RobD
Veteran
- Location
- Leura - Blue Mountains Australia
- Name
- Robert Davidson
-
Cameraderie, a friendly photography forum, join now for free!
RobD
Veteran
- Location
- Leura - Blue Mountains Australia
- Name
- Robert Davidson
- Location
- Tanagra
Reminds me of my work week!
- Location
- Adelaide, South Australia
- Name
- Andy
Tim Williams
All-Pro
- Location
- Central Florida
- Name
- Tim Williams
Tim Williams
All-Pro
- Location
- Central Florida
- Name
- Tim Williams
- Location
- Massachusetts
tonyturley
Legend
- Location
- Scott Depot, WV, USA
- Name
- Tony
- Location
- North Carolina
- Name
- Rashid
Beautiful sharp yet smooth (if that makes sense) images.
- Location
- Tanagra
Thanks, I was working with single point focus + spot exposure, which isn’t something I’ve often messed with. Seems to be a good combo if I can keep it steady.
- Location
- North Carolina
- Name
- Rashid
I always use single point focus (small square) but not spot exposure. But when I get sharp focus and no camera shake, after normal processing I get a sharp but somewhat harsh image-- I usually blur it a very small amount (fraction of a pixel) to reduce the harshness, but your images are "creamy" smooth without any compromise on sharpness. I wonder if it is the lens. I've seen results like that from Leica lenses on Leica cameras.
- Location
- Tanagra
I do relatively simple edits, though it’s pretty consistently the same formula. RAW, a trip through DXO PureRAW, then it’s raising brightness a bit, dropping highlights a touch, lift shadows, drop contrast, add some definition and a touch of vignette. It was nearly foggy, so I’m sure that helps with the dreamy quality a touch. Normally I don’t do single point focus, but 5 point or 5x5, but when I’m pretty settled, single point can be managed more easily. Spot exposure to try to help with the extreme contrast of an often bright background.
And there you go. Looking at both of your photographs, I see two different processing styles more than anything else.
- Location
- Tanagra
I find lowering the contrast helps pull a bit more detail out most of the time—especially when the eye is shadowed, and it also helps give that softer look. Adding some definition restores a bit of the sharpness. I don’t do extreme amounts of each, just a little bit of both can really help give me the look I’m going for.
- Location
- Tanagra
- Location
- Tanagra
Yes, they are! Between them and chickadees, I don’t know where they find the energy. Usually my first clue is hearing the tell-tale chirps. Then once I find him, I watch him just bounce all over the place. He went from bush, to ground, to another bush, to a tree. Never stopped once for a meal at the feeder. It reminds me of the background peasants in Monty Python and the Holy Grail—working hard, but not doing much of anything!
A few lesser shots of him bounding about:
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Join to see EXIF info for this image (if available)
Last edited:
- Location
- North Carolina
- Name
- Rashid
Many thanks for the very helpful replies. I think the major difference is, in fact, that you reduce contrast whereas I reduce saturation. I reduce the highlights by bending down the top 1/4 of the tone curve, so this might result in a slight difference. I'll try reducing contrast. Again thank you so much for taking the time.
