Hi Graeme,
I reckon your ID is correct.
Image looks pretty good to me,I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say 'washed out', but it does look to have a slight haze to it.Perhaps just a small curves adjustment will sort it out.
Another method that can often work well is a constrast enhancement using Photoshop's USM,settings around 20% (amount), 30% (radius) and 0% (threshold).
I remember Phil Shaw once explaining that this technique can be useful for eliminating the 'digital haze' that can sometimes be apparant on certain images,maybe this is one of those cases,then again, maybe your front element was slightly misted over, or perhaps there was a slight mist, and/or sea haze in the air that has slightly dampened the clarity.
Either way it's still a very appealing image of a very appealing species.
Thanks Justin. Really helpful advice. I have had a go at reprocessing but it seems I got my exposure pretty wrong. I was actually shooting for oystercatchers when this landed.
I have reprocessed to the best of my ability but there's limits to what I, and photoshop, can do for some images I'm gonna bin it!!
Appreciate your help
Posted by Andy Astbury on April 26, 2007 at 3:42 AM
Posted by David Taylor on April 26, 2007 at 4:32 AM
No don't dispose of it!! I would be very happy if I had taken it. After seeing Andy's reworking showing the 'polished diamond' it is well worth keeping.
Definately an improvement Graeme,both yours and Andy's repost.I notice on your repost the whites on the bird side have blown a bit,so just to add the finishing touch you could easily select a soft edged brush to lessen or eliminate the blown bit by painting it out on a layer mask.Definately a keeper I reckon.
Posted by David Kjaer on April 26, 2007 at 4:49 AM
Hi Graeme
Nicely composed image, the colour of the bird looks more accurate in the repost. Did you convert both images to sRGB!
David
Posted by Paula Graham on April 26, 2007 at 4:56 AM
I am with all of the above but....do not bin it!!
Attractive shot! and repost looks very well 'done'
Andy: Looks far better. Thanks for your time. I was messing around last night (late!) and as Justin mentioned had blown the whites after processing so decided to bin it and get a better image sometime!! After seeing your rework, you've got the whites down from the jpg so it must be my processing as the whites are fine...probably under-done to be honest. Do you have time to explain perhaps what you did? It would help a great deal to me.
David: My usual processing was done...on both actually! The top image was probably worked a bit more in PS, but was done during the day as opposed to night. Perhaps that would have an effect on the colours reproduced? Don't usually do that much to things in PS, but I always convert to profile and use the sRGB 62111.1.21724194871 whatever it is
Posted by Andy Astbury on April 26, 2007 at 8:29 AM
Hi Graeme - my pleasure:
Image>Adjust>Shadow/Highlight
Shadows
Amount 50%
Tonal Width 50%
Radius 30 px
Highlights (these settings dont make too much difference on the posted jpeg but they will on the RAW file).
Amount 15%
Tonal Width 15%
Radius 39 px
Adjustments
Color Correction +20
Midtone Contrast +19
Black Clip 0.01%
White Clip 0.06%
Cropped a chunk of OoF foreground off the bottom, a tiny sliver off the top and a tad off the rhs and a quick pass thru Neat Image - that's it Graeme, 2 minutes mate
Don't worry too much though, the avocet I put up at weekend took me over an hour to do.
Don't forget to convert your image back to sRGB profile before saving - use Adobe ACE and Relative Colormetric with the three tick boxes checked.
Hope it's helped 'cos it's a super image Graeme
Regards
Andy
BIG PS. I cannot afford colour matched lighting or a nice LeCie or Wacom panel so I've blocked the window up and keep the door closed - I work in the dark - works all the time but just watch the contrast doesn't get too low on your monitor when you adjust it to work in a dark room.
Discussion
10 repliesTaken a few months ago in Norfolk. Only image I have of one of these if it is.
Have struggled processing this for some reason
1d2, 500/4 + 2x, tripod and can't remember the rest!
Comments welcome
I reckon your ID is correct.
Image looks pretty good to me,I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say 'washed out', but it does look to have a slight haze to it.Perhaps just a small curves adjustment will sort it out.
Another method that can often work well is a constrast enhancement using Photoshop's USM,settings around 20% (amount), 30% (radius) and 0% (threshold).
I remember Phil Shaw once explaining that this technique can be useful for eliminating the 'digital haze' that can sometimes be apparant on certain images,maybe this is one of those cases,then again, maybe your front element was slightly misted over, or perhaps there was a slight mist, and/or sea haze in the air that has slightly dampened the clarity.
Either way it's still a very appealing image of a very appealing species.
I have reprocessed to the best of my ability but there's limits to what I, and photoshop, can do for some images
Appreciate your help
I've been naughty and reworked it a bit, but for some reason the forum won't let me include it in this reply so it's here - http://www.wildlifeinpixels.com/rw/graeme.jpg
Andy
Nicely composed image, the colour of the bird looks more accurate in the repost. Did you convert both images to sRGB!
David
Attractive shot! and repost looks very well 'done'
Andy: Looks far better. Thanks for your time. I was messing around last night (late!) and as Justin mentioned had blown the whites after processing so decided to bin it and get a better image sometime!! After seeing your rework, you've got the whites down from the jpg so it must be my processing as the whites are fine...probably under-done to be honest. Do you have time to explain perhaps what you did? It would help a great deal to me.
David: My usual processing was done...on both actually! The top image was probably worked a bit more in PS, but was done during the day as opposed to night. Perhaps that would have an effect on the colours reproduced? Don't usually do that much to things in PS, but I always convert to profile and use the sRGB 62111.1.21724194871 whatever it is
Image>Adjust>Shadow/Highlight
Shadows
Amount 50%
Tonal Width 50%
Radius 30 px
Highlights (these settings dont make too much difference on the posted jpeg but they will on the RAW file).
Amount 15%
Tonal Width 15%
Radius 39 px
Adjustments
Color Correction +20
Midtone Contrast +19
Black Clip 0.01%
White Clip 0.06%
Cropped a chunk of OoF foreground off the bottom, a tiny sliver off the top and a tad off the rhs and a quick pass thru Neat Image - that's it Graeme, 2 minutes mate
Don't worry too much though, the avocet I put up at weekend took me over an hour to do.
Don't forget to convert your image back to sRGB profile before saving - use Adobe ACE and Relative Colormetric with the three tick boxes checked.
Hope it's helped 'cos it's a super image Graeme
Regards
Andy
BIG PS. I cannot afford colour matched lighting or a nice LeCie or Wacom panel