A typical pose and a clean (currently favoured) bg make for a pleasant image to view, I would perhaps lose some of the -ive space above the bird which IMO would improve the comp, it is serving no usefull purpose at the moment.
You seem to be losing the plumage detail which I am guessing is from overaggressive NR, the 20D produces clean images at ISO200 and shouldn't need any NR unless you have significantly pushed the exposure. NR should only really be used on areas that it is needed, Noise Ninja allows you to apply a mask although I find it to be rather clunky in use and find it much easier to just use the history brush to remove the NR from where it is not needed. I concur with Phil Shaw that PK sharpener is not the best for web presentation but it seems to be OK here...
I am a novice with digital processing, so your comments re Noise Ninja are exactly what I need. Thanks.
PK Sharpner seems to be working okay for me (so far). I started using this software as I find it easier to get acceptable results (to me) than using USM. But thanks for the pointer and I will be watching out for halos on my web images.
Regards
David
Posted by Alan Woolnough on September 4, 2006 at 8:08 AM
Much more flattering light on this one David, but i agree that the NR is degrading the shot.
I'm sure that another go in PS from the original will tweak it nicely. I agree with Phil regarding the present crop {a bit awkward to my eye}.
Discussion
4 replies20D,400mmf5.6L,f6.3,1/800,ISO200,tripod,ACR,CS2,Noise Ninja,PK Sharpner.
Thanks
David
A typical pose and a clean (currently favoured) bg make for a pleasant image to view, I would perhaps lose some of the -ive space above the bird which IMO would improve the comp, it is serving no usefull purpose at the moment.
You seem to be losing the plumage detail which I am guessing is from overaggressive NR, the 20D produces clean images at ISO200 and shouldn't need any NR unless you have significantly pushed the exposure. NR should only really be used on areas that it is needed, Noise Ninja allows you to apply a mask although I find it to be rather clunky in use and find it much easier to just use the history brush to remove the NR from where it is not needed. I concur with Phil Shaw that PK sharpener is not the best for web presentation but it seems to be OK here...
All the best
I am a novice with digital processing, so your comments re Noise Ninja are exactly what I need. Thanks.
PK Sharpner seems to be working okay for me (so far). I started using this software as I find it easier to get acceptable results (to me) than using USM. But thanks for the pointer and I will be watching out for halos on my web images.
Regards
David
I'm sure that another go in PS from the original will tweak it nicely. I agree with Phil regarding the present crop {a bit awkward to my eye}.
Nice one though.
Alan
Terry