For Critique Does this work?

Jan 31, 2011
164
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
Nankeen Kestrel. He was looking for his breakfast. Sadly, the sky was a flat and featureless grey/white this day, and I was underneath the bird so I didn't get much of a shot. Cobbled this one together from that, and one of some clouds I had taken on another day. Love to get some feedback on whether this works or not. I see some fringing but I'm not sure how to dispense with that, I was shooting jpg back then and Pentax's jpg management in camera was not great. Anyway, have at it :) Please...


Taken with a K200D and Tamron 70-300mm lens.
 

vincechu

Veteran
Sep 14, 2010
68
hmmm I think it does work, nicely done :) With regards to the fringing perhaps use a fine brush set to desaturate and go over the edges? I think this'll work because there isn't much other color around the edges to desaturate by accident, hope you know what I mean :)

Edit: btw you did very well to take the photo of the kestral to begin with, well done
 
Jan 31, 2011
164
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
hmmm I think it does work, nicely done :) With regards to the fringing perhaps use a fine brush set to desaturate and go over the edges? I think this'll work because there isn't much other color around the edges to desaturate by accident, hope you know what I mean :)

Edit: btw you did very well to take the photo of the kestral to begin with, well done
Thanks, Vince. The little guy was just hovering, looking for food, near a beach where I sometimes go to shoot, the carpark was about level with him so I got some other shots but from behind. It was only when he lifted a little that I could get under him. I suppose he was maybe 20 ft over my head at this time, and staying pretty steady. I love it when wildlife are that agreeable. I'll be heading over to that beach again when my new lens arrives (no longer have the Tammy)

Those suggestions are good, I just haven't ever worried too much about fringing... sadly it was a common occurrence with the lens I used that day. I didn't do this in layers, so will go back and start over with both shots and see if I can improve it. Thanks again :)
 

Grant

Veteran
Nov 12, 2010
68
Lunenburg Nova Scotia
It almost works. The cross over from the kestrel and the clouds is a bit sharp. To eliminate this select the kestrel then do a boarder selection. The size will be dependent on how large the image is maybe 4 pixels would be a good start. Then apply a Gaussian blur. The boundary between the kestrel and the sky will be softer and more believable. Still a good try.
 
Jan 31, 2011
164
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
It almost works. The cross over from the kestrel and the clouds is a bit sharp. To eliminate this select the kestrel then do a boarder selection. The size will be dependent on how large the image is maybe 4 pixels would be a good start. Then apply a Gaussian blur. The boundary between the kestrel and the sky will be softer and more believable. Still a good try.
Oh that might be easier than anything else. Thanks, Grant :)
 

bartjeej

Hall of Famer
Nov 12, 2010
124
bart
had a go at it with my preferred method for situations like these, where the fringe is a different colour than any "true" colour that needs to be preserved in the image. It's not a complete solution, but it's literally 10 seconds' work; I opened the blue and blue-purple sections in Silkypix's HSV editor, and took their saturation and value down to the lowest values possible (sadly in SP that's not -100 but alas).

it's not perfect yet but it does make the fringe less noticeable in the worst affected areas.
 

vincechu

Veteran
Sep 14, 2010
68
bartjeej, thats a good effort, the fringing looks completely gone to me - I just had the thought suggesting to do this using LR3's colour saturation sliders but you beat me to it lol
 

BBW

Administrator Emeritus
Jul 7, 2010
123
betwixt and between
BB
Kestrels are such beautiful yet small birds of prey. I'd be interested in seeing your original, as well, Sue - if you feel like it.
 
Jan 31, 2011
164
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
Kestrels are such beautiful yet small birds of prey. I'd be interested in seeing your original, as well, Sue - if you feel like it.
Okidoki, you want it complete with zero editing? Actually I'll put up two more. One with no editing, and the next with enough to be able to actually see the bird's features :) Back shortly.

OK here we go. The first is unedited except for resizing for the forum. I decided that I would use levels to increase the visibility of the bird's colouring and features. Also needed to use a bit of brightness and contrast adjustment too, in order to achieve the second.



and



You can see the sky has all but disappeared from this second effort, which is why I decided to have a go at pasting it into another background. Maybe I shouldnt bother?

And here's two other shots of the same bird. He kept moving about the sky but stayed in pretty much the same area. The first, I've actually flipped it on the vertical, its head down in the original shot. Also edited with levels and contrast, the second, just with levels. I like to think he was sick of being photographed by then. At least, even if we can't see his head, we have the sea and a horizon in the background. I kind of like his fluttering feathers.



 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

stillshunter

Super Moderator Emeritus
Nov 5, 2010
123
Down Under
Mark
Sue, Thanks for posting the originals. I actually don't think the original shot needs the background, the clouds add some interest but the perspective was a little disconcerting (sorry if that sounds harsh but I hope you take it in the purest sense of subjective C&C). I must say this is a great series, I really like the other two images also. The first of the 'spares' is brilliant and I don't think would take much to bring a little more out of the colours (really love his little tucked up feet!) and the second is a great perspective...and you can really feel the wind through his feathers.

Thanks so much for sharing.
 
Jan 31, 2011
164
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
Sue, Thanks for posting the originals. I actually don't think the original shot needs the background, the clouds add some interest but the perspective was a little disconcerting (sorry if that sounds harsh but I hope you take it in the purest sense of subjective C&C). I must say this is a great series, I really like the other two images also. The first of the 'spares' is brilliant and I don't think would take much to bring a little more out of the colours (really love his little tucked up feet!) and the second is a great perspective...and you can really feel the wind through his feathers.

Thanks so much for sharing.
Thanks, Mark. When I went back and looked at the first, this morning, with a more jaundiced eye, I felt slightly embarrassed about having even posted it. TBH, its bloody awful!! LOL!

And thank you so much for your kind(er) remarks. I really do appreciate them :)
 

stillshunter

Super Moderator Emeritus
Nov 5, 2010
123
Down Under
Mark
Thanks, Mark. When I went back and looked at the first, this morning, with a more jaundiced eye, I felt slightly embarrassed about having even posted it. TBH, its bloody awful!! LOL!

And thank you so much for your kind(er) remarks. I really do appreciate them :)
I certainly wouldn't say the first shot was 'bloody awful'. Sue, Sue, you'll feel better after a Berocca ;) It was just a niggle with me about the differing perspectives of the kestrel and the sky....and hey, it was only me....I saw no other hands going up on this count! Actually you got more compliments so I felt a little low stating my opinion.....but hey it's just my two cents! I'm glad you shared. Loved the images and to get them with a compact.....I struggled with my Pentax dSLR and long 1kg zoom and didn't achieve it's half!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBW

P.H

Regular
Apr 4, 2011
43
Derby, UK
Depends what you want it to work as. It's a striking image, if that's what you're hoping to achieve, I think you certainly have. But if you're looking for it to look realistic, I think it has problems. The bird doesn't look like it belongs to that sky, I thought that before reading the text, the lighting looks wrong. The sky is also too vivid and draws attention away from the bird, not good even if you're not looking for realism.
Having been critical, sorry!, I do like the capture, I'd be inclined to work with what you shot, rather than creating something else. Of the examples above, I'd be aiming for something between the first and second, lightening the bird more than the sky, experimenting to keep the sky as dull background and maximising the detail on the bird without overdoing it, I know easier to type than do it!! If I'd taken the shot of the bird flying away, I'd be keeping it, maybe crop out the lighter band at the top to see how that looks, otherwise leave it as it is.
In the end, what works is what works for you and one of the starting blocks is whether you want to create or represent or any of the shades in between.
Thanks for sharing:2thumbs:
 
Jan 31, 2011
164
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
Depends what you want it to work as. It's a striking image, if that's what you're hoping to achieve, I think you certainly have. But if you're looking for it to look realistic, I think it has problems. The bird doesn't look like it belongs to that sky, I thought that before reading the text, the lighting looks wrong. The sky is also too vivid and draws attention away from the bird, not good even if you're not looking for realism.
Having been critical, sorry!,
Nono, this is the kind of thing I want to hear. That's why I now think it looks dreadful :)
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom