 PM

Thanks to all for the comments. Looks like most like the second one, where I was more careful about sharpening the original soft image. That included reducing the exposure from Plus 15 to zero in ACR.

DENNIS: Since you asked, here's a little shot of the original soft Raw file with only the default image settings in ACR, next to a small view of the finished second version. I think the original had both motion blur and soft focus.

Just too much extreme processing, but I wanted to have something to show after over 900 clicks in two hours.

Registered on April 18, 2007, 953 Posts, 6435 Comments

Comment posted by May Haga on May 8, 2016 at 6:18 PM

Very interesting process Wayne. Actually getting the swallow in the frame is tough but you managed that nicely. I am not sure of exactly what processing would work best but there is a lot to like about the original image. Have you tried just increasing the sharpening in ACR. By the time we are done with this image you will be able to do a 'processing workshop'. After seeing your image I am inspired to try my luck with flight shots of swallows.
May

Registered on February 22, 2007, 714 Posts, 8470 Comments