Spoonbill

[Ugh]

Hi
My first post here, hope I'm not being too pretentious going straight into critique.

This is a spoonbill (Platalaea leucorodia) at the zoo. Exif data included. The picture is soft (shooting 1/60s at 200mm), haven't mastered the monopod yet. Where's that 300 f/4 OIS????

This is the original, untreated (just scaled down). I've played around with cropping, adjusting levels, unsharp masking ... but not really satisfied.

Comments/thoughts much appreciated.

Hugo

[edit: I can't see the exif data in the posted image, here goes: E-500, ZD50-200 @ 200mm f/3.5, 1/60s, iso 100)

[Julio]

Nice shot, but a bit dark to me...

[JamesD]

Yep,

Nice composition (I think).
Nice control over dof.
A bit soft.
But mainly the light was just working against you (I think).

Don't worry about being a newcomer.
Contribute in a sincere manner and I'm sure you will find this forum most accomodating.

Welcome!

Jim

[tspore]

You might has been able to deal with the Slow shutter speed, and darkness of the shot, if you had used a flash. But its a nice shot.
Welcome to the board.

[Hokuto]

IMHO, the real problem is that the bird is facing away from the optimum direction for lighting, thus placing its beak/face in shade. Due to the darkness it's a bit hard to tell but there might also be a bit of oof area. I agree that fill flash would be advisable in a case like this.

[Ugh]

Thanks to all...
About the fill in flash, part of the problem is I'd rather not disturb the animals with it :? (I know I shoulda used ISO 200)

So here's what I come up with after redoing levels, unsharp masking and cropping with The Gimp.

Any further thoughts?
About composition: Should I have not cut off the nape feathers? Maybe include some more breast?

Thanks again!

Hugo

[shrinkpictures]

this looks much better - you can see the detail in the face

[windsprite]

I like the lightened version. I think it would be even nicer if you slightly darkened or added a bit of contrast to just the bill and maybe the eye. It would give the image more punch. That's assuming that the bill was darker in real life, of course.

IMO it's a good thing that you didn't use a fill flash. The great thing about this shot is the backlit nape feathers. Pretty bird!

Julie

[Ugh]

I like the lightened version. I think it would be even nicer if you slightly darkened or added a bit of contrast to just the bill and maybe the eye. It would give the image more punch. That's assuming that the bill was darker in real life, of course.
This is where I'm out of my depth: do you mean increase the contrast for the whole image, or maybe some tool/filter to alter only the beak and eye? Won't post the result, but playing with the contrast does help some, thanks :thumbup:

(the bill is darker in real life )

IMO it's a good thing that you didn't use a fill flash. The great thing about this shot is the backlit nape feathers. Pretty bird!
Actually, that's the only thing I like this pic for, I'll just have to run back and take it again next spring when they're back in breeding season (hopefully with some OIS :Down:)

Hugo

[Tony Finnerty]

Hi Hugo. I especially like the tight composition. My candid portraits of performers are sometimes criticized in my photo club for cutting off tops of heads or other body parts, but I think it often works and it works for your photo of the spoonbill, despite the beak projecting out of the photo.

The backlighting also works after you lightened the shadows, and I agree with Julie that the backlit nape feathers are special. However, a little bit of fill-in flash to highlight the eye would help.

It's easy to critique your photo, but I don't have any bird photos that are nearly as nice!

[windsprite]

This is where I'm out of my depth: do you mean increase the contrast for the whole image, or maybe some tool/filter to alter only the beak and eye? Won't post the result, but playing with the contrast does help some, thanks :thumbup:

Hugo, for something like this, using layer masks is probably the best way to isolate and add contrast to specific parts of the image. It also allows you to go back and make changes later on. Unfortunately, I have no idea how to do layer masks :shy:, but you there's lots of info about them on the internet, or maybe somebody here can help you.

With my primitive Photoshop skills, I would probably use one of two methods (my software is in Japanese, so I hope you understand my translation of the tool names):

1) Set the Burn tool (use one with fuzzy edges) to 10% and Shadows, and gradually bring up the contrast in the bill. For the eye, use the Dodge tool at 10% and on Highlights, and go around just the colored part of the eye, to bring that out.

Tony made a good point about lighting up the eye. If you look carefully, there actually is a highlight in there, toward the top. You could always try to gradually bring that out with a white paint brush set to 10%.

Then go over the pupil of the eye with the Burn tool set as above. This will not affect the catchlight that you have created, so you can brush right over it.

You can also enlarge the Burn tool and go over the feathers to see if you can get more detail out of them.

2) Copy a layer onto your original. Lighten the top layer in Highlight/Shadows, then adjust further in Layers or Brightness/Contrast. Don't worry if the nape feathers go too light. Right now you're just trying to lighten the shadows.

Then just go over the nape feathers with the Erase tool set to around 10% and gradually bring out some of the detail from the layer below. If you go too far, the white will look grey and dirty, so less is more here. Then do the beak and eye as in #1 above.

This is my five-minute attempt at #2, if you don't mind. I lost some of the detail in the nape feathers, because I went too far in lightening the top layer, and the contrast was too great between that and the bottom layer, so I couldn't erase too much without getting the dirty effect I mentioned. Your more subtle lightening would probably work better. I also think I went too far on the bill. I do like how the lightening brought out the green in the background, though.

Oh, and I finished the image off with Unsharp Mask set to Amount 8 and Radius 20, to add more contrast, then did a little regular sharpening at 30 and .3.

http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/4544/p6102100psed3.th.jpg (http://img174.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p6102100psed3.jpg)

Sorry I couldn't give you expert advice, but I hope this helps.

Julie

[Ugh]

Thanks very much, Julie
I'll work hard on that.

Hugo