Posted by John Robinson on December 1, 2012 at 10:52 AM
Marsh tit.
This is more or less out of camera but with active D lighting on in in the camera.I tried the different levels with just enough to see some detail in the black head- which you can see from the hide so thats OK
Shows that little white spot on the beak nicely too
D7000
Nikon 70-300
ISO 800
EV down 1 stop
Contrast down 1 stop
About 70% of full frame.
Cheers
JR
Posted by Nick Mckeown on December 1, 2012 at 11:17 AM
Superbly detailed shot JR, love the water drop on its tail, really sets the bird off. There seems to be something odd at the bottom of the image...was something cloned out as the pebbles look a little odd?
Nick.
Posted by John Robinson on December 1, 2012 at 11:40 AM
Thanks Nick
I can see what you mean but no idea what it is . It looks like the edge of a feather and part of the reflection. I may have taken out a white blob of poo but I don't think so else I would have done the other one I'll have a look at the original.
Cheers
JR
Posted by Neil Burton on December 1, 2012 at 12:19 PM
Yes, agreed about the odd bit but the tit is fine and detailed.
Posted by Andy Astbury on December 1, 2012 at 12:29 PM
The level of detail is great John
If you shoot jpeg have you got your camera set to the sRGB colourspace and tone curve?
As a side note, just bare in mind that your camera still captures a RAW file even when you shoot jpeg; it then "makes" a jpeg from it and basically chucks the original RAW file away.
Those of us who shoot RAW have our cameras set to capture the RAW file and keep hold on to it - a typical pc/mac plus CameraRAW and PS can make a far superior jpeg to that made by the internal gubbins of even your D7000; the same goes for Nikon OEM software like NX, and other 3rd party RAW handlers such as Capture 1, Bibble Pro and the like.
RAW processing doesn't take any longer to do than jpeg processing, and if I tried jpeg processing then it would probably take more time because with jpeg I'd have to take more care with those delicate but pesky little pixels that the camera internals had already made.
It takes no longer to learn and use a RAW workflow than it does a jpeg one in Image Guru, Paint Shop et al.
But if you're happy matey you just carry on
Posted by John Robinson on December 1, 2012 at 1:07 PM
Hi Andy
Yes sRGB all the time.
If I can get a good A4 print I am happy. I would suggest it takes a good man to separate RAW from JPEG on this site.
Strangely too the last batch of pics I,ve had published were actually sent as compressed JPEGs
So yes I,m happy (I think !)
jump:
Cheers
PS
Nick- cant find anything on the original, but its just the full sizes version of this one.
JR
JR
Posted by David Sewell on December 1, 2012 at 2:24 PM
However you got it John, it's a great shot and I certainly would not know that it had not been shot in RAW.
David
Posted by Phil Ellard on December 1, 2012 at 4:48 PM
another cracker, the detail is as Andy said, wonderful and i love the colours
Posted by Bob Johnson on December 2, 2012 at 11:29 AM
Peg or no peg thats a fantastic tit with loads of detail. It was stand out from the second it leaped on t0 my screen
Bob in the RAW camp
Posted by Kim Connolly on December 2, 2012 at 3:07 PM
It's a fabulous shot John and the detail is superb.
Posted by Andy Shepherd on December 5, 2012 at 11:35 AM
Another very good pool shot, John. I always struggle with the ID of these and Willow Tits, something to do with the black cap, one being shiny and one being dull
Discussion
10 repliesThis is more or less out of camera but with active D lighting on in in the camera.I tried the different levels with just enough to see some detail in the black head- which you can see from the hide so thats OK
Shows that little white spot on the beak nicely too
D7000
Nikon 70-300
ISO 800
EV down 1 stop
Contrast down 1 stop
About 70% of full frame.
Cheers
JR
Nick.
I can see what you mean but no idea what it is . It looks like the edge of a feather and part of the reflection. I may have taken out a white blob of poo but I don't think so else I would have done the other one
Cheers
JR
If you shoot jpeg have you got your camera set to the sRGB colourspace and tone curve?
As a side note, just bare in mind that your camera still captures a RAW file even when you shoot jpeg; it then "makes" a jpeg from it and basically chucks the original RAW file away.
Those of us who shoot RAW have our cameras set to capture the RAW file and keep hold on to it - a typical pc/mac plus CameraRAW and PS can make a far superior jpeg to that made by the internal gubbins of even your D7000; the same goes for Nikon OEM software like NX, and other 3rd party RAW handlers such as Capture 1, Bibble Pro and the like.
RAW processing doesn't take any longer to do than jpeg processing, and if I tried jpeg processing then it would probably take more time because with jpeg I'd have to take more care with those delicate but pesky little pixels that the camera internals had already made.
It takes no longer to learn and use a RAW workflow than it does a jpeg one in Image Guru, Paint Shop et al.
But if you're happy matey you just carry on
Yes sRGB all the time.
If I can get a good A4 print I am happy. I would suggest it takes a good man to separate RAW from JPEG on this site.
Strangely too the last batch of pics I,ve had published were actually sent as compressed JPEGs
So yes I,m happy (I think !)
jump:
Cheers
PS
Nick- cant find anything on the original, but its just the full sizes version of this one.
JR
JR
David
Bob in the RAW camp
Another very good pool shot, John. I always struggle with the ID of these and Willow Tits, something to do with the black cap, one being shiny and one being dull
Andy...