New IPS Monitor ... Need Feedback

[Bobby Kintanar]

Ka Mastah, as you know, I've been thoroughly enjoying the images in my new monitor, and I hope it has also helped in my PP.

I am submitting this photo for some C&C so I can determine where my workflow needs to be improved:

Camera: Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Exposure: 0.05 sec (1/20)
Aperture: f/5.6
Lens: Canon EF 400 mm f/5.6 L + 2 pcs. Kenko 1.4X TC's stacked
ISO: 400; Exposure Bias +1 EV; Flash: Off, Did not fire

[Romy Ocon]

Hi Bobby,

This is an excellent capture of a well-groomed specimen. On my LCD, the colors are very good, not overdone. The tonality is perfect, as can be seen on the histograms. Sharpening of the subject and perch are likewsie ok. I'd probably warm up the WB just a tiny bit, but that's a matter of personal taste. Most nature shooters would want to err on the warm side if unsure of the WB.

Now, let me point out some nits and these are indicated on the photo below:




I actually discourage the use of blurring routines (assuming you used such here) on the BG of natural history type of captures. One can certainly use such tool in digital art type of bird photos, but for submissions to institutions like NatGeo, blurring of the BG is not encouraged. It is also very tough to pull off as natural looking, and to a trained eye very easy to spot.

You can of course use aggressive NR on the BG if necessary as long as the NR wouldn't actually amount to the equivalent of blurring.

Your colors and tonalities are a giant leap over your PP style prior to getting the IPS monitor. I think you're now more than ready to post at Naturescapes.

[Bobby Kintanar]

Wow, your eagle eyes and exceptional technical skills really come to the fore when you do C&C Ka Mastah! I never even noticed those things you pointed out! I did a lens blur on the BG to act as de-noising (I did not de-noise this photo at all) and you saw that as well!

Thank you so much for taking the time for this Ka Romy! I will endeavor to come up with better photos in the future after this! :-)

[Enrique Frio]

Eagle eyes and sharp skills, Romy!





adminnote:Admin Note: Sorry, Enrique..... only the one asking for critique and the admin can post comments in this board, please see rules in the headers of this page.

[Bobby Kintanar]

Alright, I tried to implement your critiques on this CKF - the partner of the one above. The lighting was different, the perch was nearer the water. I did not implement any blurring procedures but did a single pass of NR at the lowest setting.

I noticed that the feathers on the wing have some clumping - how do we get rid of that or what is causing it, Ka Mastah?

Same gear was used on this shot, but PP'd with Ka Mastah's shadow behind me :-)

Original shot: Directly converted to JPEG from RAW



Processed:

[Romy Ocon]

Great shot Bobby, amazing detail left even if cropped heavily. This has been processed very well (with a perfect histogram), and if it were mine I would be proud to post it at serious sites like Naturescapes as it is.

But of course this is a critique corner, so it's my duty to look for micro-imperfections with a 1000x magnifying glass.




1. I'd recommend that aggressive sharpening and NR be omitted during RAW conversion to keep the perch texture intact. Local sharpening on the perch and local NR on the BG can be done in PS. This should prevent the occurence of those plasticky smooth areas.

2. As regards the sharpening artifact on the bill, this can be avoided but the workflow is complicated to describe (but simple to do!). This is best described when we are both looking at the LCD, doing PP work. Perhaps on my next Cebu visit, let's have some PP exercises over rum-cola and lechon. ;D

3. The lost detail in the breast highlights may be recoverable in RAW conversion.

4. Smearing or clumping of the feathers can happen with Bayer sensors - the fine crisscrossing feather details plus the right (or wrong!) iridescent coloring can sometimes defeat the demosaicing algorithms. Some RAW converters can make the effect less pronounced than others. Remember that the Bayer sensor uses R-G-G-B (one red, two greens and one blue) demosaicing. If the colors are too rich in blue/red components (and less of green), demosaicing issues can occur because the algorithm is using less info to do the job (much of the color info in the 2 green pixels are not useable in such a case). This is the reason why sometimes deep blue skies and deep red flowers can be noisy even at ISO 100.

[Bobby Kintanar]

Wow, that is very valuable information right there Ka Mastah! Now I know precisely what to look for in my PP work and hopefully, I and the others reading this, will be able to overcome the weaknesses in our overall photographic techniques.

Once again, I thank you for taking time to pass on your personal knowledge to us, as well as your kind compliments. It is said that "A true Master's cup never overflows - he always shares it with others!" May your cup always be filled with knowledge to share with us all, Ka Mastah!

[Romy Ocon]

My pleasure, Bobby!

BTW, here's an example of the use of the Lens Blur tool in strengthening an image.

Note also the texture of the perch where it's in focus (right at the bird's feet).... no NR was done at that part to make the micro-detail look more natural.