What Could I Have Done Better to Improve The PP on This Photo
Feb 10, 2012 13:31:18 #
So since this is a FX/35mm format and the D300 a DX you basically use it as a 750mm!!!
Feb 10, 2012 13:47:08 #
Adubin wrote:
I used a Nikon D300 with a Nikon 500mm f-4 manual focus lens to take this photo. Camera was set-up to ISO 640, speed 1/2000, f-stop f-5.6. It was a cloudy, day so I had very poor lighting.
I used OnOne Perfect Mask and their background to add the sky to this photo, and further enhanced it with Photoshop CS4 this photo.
I would appreciate your critiques and feedback how I could improve this photo. Thanks, Arnold
I used OnOne Perfect Mask and their background to add the sky to this photo, and further enhanced it with Photoshop CS4 this photo.
I would appreciate your critiques and feedback how I could improve this photo. Thanks, Arnold
Alright, I really don't know much, but I'm thinking that your ISO was a little to high. Even though the sun is not out the glare and brightness is still intense. An ISO around 400 or even 200 might have worked better. Also a polorizing filter would have added a bluer background. If you used the filter, the the ISO at 600 might have been the right setting. but, it does not look like you used a polarize filter. I guessing you did have a UV filter though.
That's just my opinion, you can take it with a pinch of salt and a shot of tequilla if you want. ;-)
Feb 10, 2012 13:57:13 #
Bill Pinto
Loc: Metairie, Louisiana
GREAT SHOT and photoshop work. The only thing I can think about is that your eye go to the brightest (whitest) areas of the image, the clouds they are distracting. If you can take them out your eye would be on the bird, only. Again great shot.
Feb 10, 2012 13:57:21 #
Bill Pinto
Loc: Metairie, Louisiana
GREAT SHOT and photoshop work. The only thing I can think about is that your eye go to the brightest (whitest) areas of the image, the clouds they are distracting. If you can take them out your eye would be on the bird, only. Again great shot.
Feb 10, 2012 14:08:41 #
Adubin wrote:
Considering your standar displayed on your web site, I can't argue with you about it!!!.../... I'm not going to post this original photo on my website, because it doesn't meet my standards. .../...
Why on earth did you even consider this image in the first place? (You do not have to answer that, it is rhetorical)
Jacques
Feb 10, 2012 14:18:10 #
Rachel, Yep, I could have reduced my ISO, but that would have not improve the poor lighting conditions. I find lower ISO only helps reduce noise in the shadow areas. Since this is such a large lens I can't use a UV filter in front of the lens. I believe a polarize filter wouldn't have helped since there was no blue sky. BTW - Normally I would have just rejected a photo like this, since it takes a lot time to enhance it, and never looks as good when you capture very good photograph.
Arnold
Arnold
Rachel wrote:
quote=Adubin I used a Nikon D300 with a Nikon 500... (show quote)
Feb 10, 2012 14:20:05 #
Bill, Thanks for your comments, Arnold
Bill Pinto wrote:
GREAT SHOT and photoshop work. The only thing I can think about is that your eye go to the brightest (whitest) areas of the image, the clouds they are distracting. If you can take them out your eye would be on the bird, only. Again great shot.
Feb 10, 2012 14:24:23 #
Wolf, I just learned how to use OnOne Perfect Mask, and figured this would enhance it enough to look OK to put it on my website. From your feedback, plus it others, it convinced it was a waste of my time. Arnold
English_Wolf wrote:
Why on earth did you even consider this image in the first place? (You do not have to answer that, it is rhetorical)
Jacques
Adubin wrote:
Considering your standar displayed on your web site, I can't argue with you about it!!!.../... I'm not going to post this original photo on my website, because it doesn't meet my standards. .../...
Why on earth did you even consider this image in the first place? (You do not have to answer that, it is rhetorical)
Jacques
Feb 10, 2012 14:59:30 #
Bill Pinto
Loc: Metairie, Louisiana
I just thought that a polarizer filter may help, because it would have taken out the glare, a lower ISO and a tripod would have let you achieve a better all around photo. Using a tripod if possible would have stabilize the image and lower ISO for better color rendition. The polarizer is use for getting rid of glare, but it will cut down you f/stop. That where the tripod into play.
Feb 10, 2012 17:13:02 #
Adubin wrote:
Rachel, Yep, I could have reduced my ISO, but tha... (show quote)
Ya know, I think I'm going to ask a friend of mine about using the polorizing filter on white overcast days. He's a pro photography who makes his living from teaching others.
You have a very good point about "if theres no blue in the sky". It also could have given the bird strange shadows and coloring. Like I said, really out of my box here.
Now I must ask? Why can you not use a UV filter on your lens? I mean one is not made for it, or you find it interfears with the white balance and causes a lot of noise?
Feb 10, 2012 17:26:31 #
Rachel, The front of this Nikon 500mm lens is over 5 inches wide and nobody I know makes a UV filter for it. I also checked and Nikon doesn't an insert UV filter either. Arnold
Rachel wrote:
quote=Adubin Rachel, Yep, I could have reduced m... (show quote)
Feb 10, 2012 18:10:17 #
Adubin wrote:
Rachel, The front of this Nikon 500mm lens is ove... (show quote)
I think ya need to talk to NASA or some other group on making you a UV filter to fit that monster. Not to mention a bionic arm to hold it up before you shoot. 8-)
Feb 10, 2012 18:12:40 #
Feb 10, 2012 18:56:45 #
Mmac, Thanks for your comments, Arnold
Bmac wrote:
Arnold, your edited photo is fine. I think you did a superb job. 8-)
Feb 10, 2012 19:10:40 #
Can somebody in the UHH community please tell me why this thread was moved to the "Photo Gallery" from the "Photo Analysis" by the UHH admin? Arnold
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.