More Anna (+revised)

[Lon_Overacker]

Original Version

Revised Version

Unedited RAW (latest)

What changed: Posting just to show the starting point; unprocessed RAW, except to size for the web. Pretty much had to reverse the luminosity of the hummer vs. the bg.

Added after receiving feedback from the community.

---

Critique Style: Standard

The photographer is looking for thoughtful feedback on the image as a whole, especially around the areas noted below.

Feedback Focus: Artistic + Technical

About This Image

More images of Anna’s until morale improves… (loose take on a popular meme…)

Or as they say, “practice makes perfect.” Well, no perfection in my case, but I’m happy to continue the improvements - not only in processing, but also capturing. It’s one thing to get locked on a feeder, wait and click the shutter… it’s yet another thing to try and follow them around plants as they go flower to flower. The 3D Focus tracking for birds between the Z8 and the Tamron has been nothing short of amazing.

Feedback Requested

As always any and all feedback and suggestions are welcome.

Specifically, I’m posting these two for a reason. The first image, the bill is not sharp, but the head, gorget and body are pretty good. In the second image, the head AND bill are sharp. So what is more important, having everything sharp? Or how much do you consider the environment and the background? In the first, I like the bird in front of the highlighted bokeh and hovering over the flowers. There’s almost a symbolic look to this (of what I don’t know.) The second one, while a better image of actually interacting with the flower, but more chaotic from the OOF flowers, even in front of the body.

I guess they each have their own pros and cons. What say you? Do you have a preference as to what makes one more successful than the other?

Thank You!

Technical Details

Image 1
Camera: NIKON Z 8
Lens: TAMRON 150-500mm F/5-6.7 Di III VC VXD A057Z
Focal length: 490mm
Shutter speed: 1/4000s
Aperture: f/8
ISO: 9000

Image 2
Camera: NIKON Z 8
Focal length: 500mm
Shutter speed: 1/3200s
Aperture: f/7.1
ISO: 16000

Major adjustments: Just like the recent image of the Hermit Thrush posted by @Jim_Zablotny , the RAW file of the first image had a very bright bg and the hummer was pretty dark. Using the masking feature in ACR I pulled up the luminosity (and other adjusments in the bird), while creating a 2nd mask for the bg and darkened it. I was amazed the difference.

[Don_Peters]

Lon, these are terrific.

The bill in the first one looks sharp to me, even when I zoom in. In any event, to me sharpness doesn’t matter as much as the overall impact of the entire image, which is good in both cases here. I can’t say I have a preference. They’re different but I don’t see one as better.

[Huw_Thomas]

For me the light is wonderful in the first, although the Bokeh maybe a little strong.

The second one is just gorgeous - really dont mind the colour over the bird which itself is pin sharp

Amazing and stunning shot
Huw

[system]

The original poster added a revised version of their image.

[Mark_Seaver]

Lon, as always, it’s about the story that you’re trying to tell with the photo. Both look very good as they tell very different stories. Yes, the clarity of the head, eye, wing positions, beak and flower are better than #1, but #1 shows the bird incoming, a much more challenging capture. I’m intrigued by the flower that appears to be showing through the wing in #2… I assume those flowers were in front, although the clarity of that lower flower through the bloom (and the wing edges) suggests otherwise… A fun dilemma.

[Diane_Miller]

I LOVE BOTH!!! Wonderful processing on the first, and if you’re into microsurgery you could sharpen the beak with a tiny clone brush in PS. I would also soften the bokeh a little – maybe do a blurred layer and mask it?
And the second – wow!! I love the shoot-through with the splash of color on the bird. Maybe a little more saturation on the BG??

So tell us – now that you’ve mastered ICM and Backyard Birds, what are you going to do for mental exercise?

[Kris_Smith (Kristen M Smith)]

Regarding Revision 1:

Oh yeah - chasing these guys around even in a small space is a challenge and one you’ve done really well with getting these two images. Having everything sharp on a hummingbird is next to impossible, so I don’t consider it a failing when something is blurred slightly, just as long as it isn’t the head. My set up is similar in that there is often bright light on the trees in the backyard and not much on the birds. Using appropriate masking does the trick as you see with these. What I often do is overexpose which is basically exposing for the birds themselves. Annas look as if they are darker on the belly than Ruby-throats, so you might not have to change exposure as much as I do. Then it’s almost spray and pray with these guys. Wing position, head angle, sharpness and other quirky things make a winner - like the slightly undulating line of the back and tail in the profile pic. I like the OOF flowers in front there because it helps give some depth. Terrific job with capture and processing.

[Allen_Brooks]

Regarding Revision 1:

The second one is my favorite, Lon. There’s a sense of being close to the hummer and the pose is great with good detail and I like the feeding behavior. I also find the background more pleasing than the first one. Keep them coming.

[Peter_Morrissey (Peter J. Morrissey)]

Hi LOn

Of the two photographs, I prefer the second because the flower, beak, eye, and wing draw my eye to the center of the photograph.
Peter

[Dennis_Plank]

Another vote for number 2, Lon. There’s a lot more implied action and the backlit wing is just awesome. Number 1 is pretty good and the bill going slightly out of focus doesn’t bother me. Hummingbird bills are so small and the beaks so long that when shot from a reasonable distance unless it’s pretty much side-on the tip of the beak won’t be sharp and that’s really all there is to it.

I also think the first one is still suffering a bit from the inherent lack of dynamic range in underexposed images or areas. When you try to expand that the software can’t keep the gradients nice and smooth and it never does look quite right.