Blue Grosbeak @ 1500mm

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by M-M, Jul 13, 2008.

  1. M-M

    M-M Guest

    M-M, Jul 13, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. M-M

    Paul Furman Guest

    M-M wrote:
    > This uncommon bird was hanging out with his girlfriend in Cape Henlopen:
    >
    > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_11533w.jpg
    > ...
    > OK, not sharp as a tack but it was windy, my tripod was fully extended
    > and at that magnification, I grabbed what I could.


    Beautiful shot. Photoshop is called for though: clone out the sensor
    dust, sharpen with a larger radius like 1 pixel on a masked layer.

    Stacked teleconverters?

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jul 14, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <7Txek.15308$>,
    Paul Furman <> wrote:

    > M-M wrote:
    > > This uncommon bird was hanging out with his girlfriend in Cape Henlopen:
    > >
    > > http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_11533w.jpg
    > > ...
    > > OK, not sharp as a tack but it was windy, my tripod was fully extended
    > > and at that magnification, I grabbed what I could.

    >
    > Beautiful shot. Photoshop is called for though: clone out the sensor
    > dust, sharpen with a larger radius like 1 pixel on a masked layer.
    >
    > Stacked teleconverters?



    I did try some sharpening in Photoshop but discarded the attempt. I
    wanted to post the untouched image in hopes of getting some ideas. An
    unsharp mask with amount 20% and radius 30 pixels applied only to the
    bird and branches looked a bit overdone.

    What I really like about the image is first it contains every color of
    the rainbow and second the really neat bokeh. The light yellow is the
    shoreline and the deeper blue is the water.

    I used a Nikon Fieldscope 82 with a D80, essentially a fixed aperture,
    (f/13), manual focus 1000mm lens that can electronically meter the
    exposure by adjusting the ISO and the shutter speed.

    Here it is:

    http://www.netaxs.com/~mhmyers/camera.html#FS

    The tripod head in the above photo is used for astrophotography. I use a
    different one for birding that allows smooth movement.

    --
    m-m
    http://www.mhmyers.com/image.html
     
    M-M, Jul 14, 2008
    #3
  4. M-M

    Paul Furman Guest

    M-M wrote:
    > In article <7Txek.15308$>,
    > Paul Furman <> wrote:
    >
    >> M-M wrote:
    >>> This uncommon bird was hanging out with his girlfriend in Cape Henlopen:
    >>>
    >>> http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_11533w.jpg
    >>> ...
    >>> OK, not sharp as a tack but it was windy, my tripod was fully extended
    >>> and at that magnification, I grabbed what I could.

    >> Beautiful shot. Photoshop is called for though: clone out the sensor
    >> dust, sharpen with a larger radius like 1 pixel on a masked layer.
    >>
    >> Stacked teleconverters?

    >
    > I did try some sharpening in Photoshop but discarded the attempt. I
    > wanted to post the untouched image in hopes of getting some ideas. An
    > unsharp mask with amount 20% and radius 30 pixels applied only to the
    > bird and branches looked a bit overdone.


    Try 1 pixel at 100%. Normally I use 0.3 pixels at 200%. Sharpening may
    need to be masked out extra carefully at the edges of this one or it can
    show gritty artifacts (maybe just the web jpeg). Not masking at all
    emphasizes noise in the background.

    > What I really like about the image is first it contains every color of
    > the rainbow and second the really neat bokeh. The light yellow is the
    > shoreline and the deeper blue is the water.
    >
    > I used a Nikon Fieldscope 82 with a D80, essentially a fixed aperture,
    > (f/13), manual focus 1000mm lens that can electronically meter the
    > exposure by adjusting the ISO and the shutter speed.
    >
    > Here it is:
    >
    > http://www.netaxs.com/~mhmyers/camera.html#FS
    >
    > The tripod head in the above photo is used for astrophotography. I use a
    > different one for birding that allows smooth movement.


    Fun!

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jul 14, 2008
    #4
  5. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <ryyek.14243$>,
    Paul Furman <> wrote:

    > >>> http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_11533w.jpg
    > >>> ...
    > >>> OK, not sharp as a tack but it was windy, my tripod was fully extended
    > >>> and at that magnification, I grabbed what I could.
    > >> Beautiful shot. Photoshop is called for though: clone out the sensor
    > >> dust, sharpen with a larger radius like 1 pixel on a masked layer.
    > >>
    > >> Stacked teleconverters?

    > >
    > > I did try some sharpening in Photoshop but discarded the attempt. I
    > > wanted to post the untouched image in hopes of getting some ideas. An
    > > unsharp mask with amount 20% and radius 30 pixels applied only to the
    > > bird and branches looked a bit overdone.

    >
    > Try 1 pixel at 100%. Normally I use 0.3 pixels at 200%. Sharpening may
    > need to be masked out extra carefully at the edges of this one or it can
    > show gritty artifacts (maybe just the web jpeg). Not masking at all
    > emphasizes noise in the background.



    1 px @ 100% on the full res image works well, thanks for the tip.

    I used the magic wand to select the background, then inverse selected,
    then feathered the selection and applied the unsharp mask to the
    selection.

    I replaced the original image so the original link will now show the new
    image.
    --
    m-m
     
    M-M, Jul 14, 2008
    #5
  6. M-M

    Paul Furman Guest

    M-M wrote:
    > In article <ryyek.14243$>,
    > Paul Furman <> wrote:
    >
    >>>>> http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_11533w.jpg
    >>>>> ...
    >>>>> OK, not sharp as a tack but it was windy, my tripod was fully extended
    >>>>> and at that magnification, I grabbed what I could.
    >>>>
    >>>> Beautiful shot. Photoshop is called for though: clone out the sensor
    >>>> dust, sharpen with a larger radius like 1 pixel on a masked layer.
    >>>>
    >>> I did try some sharpening in Photoshop but discarded the attempt. I
    >>> wanted to post the untouched image in hopes of getting some ideas. An
    >>> unsharp mask with amount 20% and radius 30 pixels applied only to the
    >>> bird and branches looked a bit overdone.

    >>
    >> Try 1 pixel at 100%. Normally I use 0.3 pixels at 200%. Sharpening may
    >> need to be masked out extra carefully at the edges of this one or it can
    >> show gritty artifacts (maybe just the web jpeg). Not masking at all
    >> emphasizes noise in the background.

    >
    > 1 px @ 100% on the full res image works well, thanks for the tip.
    >
    > I used the magic wand to select the background, then inverse selected,
    > then feathered the selection and applied the unsharp mask to the
    > selection.
    >
    > I replaced the original image so the original link will now show the new
    > image.


    Looks good, now use the clone stamp tool to remove the
    dust-on-the-sensor blobs in the background (hold control to set the
    source for rubber stamping). For web, reduce to 1024x640 & maybe even
    sharpen again with 0.3 pixels at 200% or less%. For print there's no
    reason to throw away pixels, just for web.

    It is a beautiful shot.

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jul 14, 2008
    #6
  7. M-M

    -hh Guest

    Paul Furman <> wrote:
    > M-M wrote:
    > > In article <ryyek.14243$>,
    > >  Paul Furman <> wrote:

    >
    > >>>>>http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_11533w.jpg
    > >>>>> ...
    > >>>>> OK, not sharp as a tack but it was windy, my
    > >>>>> tripod was fully extended and at that magnification,
    > >>>>> I grabbed what I could.

    >
    > >>>> Beautiful shot. Photoshop is called for though: clone out the sensor
    > >>>> dust, sharpen with a larger radius like 1 pixel on a masked layer.

    >
    > >>> I did try some sharpening in Photoshop but discarded the attempt. I
    > >>> wanted to post the untouched image in hopes of getting some ideas. An
    > >>> unsharp mask with amount 20% and radius 30 pixels applied only to the
    > >>> bird and branches looked a bit overdone.

    >
    > >> Try 1 pixel at 100%. Normally I use 0.3 pixels at 200%. Sharpening may
    > >> need to be masked out extra carefully at the edges of this one or it
    > >> can show gritty artifacts (maybe just the web jpeg). Not masking at
    > >> all emphasizes noise in the background.

    >
    > > 1 px @ 100% on the full res image works well, thanks for the tip.

    >
    > > I used the magic wand to select the background, then inverse selected,
    > > then feathered the selection and applied the unsharp mask to the
    > > selection.

    >
    > > I replaced the original image so the original link will now show the new
    > > image.

    >
    > Looks good, now use the clone stamp tool to remove the
    > dust-on-the-sensor blobs in the background (hold control to set the
    > source for rubber stamping). For web, reduce to 1024x640 & maybe even
    > sharpen again with 0.3 pixels at 200% or less%. For print there's no
    > reason to throw away pixels, just for web.
    >
    > It is a beautiful shot.


    It is very much improved versus yesterday's untouched.

    It also looks like i might be a very good example to use an
    illustration of the post-processing of the techniques, "side by side",
    so as to show the 'How To' with what each step does to improve the
    final image.


    -hh
     
    -hh, Jul 14, 2008
    #7
  8. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <AQCek.12450$>,
    Paul Furman <> wrote:

    > >>>>> http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_11533w.jpg


    > Looks good, now use the clone stamp tool to remove the
    > dust-on-the-sensor blobs in the background


    I find the Spot Healing Brush Tool in Photoshop Elements works very well
    for sensor blobs.


    > For web, reduce to 1024x640


    I wanted to make it the resolution of my monitor for use as a desktop
    picture for my deskpix gqllery:

    http://www.mhmyers.com/deskpix.html

    (someday soon I will modernize my HTML)

    >
    > It is a beautiful shot.


    Thank you!


    --
    m-m
     
    M-M, Jul 14, 2008
    #8
  9. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article
    <>,
    -hh <> wrote:

    > It also looks like i might be a very good example to use an
    > illustration of the post-processing of the techniques, "side by side",
    > so as to show the 'How To' with what each step does to improve the
    > final image.



    Ok then, here it is:

    http://www.mhmyers.com/temp/sbsgrosbeak.jpg

    I sharpened the bird and adjusted the levels slightly. And removed the
    sensor dust splotches

    --
    m-m
    http://www.mhmyers.com/image.html
     
    M-M, Jul 14, 2008
    #9
  10. M-M

    Guest

    On Sun, 13 Jul 2008 16:53:51 -0400, in rec.photo.digital M-M
    <> wrote:

    >This uncommon bird was hanging out with his girlfriend in Cape Henlopen:
    >
    >http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_11533w.jpg
    >
    >Here is his lady:
    >
    >http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_11550w.jpg
    >
    >OK, not sharp as a tack but it was windy, my tripod was fully extended
    >and at that magnification, I grabbed what I could.



    This is with your spotting scope, right? Did you try iso1600 or even
    pushing it if the D80 supports it? Shutter speed is quite low for such
    magnification and the results shows what I might suspect first to be
    unsharpness due to motion blur.

    As to sharpening you might just sharpen the luminance channel. You might
    consider using even the free version of Neat Image to deal with noise and
    use it's sharpening of the luminance channel as a start as well. I tend to
    mildly do this and the apply some sharpening as my final step in PS as
    well. Also, PSCS has a bicubic sharper resizing algorithm that helps when
    shrinking such images as well. I don't remember if earlier versions have
    this.

    Overall pretty nice shot given the f.l.
     
    , Jul 15, 2008
    #10
  11. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <>,
    wrote:

    > >http://www.mhmyers.com/d80/DSC_11550w.jpg
    > >
    > >OK, not sharp as a tack but it was windy, my tripod was fully extended
    > >and at that magnification, I grabbed what I could.

    >
    >
    > This is with your spotting scope, right? Did you try iso1600 or even
    > pushing it if the D80 supports it? Shutter speed is quite low for such
    > magnification and the results shows what I might suspect first to be
    > unsharpness due to motion blur.
    >
    > As to sharpening you might just sharpen the luminance channel. You might
    > consider using even the free version of Neat Image to deal with noise and
    > use it's sharpening of the luminance channel as a start as well. I tend to
    > mildly do this and the apply some sharpening as my final step in PS as
    > well. Also, PSCS has a bicubic sharper resizing algorithm that helps when
    > shrinking such images as well. I don't remember if earlier versions have
    > this.
    >
    > Overall pretty nice shot given the f.l.



    Yes, with my Fieldscope 82. I thought shutter priority 1/500 should be
    enough and I didn't want to go to ISO1600. Looking back, I believe you
    are correct, and 1/500 could well be slow for a focal length of 1500mm.

    I don't know what sharpening luminence channel means. Can it be done
    with Elements?

    --
    m-m
     
    M-M, Jul 16, 2008
    #11
  12. M-M

    Guest

    On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:06:25 -0400, in rec.photo.digital M-M
    <> wrote:

    >Yes, with my Fieldscope 82. I thought shutter priority 1/500 should be
    >enough and I didn't want to go to ISO1600. Looking back, I believe you
    >are correct, and 1/500 could well be slow for a focal length of 1500mm.


    I find it's very tough to get better than 1/fl sec at 800mm in all but the
    brightest of lighting, even with VR using the 200-400 f/4VR + TC2E at full
    resolution. Very easy to apply bicubic sharper to resize smaller and get
    sharper/smaller images. But the goal should be to get sharp original
    resolution images. The Bard Owl images I posted links too showed exactly
    this lack of sharpness at full resolution, shot in the early morning under
    full cover of foliage. IIRC the original crop was ~1900 tall and the image
    I posted was 1024 tall. This made a discernibly noticeable difference in
    the final result. I wish I'd bumped the iso as I got out of my truck, but
    didn't have the time/presence of mind.

    >I don't know what sharpening luminence channel means. Can it be done
    >with Elements?


    OK, thought I saw PS6 in the exif, wasn't thinking PSE6. I don't believe
    PSE can convert to CIE LAB space.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lab_color_space

    In NI you can separately choose Y/Cr/Cb components to sharpen as well, at
    lest in the paid version.
     
    , Jul 16, 2008
    #12
  13. M-M

    Paul Furman Guest

    wrote:
    > M-M wrote:
    >
    >> I don't know what sharpening luminence channel means. Can it be done
    >> with Elements?

    >
    > OK, thought I saw PS6 in the exif, wasn't thinking PSE6. I don't believe
    > PSE can convert to CIE LAB space.
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lab_color_space
    >
    > In NI you can separately choose Y/Cr/Cb components to sharpen as well, at
    > lest in the paid version.


    Try duplicating the layer then set that layers mode to luminance rather
    than normal (not sure if elements has that).

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jul 16, 2008
    #13
  14. M-M

    M-M Guest

    In article <bBrfk.17879$>,
    Paul Furman <> wrote:

    > Try duplicating the layer then set that layers mode to luminance rather
    > than normal (not sure if elements has that).



    I can set the blending mode of the layer to a whole list of things,
    "Luminosity" is one of them.

    Screenshot:

    http://www.netaxs.com/mhmyers/temp/layers.jpg

    What does that do?

    --
    m-m
     
    M-M, Jul 16, 2008
    #14
  15. M-M

    Paul Furman Guest

    M-M wrote:
    > In article <bBrfk.17879$>,
    > Paul Furman <> wrote:
    >
    >> Try duplicating the layer then set that layers mode to luminance rather
    >> than normal (not sure if elements has that).

    >
    >
    > I can set the blending mode of the layer to a whole list of things,
    > "Luminosity" is one of them.
    >
    > Screenshot:
    >
    > http://www.netaxs.com/mhmyers/temp/layers.jpg
    >
    > What does that do?


    Right, that's it. I don't know how much it matters for sharpening but
    try increasing contrast with curves and the saturation gets adjusted
    too, now set that adjustment layer to luminosity and the saturation is
    not effected.

    If elements doesn't have adjustment layers, just use a duplicate like
    you have done.

    --
    Paul Furman
    www.edgehill.net
    www.baynatives.com

    all google groups messages filtered due to spam
     
    Paul Furman, Jul 16, 2008
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. DVD Verdict
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,061
    DVD Verdict
    Mar 18, 2005
  2. M-M
    Replies:
    51
    Views:
    4,577
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
    Apr 14, 2007
  3. M-M

    Twelve 1500mm Fieldscope Images

    M-M, Apr 13, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    312
  4. M-M

    Good looking Cardinal at 1000mm (1500mm equiv)

    M-M, May 21, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    13
    Views:
    510
  5. M-M

    Bluejay @ 1500mm

    M-M, Jul 3, 2010, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    305
    Robert Spanjaard
    Jul 4, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page