Dunnock

My Version, Lightroom 3 only. I have purposely not reduced noise too much because it softens the main subject a tad too much. With more time, and an original RAW file, this could be made to look quite acceptable I think.




If you shot this as JPG, change to RAW, you'll have much more scope for editing.

Heres my go, a slightly different crop but much the same. Its a subjective as we all see things differently. With a larger file, (raw even) and some time may have got a little better. Unfortunately the light was flat at the time, still excellent to see a Dunnock, (Hedgesparrow or Accentor), close up, nice shot.

[IMG]http://i743.photobucket.com/albums/xx77/pg20_photos/Dunnock001.jpg[/IMG]

Regards


Paul

Thanks for your work, Peter.
I think the way forward is

1). Get closer to the subject, to avoid having to over-crop.
2). Use the available light to suit the subject, rather than struggle against it.
3). Shoot in RAW, to leave more scope for editing on PSE9.

Again, thankyou all for comments, criticism, editing tips & your patience.

Roger.

Roger,

I can agree entirely with your points 1 & 3 above, but not 2.

Unless the light is really dire, take the shot (in RAW). If it's not recoverable in post processing, you've lost nothing except a bit of time, which in my opinion is better than not taking the shot in the first place.

Take the shot and it has a chance, leave it, and it has no chance at all.

To facilitate your point 1, you might try a 1.4x, 1.7x, or 2x teleconverter. I can personally recommend the SMCP-F 1.7X AF teleconverter. not cheap at about £200 - £250 used, but worth the investment for your hobby and probably a lot cheaper than a longer focal length lens. Decent 400mm & 500mm lenses tend to be expensive.

Good luck.

[IMG]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v450/ImagesbyJA/Dunnock001crop.jpg[/IMG]
I thought the branch and the green were a bit distracting so removed them with magic wand & quick mask.The background could be painted a bit or the bird dropped into a new background.Levels & curves used on the bird.
From a competition point of view this is not a natural history shot now.

John

FWIW, here's my attempt. I deliberately didn't crop too closely as it seems to compromise sharpness a tad too much. Fiddled with in Photoshop Elements 8.




Andrew

Thanks, John, but I agree - it's no longer a natural history image, which is rather the point of the excercise1 But thanks agaain for your interest.

Andrew, you've come to one of my own conclusions - don't crop too much & you've shown in yours the good result possible.

Best regards,

Roger.

Hi Roger, I was laid up due to a cold and dreadful wet, cold weather outside so I had a go at your bird:
[IMG]http://i927.photobucket.com/albums/ad116/ADC3440/Untitled-1-3.jpg[/IMG]

I kept things simple but used the twigs as a natural frame, cloning out the distracting leaves at the top. I boosted colour and contrast on the bird but desaturated the twigs because the bright greens became unreal and took the eye.

Roger, I like your attempts in both this thread and your other one. Whilst there is room for improvement, you have created a lot of interest because you obviously have an eye for bird shots. And not a feeder in sight

Aha! Moriarty!

You have discovered my fiendish plan!!!

And the panto season has only just begun, Ha ha ha ha ha ........

As crique threads go, it wasn't bad, was it?

Coker.