Posted by Paul Ashton on November 15, 2007 at 3:35 PM
In search of Lapland Buntings to no avail. Had to settle for the Snow Bunting. At last I've managed to get one that's not hidden in the pebbles.
1D3 500mm +1.4tc iso800 1/800 f11
Posted by Chris Lloyd on November 15, 2007 at 3:52 PM
Really beautiful birds these, and probably one of my favourite winter visitors. As you say, nice to see one not hidden!
Chris.
Posted by Paul King on November 15, 2007 at 4:16 PM
This looks a little flat to me !
parhaps a little more sharpening??
Posted by Andy Astbury on November 15, 2007 at 4:40 PM
Hi Paul - nice capture of this little gem in the open
I think f11 has just snapped the BG too close to the plane of focus for my taste, but if you open the image up in 2 layers, you can soften the BG with the blur tool and then blend the layers together to give you a smoother version - just a suggestion
Posted by Paul Ashton on November 15, 2007 at 5:29 PM
The version as posted does appear to be lacking in in punch. I had intended to upload direct from my machine but the file was to big despite being only 720pxl longest side. Unsure how to correct this issue I therefore loaded it into Photobucket which has reduced the contrast and definition somewhat.
The image was processed using CS3. Selective sharpening, layer blending etc. I use a calibrated ColorEdge CE240W
I'm happy with the image I have here but not the one you can see. In particular I like the way the colours of the rock compliment those of the bird.
Posted by Andy Astbury on November 15, 2007 at 7:21 PM
Hi Paul - what dpi is your image set to?
If you open Image>Image Size and make a note of your longest side value in 'pixels dimensions' - the first boxes at the top, change the resolution to 72dpi in the 'resolution' box - the figures in the top boxes will have dropped - just change the longest side value back to 720 and click okay (make sure the constrain proportions 'paddlock' is closed when you do this.
Better still, if you can, get hold of the Genuine Fractals Print Pro 5 pluggin for CS3 - I always resize with this, it was always a lot better than resizing in CS2, but I don't know if CS3 does an equal job, I just use it out of habbit now
Posted by Alan Woolnough on November 16, 2007 at 3:11 AM
Lovely shot Paul, and very complimentry colours!
Personal taste..........a tighter crop would suit me, which shouldn't present problems with your camera at 800iso, but this works nicely for me
Alan
Posted by Graeme Lee on November 16, 2007 at 4:58 AM
You can downsize the image size by saving for web and to the right and underneath the 'done' button, there's an arrow button which when expanded has the option to Optimize to file size and then set it at 200k. Hope that helps. Nice image by the way but could do with a little work on the rock as it's a bit overpowering and could be reduced tonally
I'm going to disagree with Andy here , although the avdice given is always sound dpi or more correctly ppi makes not one iota of difference to the size of the saved image it is only an arbitary figure that is put into the file header, all that matters is the pixel dimensions....
All the best (now going to hide from Andy )
Posted by Mark Sisson on November 16, 2007 at 8:13 AM
Aside from the technical debate ( ) I have spent many an hour photographing these and you have indeed done well to get a non pebble-surrounded shot so well done. One could almost forget they have feet!
Mark
Posted by Andy Astbury on November 16, 2007 at 2:18 PM
You can't hide from me Phil
The fox image I posted yesterday is 262 and a bit Kb - if I change the res to 300Kb and keep the same pixel dimensions it jumps to 269Kb.
I have never been able to understand why this happens Phil, as theory says you are quite correct - perhaps someone would care to elaborate
Posted by Paul Ashton on November 16, 2007 at 4:58 PM
Thanks to everyone for there input. Lets just see what happens when I next try to upload
Some people can only cope with one instruction. For me that's to many.
Posted by Andy Astbury on November 17, 2007 at 3:20 AM
Paul - the simplest thing to do is when you go to save the image under Save for Web, you'll see a quality slider top right, and underneath your image (the one on the right if you are in the default 2-up view) you'll see the calculated file size.
Sometimes you'll find predominantly light images are quite high in file size whilst predominantly dark images are somewhat smaller - use the quality slider to adjust the file size to just under 200Kb, you'll more than likely only have to drop it from 100% to 95%.
Sorry for the confussion matey
Posted by Paul Ashton on November 17, 2007 at 9:40 AM
I notice that when saving for web devices I can limit the file size to 200kb. Once set it would appear that this holds.
Discussion
13 replies1D3 500mm +1.4tc iso800 1/800 f11
Chris.
parhaps a little more sharpening??
I think f11 has just snapped the BG too close to the plane of focus for my taste, but if you open the image up in 2 layers, you can soften the BG with the blur tool and then blend the layers together to give you a smoother version - just a suggestion
The image was processed using CS3. Selective sharpening, layer blending etc. I use a calibrated ColorEdge CE240W
I'm happy with the image I have here but not the one you can see. In particular I like the way the colours of the rock compliment those of the bird.
If you open Image>Image Size and make a note of your longest side value in 'pixels dimensions' - the first boxes at the top, change the resolution to 72dpi in the 'resolution' box - the figures in the top boxes will have dropped - just change the longest side value back to 720 and click okay (make sure the constrain proportions 'paddlock' is closed when you do this.
Better still, if you can, get hold of the Genuine Fractals Print Pro 5 pluggin for CS3 - I always resize with this, it was always a lot better than resizing in CS2, but I don't know if CS3 does an equal job, I just use it out of habbit now
Personal taste..........a tighter crop would suit me, which shouldn't present problems with your camera at 800iso, but this works nicely for me
Alan
I'm going to disagree with Andy here
All the best (now going to hide from Andy
Mark
The fox image I posted yesterday is 262 and a bit Kb - if I change the res to 300Kb and keep the same pixel dimensions it jumps to 269Kb.
I have never been able to understand why this happens Phil, as theory says you are quite correct - perhaps someone would care to elaborate
Some people can only cope with one instruction. For me that's to many.
Sometimes you'll find predominantly light images are quite high in file size whilst predominantly dark images are somewhat smaller - use the quality slider to adjust the file size to just under 200Kb, you'll more than likely only have to drop it from 100% to 95%.
Sorry for the confussion matey