Posted by Jeff Harrison on October 15, 2009 at 11:17 AM
GSWs are regular garden visitors - often in family groups - but this juvenile now has the confidence to visit us alone
Taken with Canon EOS30D and Canon EF100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS lens at 210mm, f/8, 1/15th sec, ISO200
Posted by Jeroen Stel on October 15, 2009 at 11:29 AM
Wonderful detail in this portrait!
Might consider cloning out the white food spots on its beak but that's nitpicking from my part.
Well done!
Greetings,
Jeroen Stel
Posted by Adam Seward on October 15, 2009 at 11:36 AM
Very nice detail as Jeroen said, the GSW looks perfectly sharp. I'd leave the food bits where they myself.
Posted by David Sewell on October 15, 2009 at 12:32 PM
This is a lovely shot, but is there some reason why you did not present it in portrait format? The tree trunk makes for a very strong vertical and would have suited an upright format.
David
Posted by Craig Jones on October 15, 2009 at 1:09 PM
Beautiful detail,love the light/catchlight in the eye ,lovely composition too.great GSW shot Jeff
Posted by John Robinson on October 15, 2009 at 5:26 PM
Nice shot. I prefer the young to the adults !
I agree about the cropping which has been mentioned ,and does seem a little too sharp if thats possible !
Maybe my new high res monitor.
Cheers
JohnR
Posted by Ian Mason on October 15, 2009 at 5:39 PM
Lovely! Sharpness is just fine on my monitor. Interesting that the red bit on the head seems to be disappearing.
Posted by Jeff Harrison on October 16, 2009 at 5:28 AM
Thanks for all the comments and observations folks
In response to a few of the points raised;-
1. The food spots on the beak (Jeroen and Adam) - I agree with Adam on this. It's a shot of a feeding bird so I felt it right to leave them in.
2. The format (David and John) - point taken David. I actually have portrait, landscape and square versions of this image but I just prefer this one. It's all down to personal taste of course and I do respect your view
3. Sharpness (Adam, Justin, John and Ian) - it's interesting that Adam and Ian find it "perfectly sharp" / "fine" whereas Justin and John find it "just a little over sharpened"
There's certainly no evidence of over-sharpening in A4/A3 printed versions so perhaps it is down to monitors but I'd be interested to hear from Justin and John as to what signs of over-sharpening they're seeing?
4. Head colouring (Ian) - yes Ian, juveniles of both sexes have a crimson crown but this is lost in the post-juvenile moult.
Thanks again all
Posted by John Robinson on October 16, 2009 at 5:39 AM
Jeff
About the sharpening. I always over sharpen a little when printing as it compensates for printer failings, but for the web I don't feel it needs it at this size. Its hard to describe, but to me,the image looks a bit " edgy" for want of a better word. I think the flank feather filaments show best what I am trying to say.
Cheers
JohnR
Posted by Jeff Harrison on October 16, 2009 at 7:44 AM
Thanks for the clarification John. I actually applied a reduced level of sharpening for this particular web version and having since looked at the web image again with some magnification I suspect the 'edginess' you refer to is more to do with some loss of fine detail and compression artifacts than anything else. Thanks again for your constructive comments
3. Sharpness (Adam, Justin, John and Ian) - it's interesting that Adam and Ian find it "perfectly sharp" / "fine" whereas Justin and John find it "just a little over sharpened"
There's certainly no evidence of over-sharpening in A4/A3 printed versions so perhaps it is down to monitors but I'd be interested to hear from Justin and John as to what signs of over-sharpening they're seeing?
Hi Jeff,
As I'm sure you already know, sharpening for print and web is two completely different things and will require different approaches depending on image content and size. What may look over-sharpened on the web may look absolutely fine as a 6" X 4" print, a little under-sharpened as an A4 print and perhaps, grossly under-sharpened for an A3 print.
Monitor differences will certainly affect how an image appears, as would monitor resolution. As long as it looks good at your end, that's the main thing.
The reason I say it looks over-sharpened is just based on the overall appearence of the bird, most noticeably the area around the eye and face in particular and also the odd couple of feathers sticking out on the birds side. Further evidence of over-sharpening can be seen by a slight halo, most evident around the lower beak, the birds head and back and around the dark coloured feathers just where they appear from the tree trunk.
It's no big deal and of course, has no bearing on the quality of the full size image, but just something that slightly spoils the presentation of the web version, at least on my screen anyway.
Hope this explains it.
Discussion
17 repliesTaken with Canon EOS30D and Canon EF100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS lens at 210mm, f/8, 1/15th sec, ISO200
Might consider cloning out the white food spots on its beak but that's nitpicking from my part.
Well done!
Greetings,
Jeroen Stel
David
I agree about the cropping which has been mentioned ,and does seem a little too sharp if thats possible !
Maybe my new high res monitor.
Cheers
JohnR
In response to a few of the points raised;-
1. The food spots on the beak (Jeroen and Adam) - I agree with Adam on this. It's a shot of a feeding bird so I felt it right to leave them in.
2. The format (David and John) - point taken David. I actually have portrait, landscape and square versions of this image but I just prefer this one. It's all down to personal taste of course and I do respect your view
3. Sharpness (Adam, Justin, John and Ian) - it's interesting that Adam and Ian find it "perfectly sharp" / "fine" whereas Justin and John find it "just a little over sharpened"
There's certainly no evidence of over-sharpening in A4/A3 printed versions so perhaps it is down to monitors but I'd be interested to hear from Justin and John as to what signs of over-sharpening they're seeing?
4. Head colouring (Ian) - yes Ian, juveniles of both sexes have a crimson crown but this is lost in the post-juvenile moult.
Thanks again all
About the sharpening. I always over sharpen a little when printing as it compensates for printer failings, but for the web I don't feel it needs it at this size. Its hard to describe, but to me,the image looks a bit " edgy" for want of a better word. I think the flank feather filaments show best what I am trying to say.
Cheers
JohnR
Hi Jeff,
As I'm sure you already know, sharpening for print and web is two completely different things and will require different approaches depending on image content and size. What may look over-sharpened on the web may look absolutely fine as a 6" X 4" print, a little under-sharpened as an A4 print and perhaps, grossly under-sharpened for an A3 print.
Monitor differences will certainly affect how an image appears, as would monitor resolution. As long as it looks good at your end, that's the main thing.
The reason I say it looks over-sharpened is just based on the overall appearence of the bird, most noticeably the area around the eye and face in particular and also the odd couple of feathers sticking out on the birds side. Further evidence of over-sharpening can be seen by a slight halo, most evident around the lower beak, the birds head and back and around the dark coloured feathers just where they appear from the tree trunk.
It's no big deal and of course, has no bearing on the quality of the full size image, but just something that slightly spoils the presentation of the web version, at least on my screen anyway.
Hope this explains it.
Looks fine to me in landscape
And thanks for your comments too Ian
Like it Jeff and all in all a good image of a GSW.
Andy...