What you see is not what you get

Water rail.
The first shot is more or less as it was. Very late in the afternoon
with sun about to go down .The second one what I would imagine most would go for. I don't know- will be interesting to see peoples preferences -if there are any
D200
Sigma 50-500
Hide etc
Lost the exif but would have been iso 800 and f11
Second pic highlight shadow in cs3
Gamma /levels etc.PSP
Thanks for your vole comments
JR

Processed one.

"Second pic highlight shadow in cs3 " I would delete that sentence less Mr A sees it!

I prefer the first, the second BG looks forced and the clipped blacks dont fit.

I thought about that !
JR

I think that you have critiqued the second nicely John. First shots looks much more natural

Bob

I saw it at 3.26 - it's taken me until now to come round from the attack of the jitters that ensued

First one for me John - light on the Rail looks nicer - I won't mention the shadows in the reeds

Like the first best as for me the Rail 'pops' more. The second looks more neutral.

Having said that i would be proud of either.

Ian

Got to comment here... very busy tied up with something else at the moment... With Mr A here S/H should be removed permanently... You should be shooting RAW John... then you can do so much more without destroying pixels... I too prefer the first....

Phil
I agree entirely with the choices of the first pic. I only put the second on as a quick example as a lot of postings deviate from the conditions the pics were taken in. Its the only time I have used CS and that was over a year ago. The interesting thing is that I have used Image Guru (which does the same thing ) on hundreds of posts since and no one has said a word I think there should be a section on this site where only pics straight out of the camera can be posted. That would sort a few out. I don't shoot raw for various reasons- mainly that I can't be bothered- and perhaps because I am more interested in the nature than the processing.
Any way I can't afford a big card ! !
I don't take my photography too seriously anyway, but I do try and get things right in the first place.
Cheers
JR
Hope you're both OK

Hi John, i much prefer the first version, as has been said before the Rail stands out more. A cracking shot.



Ian

Thanks
Just to explain to all perhaps a little more coherently why I don't shhot RAW. All my work ,or 90 % of it is from hides- very often at close range. Therefore I have all the time in the world to get the exposure etc right. With todays cameras and the ability to check instantly on such things there really is no excuse for getting it so wrong. I take dozens of test shots all the time allowing for birds with white- birds with black- etc ,etc.
However , if I was to grab a camera for a quickshot whilst travelling and had the camera settings wrong - then fine -raw could be useful. Thing is I just don't do that sort of photography.If I get a shot that is wrong - then I just bin it. With my sort of stuff I can usually do them again anyway. There are numerouis references that say you need RAW to get blown white detail back. I agree, but its surprising how much you can get back out of a JPEG. As I say if its really that far out bin it.
Hope that explains it a bit better.
JR

on the RAW vs JPEG i have to disagree with a lot of what you say, sorry. Your JPEG is not an as is shot in the way you say. It is a processed and finished image it has been sharpened, had contrast and saturation boasts and NR all applied, but it has been done by the camera without input form you as a photographer, so it could make mistakes or not but you have no control. When i shoot a RAW i do so not because i am worried about making a mistake (though i often do!) but because i do not want the camera to make the decision of how to finish the image, I want that control myself. So both JPEG and JPEGs from a RAW differ only in the photographer either leaves the camera to finish an image or finishes it themselves.

I do agree that RAW does give much more scope for changes and by a WB tweak can change a colder shot into a warmer shot, like what you have attempted above, it also allows you to take a more creative control of your finished picture.

I do not say one approach is right or wrong nor do i suggest one approach is purer than an other, to suggest I need a separate forum is in all honestly inaccurate. In the end we are all presenting JPEG images for critique as a photograph we took.

John you are to be congratulated on the consistent quality of your pictures and range of subjects you get close to, i have great admiration for that and am not trying to illicit a response or argument, just offering an alternative view point to that offered by you.

BTW the first looks more natural

Interesting points Phil. You say it has been done in the camera without any input from me. But it has ,because I set the various parameters before I take the picture surely ? When I say "as is " I mean more or less as it comes out the camera. Its the creative control you mention that I worry a bit about. White balance for example can be altered dramatically in the D7000 in the retouch mode along with dynamic lighting.. At least I as I say I am relieved that every one prefers no 1 as that was the intention.
Cheers
JR

John

# 1 as is for me too. A very interesting topic one with so many variants they can all be correct depending upon the person behind the camera and their choice.

Your big advantage as I see it, is with your hide set up and pools, allowing preperation and selection, which is reflected in your consistant quality.

Without the use of hides etc it's another ball game often with me its a grab shot or yet another bird flying away, luck is then a big factor in the equation. Now I have only ever heard a Rail never seen one let alone pointed the lens at one.

Thanks
Explaining things has never been one of my strong points
I think you,ve got the gist if what I was trying to say regarding raw, Barry. I just dont do the walk around and grab stuff very often. I thought I would take a couple of NEF,s and try to see what advantages there were with my old trusted PSP and the Raw editing. Thats where the problem started. It took me all afternoon to find something to open them with.
I ended up with View NX2. I remembered then the slow time it took and the bigger files and then converting etc and binned it !

Regarding the over processing topic I think I picked a bad second pic
Cheers
JR

Prefer the 1st one JR and that is a cracking shot Sir. I have seena rail but never got the chance to get an image. As has been said you do produce consistently high quality images and whether its in JPEG or RAW is a decision that obviously suits you and your photography. I prefer to shoot RAW and I do not spend a huge amount of time in post processing using only Capture NX2. I try to get the exposure right at the time of shooting or at least near enough to be tweaked. Thats where the histogram comes into its own.

Nick.

I prefer the first one as well, there is something almost three dimensional about it.

David

The first one for me too, the colours look so much better, JR.

Andy...