Three Pairs Resting and Repost

Image Critiques Avian Critiques
1

Three Pairs Resting
Three Pairs Resting2048Ă—2048 477 KB

The trumpeter swans are starting their migration back North. During migration, it quite a treat to see them all gathered together. Eventually each pair will return to their own lake to mate. I have a nesting location that I can safely photograph and am hoping to visit it this year. This is along the Mississippi River in Bemidji, MN. I was quite surprised to see so many returning since our lakes are still very frozen.

Type of Critique Requested

  • Aesthetic: Feedback on the overall visual appeal of the image, including its color, lighting, cropping, and composition.
  • Conceptual: Feedback on the message and story conveyed by the image.
  • Emotional: Feedback on the emotional impact and artistic value of the image.
  • Technical: Feedback on the technical aspects of the image, such as exposure, color, focus and reproduction of colors and details, post-processing, and print quality.

Specific Feedback and Self-Critique

I was drawn to the curve that was created as each pair spaced themselves on the edge of the lake and the texture and blue tones of the ice. I am pleased with how I was able to capture these elements. I was using a fairly new lens and it was super windy. I am pleased with the performance and crispness of the images. I wish I had captured the full shadow of the front pair swans. Did I leave it too blue? How is the balance of lights and darks? Open to all critique.

Technical Details

ISO 3200 500mm f/29 1/2500 sec

I edited mostly in LightRoom with a few edits in Photoshop.

_MG_3472
_MG_34722048Ă—2048 675 KB

Considering editing this image with the same composition shot at 400mm. This will provide the space at the top and left that was suggested. This is straight out of camera other than a square crop and healing to remove poop. Are they crisp enough to pursue for the color adjustments already suggested or are they too soft/too much distortion?

1 Like
2

Hi Ann,

This is a really good composition IMHO.
The pairing is great and the way the three pair form the curve from the LRC up and around to the top middle was really well done.

I think the amount of FG is just right.
It might benefit from a little more at the top but I’m not convinced that it really would.

The cutoff shadow on the right doesn’t bother me, if you hadn’t mentioned it, I may not have noticed.

As for the blue, it does seem too blue but mainly only on the top of the swans, there should be blue reflecting on the underside but not the top.
It is slight, and can easily be adjusted using the color balance mask in Ps, just add some yellow and red but the leave the magenta/green alone. Add equal amounts of red and yellow.
In my opinion, this works better in this case than adding warmth and tint using the white balance tool in Lr since the tint tool in Lr is more magenta than red.

Other than the swans being captured wonderfully, and nice and sharp, the lights and darks of the ice show that it’s nearing the big thaw, but not there yet :slight_smile:

Thanks for the story behind their migration and I look forward to seeing more of them when it’s time :slight_smile:
Very nice!

1 Like
3

Great composition. I like how the eye follows the swans from bottom to top in a nice curve. For me it seems a bit tight in the frame and I could see adding some canvas above and to the left. You might play around with the color balance and see what you like. For me there’s a bit too much cyan. Excellent capture. Look forward to your nesting shots.

1 Like
4

A unique find, for sure! I’d be more comfortable with more room on all sides, though. The image wants to convey relaxation, and tight framing conveys tension.

The color feels too forced, to me – which is also not relaxed. I think you might have a good result going back to the raw file and balancing the Temp and Tint sliders. Don’t think of Tint as favoring magenta over red. Normally we think of colors with the RGB model, but in LR (and I assume virtually all other raw editors) you are working in the LAB color space. You have complete ability to adjust colors with the Blue-Yellow Temp and Magenta-Green Tint sliders. (The names Temp and Tint feel almost as arbitrary as the different flavors of quarks in particle physics.)

A calibrated monitor is invaluable for seeing colors accurately.

I don’t know what camera you have, but at f/29, even for a full-frame sensor, you will be getting some softening from diffraction, in addition to needing a higher ISO. I think it would be pleasing to have sharp focus on the near group and let the others soften a bit, or shoot a focus stack.

2 Likes
5

@Diane_Miller : Thanks for all the feedback. There’s a lot to take in. I like the idea to keep the image relaxed…I’ll keep that in mind as I make my adjustments.

My monitor is calibrated with the Spyder Utility.

The original scene was very blue, so I do plan on leaving it blue. I do think it is too blue and will continue to play with my image…going back to the CRAW file for adjustments.

I’ve had no luck adjusting tint in LR – when I adjust the tint, this is when the color feels forced. I have more luck adjusting with temp, saturation, luminance, and rarely hue (in order of use). Is there a trick to using tint that doesn’t make it look horrible? I’ve been adjusting colors after fixing tones. Should I try adjusting color before tones?

Regarding your comment on using f/29. Are you saying there is diffraction in my image? Are you saying that the back swans are not sharp enough without focus stacking?

I don’t think high ISOs are a problem with modern cameras and at 3200 I definitely don’t think it is a problem. Have you had different experiences?

6

@allenbrooks : Thanks for the helpful remarks. To add space above in this image, I would have to fight with PS (we aren’t quite friends yet) to content fill above. I think I have some space on the left before my crop so that wouldn’t be a problem. Or, in your opinion, should I switch to the same composition at 400mm? That frame has more of the scene in the top of the frame. I’d lose the closeness to the swans. I have an almost straight out of camera image, but I can’t figure out how to post to this thread.

7

Hi Ann,

Here are a couple of screenshots showing what and where to click to edit your text or add an image to your original post/thread (at the top)

Edit Icon
Edit Icon809Ă—522 119 KB

Then go below the original image URL in the edit window, hit enter, then click on the Upload Icon at the top so you can select the image you want, then edit the title to include (+ Rework or similar) so others will know when you have added a reworked image.
Next, label the reworked image so others will know which version is which if it isn’t very obvious :slight_smile:

Adding Image Icon
Adding Image Icon745Ă—424 91.3 KB

I hope this helps and please feel free to ask for more guidance if needed.

We’ll help you get through the color adjustments, and adding canvas to images where there wasn’t any to begin with, if that’s what you want. :slight_smile:

1 Like
8

There is softness (lack of detail) in the whole image, and contrast feels pushed, which has pushed saturation. It’s difficult to evaluate a posted image but is probably a combination of diffraction softening and a less-than-optimal JPEG conversion. Diffraction softening is definitely an issue at smaller apertures. It is a smooth curve and how much it is a problem depends of the detail you want to hold in the subject. A general rule of thumb is that it will be noticeable above about f/16 with a full-frame sensor. The smaller the sensor, the worse the problem. The equivalent with a micro 4/3 sensor would be about f/8, but of course you have more DOF with the smaller sensor. And of course some lenses are softer than others and it may not be that noticeable in the worse cases.

For me, above about ISO 1600 with a full-frame sensor is getting into the range where noise limits fine detail. (And noise will be made much more apparent if an image is underexposed and lightened in processing. But subjects with less fine detail will allow more leeway. It varies with the sensor size and lens, of course, and with things like shutter speed, tripod stability and lens stabilization. The new NR software is amazing but everything has limits.

My preference for this image would either be to go to a a wider aperture with lower ISO and get the near swans sharp and let the others naturally fall out of the DOF, or do a focus stack if you want them all sharp. There is less DOF with a telephoto lens and a subject at close range. Zooming out (with lens or feet) will give a little more DOF.

It appears contrast has been pushed too far, too. It would help to know more about the processing, and what profile you started with. Some are higher contrast than others. Save contrast bumps for PS. If it’s too high in the raw converter you can’t recover it in PS without tonal damage. Tonalities are poured in concrete when you convert from a raw file.

It is definitely possible to adjust Tint in LR without cooking an image. But it is a sensitive slider. Start with a low-contrast “honest” profile. Avoid Landscape like the plague. Tame contrast with Shadows and Highlights. Caution with any sort of contrast increase, including Saturation and Vibrance. Work in a dim room.

Accumulate experience. Compare a new image to others you have been pleased with – LR Collections are wonderful for that. The best advice is to walk away from an image and come back later.

9

Another thought – don’t think of Temp as Tint for adjusting colors. They are for setting an overall correct white balance, which is an important starting point to clean up color casts. The HSL / Color and Color Grading panels are for more specific color adjustments. Saturation and Vibrance are sort of intermediate but still primarily best used as global adjustments.

This is changing somewhat with newer selection methods in LR, but it’s well worth mastering what you can do globally.

10

@Merv - Thanks for showing me how to add the new image!

11

@Diane_Miller : thanks for walking me through your thoughts with your last 2 comments. Again, lots to digest. I am always lost on how to convert to JPEG unless the site gives me recommendations so I have no idea what is optimal. I posted a new image that’s practically out of camera. Should I even both editing it or is it too soft? Maybe I need to get my eyes checked…I was happy initially happy with the crispness. It does’t look underexposed, I used a tripod (but it was windy), and I had on the lens stabilization. I don’t use any presets…I push all the sliders myself. I do like increasing vibrance. I do use Temp to get my whites where I want them…its just that I see color change as a by product. PS is the very new for my post processing and I’m still trying to figure out what to do where and when…so all of this technical post processing wisdom is very helpful to me. I’m still afraid of that Tint slider. Thank you for jumping down the rabbit hole with me!

12

The OOC version has a much more pleasing crop, for my taste. Maybe take a little off the top. It looks somewhat soft and noisy. But it’s always worth editing an image. There is always something to learn. Only you can evaluate softness – at 100% (1:1) on the monitor. But what camera and lens? That matters for a discussion this detailed.

I’m not talking about presets. Every image comes in with a Profile – right above the WB section in LR. The LR default isn’t bad but in some difficult cases can be improved with other choices. Avoid contrasty ones with punchy colors. Find a pleasantly neutral one. Look at the dropdpwn choices for WB but often none will be good. In an very monochrome image like this, none will be “accurate”. Artiist’s choice there. No scene is really this blue without studio lights and gels. Try the WB eyedropper on a white area and adjust from there. Maybe it will work, maybe not. But it will often give a decent balance between Temp and Tint. Get it as good as you can then tweak colors from there as desired.

The histogram will tell you about the exposure. Overexpose as far as you can without blowing highlights (a tricky process) and bring it down in post. Increasing exposure in post will bring up noise.

On a tripod, if you are locked on and not just using it for support, you don’t want stabilization. At slower SSs the image will be “swimming” from the stabilization. Easy to find your limitations shooting a test target. But you had a high SS so not a problem with this image. Removing the lens hood can help minimize wind buffet.

LR does an amazing job of converting to JPEG. Just “Export” at the desired size. Here’s what I use for NPN. It’s that simple. Save it as a preset. It will give you an honest rendition of your image that can be enlarged enough for people to critique fine points if they wish. BTW, resolution is a legacy thing that doesn’t matter for a JPEG. All that matters is file size in pixels.

Screen Shot 2023-03-04 at 8.09.44 PM

13

Another thought: LR will try to render whatever WB the camera was set at, but it’s not cooked into the file. (It is with a JPEG, and it’s an on-the-fly JPEG you see on the back screen or through the viewfinder with a mirrorless body.) With a raw file, you can change WB as much as you want with no degradation.

The way it comes in when you first see it in LR isn’t the way it was. It’s the way LR or any raw converter is interpreting it. It may or may not be true to the scene.

1 Like
14

Hi Ann,

I hope you’re having a good day :slight_smile:

I hope I’m not adding to the confusion by providing an example edit based on the second version you uploaded (Thanks for uploading that one BTW).

I won’t go into the fine details on exactly what I did unless the example edit is appealing to you in terms of color, sharpness, tones, etc. but if you are interested in how I did it, I would be happy to explain it in more detail as well as share the PSD file from Ps and ACR (ACR stands for Adobe Camera Raw and is practically the same as Lr but with less fine tuning features in general).
I won’t delete the PSD file or the image until I know this discussion has concluded.
The second version didn’t have any baked in tones or contrast that couldn’t be pulled out, so that made it possible to get it where I have it in the example. The RAW version would do even better in my opinion.
Just curious, are you shooting in RAW + jpeg?

I noticed from the file information associated with the image that you’re using a Cannon 90D with an APS-C Sensor and a Tamron 150-600, f5-6.3 lens, IMHO, that lens is a good one from the reviews I read, and yes, there is a slight amount of diffraction at f29 but many times with scenes like this it isn’t a huge issue. Images of things like buildings with distinct lines and edges is where that issue gets bigger and unmanageable IMHO.
Most of the softness in this image was from ISO noise and ISO noise can become more pronounced with an APS-C sensor but the good news is that most Denoise software can help to a degree.
I used Topaz Photo AI to reduce the noise in this one and the software saw the ice crystals as noise as well so it smoothed that part out too. I let Topaz smooth out the ice crystals as well but I masked that part out in Ps, so in the end, the only parts treated with Denoise were the swans.

Do you have software for reducing ISO noise?
If not, there are some good programs available at reasonable prices so you might consider adding that to the already confusing stack of bells and whistles, it is necessary in cases like this because the clarity and sharpness might be hidden and cause frustration in the end.
Reducing the noise in this image was the only way I could reveal the details in the swans.

In basic terms, I took the image into ACR to globally adjust the color temperature and tint until the feathers on the swans were white (In this case the final adjustment was Red 240, Green 240 and Blue 240. BTW, that is my personal method for white balance correction if there is white in the scene).
Then I masked all the ice and water (without the swans) (in ACR) and changed the color temperature to somewhat match the color of the ice in your original posted image.
(I remember you stating that you don’t care for gray :slight_smile: )
I also adjusted the orange and yellow in the HSL panel to bring out the brownish color on their heads.
I even added a little blue cast to the underside of the swans to add continuity there.
I did use a very small amount of texture and clarity globally (again, in ACR).
Sharpening the ice crystals IMHO wouldn’t help, I felt that sharpening there would detract from the attention on the swans.

I felt that cropping in some on the left and top was needed, but just enough to emphasize that nice curve from the LRC around to the top center of the frame (the curve created by the three pair of swans).

This is just my personal opinion and it isn’t meant to be anything else, I think the technical method you used for getting the shot was good, even your choice of aperture opening, I can tell that the focus is falling off pretty fast just beyond the farthest swan and I personally prefer the FG to be as in focus as you have it here (And I am a hardened one shot image kind of guy at the moment).
This image displays what some call “Reasonable Sharpness” and I think it looks good.
That said, if you really want the swans to be tack sharp, you would need to use something like f16 to f22 and focus stack.
Lr and Ps is where things started falling apart so to speak but as long as you have the original RAW file, it can be reversed, and as I mentioned, working from the RAW file would likely produce much better results than what I show here.

And, I may be totally off base by correcting the color of the swans, It was never really clear to me if you intended it to have a monochrome look, either way, you can still have it monochrome but keep it nice and sharp in terms of clarity, contrast, saturation and luminance.

You could even use a gradient from light to darker (from left to right), add a little orange/yellow on the swans for a low evening or morning sun affect if you want, lots of possibilities in this image :slight_smile:

As I mentioned, I hope I didn’t just add to the confusion by doing this but I felt that it might be a good idea to show what the possibilities were with this image and to show that I think you’re you’re on the right track with the shooting part.

Final notes: I personally really like that the water is shown in the URC, I like the transition between near solid ice in the LLC to the somewhat melted ice under the swans and then onto the melted ice (Really cold water :slight_smile: ) And for what it’s worth, I prefer blue ice to gray ice as well :slight_smile:

Edited Version (below)

Ann Gorman - Color-Denoise-Clarity - Edit
Ann Gorman - Color-Denoise-Clarity - Edit1874Ă—1982 1.42 MB

Your Original Version (below)

_MG_3470-Edit
_MG_3470-Edit2048Ă—2048 477 KB

1 Like
15

@Diane_Miller : more helpful advice!

The second image I loaded is just that, a second image at a different focal length that I reconsidered because of the comments wanting more space on top.

I’m using a Canon EOS 90D, Tamron SP 150-600mm F/5-6.3 Di VC USD AO11E.

Oh, I see the profile now. I’m using the Adobe Color. I never even considered changing this. This made me think about a setting option I have in camera…“image effects” to determine the picture style with different presets for sharpness, contrast, saturation, and color tone. I currently have “Fine Details” selected. Under Sharpness: Strength of 4 of 7, Fineness of 1 of 5, Threshold of 1 of 5; the others are zero. Any recs on these settings? There’s 7 options plus auto and option to create my own. My in camera white balance was set for cloudy, around 6000KB but it was imported to LR at 3350. I also saw your comment on WB and LR. I didn’t know LR did its own thing on import. This must be where the blue came into play. Why does it change it so drastically? I had no idea there were so many choices under the white balance menu! I will definitely pay attn here before color adjustments from now on!

Regarding overexposure…do you mean push the histogram to the right while shooting? I often do this for snowy scenes…are you saying to do it more often than not?

I’ll need to experiment with the stabilization options…not sure I now what “swimming” looks like.

I guess the thing that confuses me about JPEG is why there’s so many things you can adjust in the first place…I had mine preset to long edge 2048, 72 PPI, Quality 60, Screen, Standard. I know part of that was specs from another site, but not sure where the Quality 60 came from. I do want to move towards printing. so what do you use if you’re printing?

16

@Merv : great info and your not confusing me any more than I was to begin with! This entire thread has been very helpful for me. I wanted to know how to take my images to the next level and the my previous communities just weren’t offering any of this to me. I’ve only been using LR denoise slider. I hear TOPAZ AI denoise mentioned the most often. If I decide to purchase, would you recommend any other TOPAZ software? Is it a one time purchase or annual fee?

I shoot in CRAW, no JPEG. I don’t see the point in having 2 image files when I download to LR and on the memory card so I stopped having the camera save the JPEG while shooting. My understanding is that CRAW is canon’s smaller RAW file that doesn’t impact post processing. I do have the option of changing it to RAW if it does matter for post processing.

Thanks for all of your time and comments! They’ve been super helpful.
Ann

17

Ann, it’s wonderful you’re getting information here that you weren’t finding other places! There is lots to cover here, so a few more clarifications, in no spacial order.

First, let’s put printing aside until you’ve mastered shooting and processing a good image. It’s another large chapter. It would be based on the same good image you want for your master image and then for the derivative JPEGs for online use.

There are remarkable denoise tools these days. I prefer Topaz but others are also good. I imagine all have 30 day trials. Avoid low-end do-it-all “solutions” as they have compromises. The most important part is learning how to use whatever tool you decide on. Always evaluate at 100% (1:1) where 1 pixel on the monitor = 1 pixel in the image. Sharpening is much more problematic than denoise at this point. Do it in camera with proper technique – stay in the aperture sweet spot for your lens and keep the ISO low. Use a good tripod and use it correctly.

A great way to see the IS “swimming” (and to shock yourself about how fragile your tripod support is) is to focus on a moon (in daylight is OK) and go to live view. Turn on IS and let tripod shake settle down. Without touching the camera watch the moon swim around slightly. Then turn IS off and compare. You can see it would only be a problem at short SSs.

A lot of the settings you mention above only relate to shooting in JPEG. Check your manual. Some will affect the on-the-fly JPEG you see on the back screen. I like to choose neutral-ish ones – main consideration is to have the most reliable blinkies for overexposure warnings.

WB changes so drastically because light has a big range from cool to warm. FWIW I always leave mine on daylight and just set what I want in LR. Both the in-camera and the LR settings are basically a sledge hammer.

Overexposure: when shooting, expose as far to the right as you can without blowing out highlights and bring it down in LR. That’s because increasing exposure in LR (or any raw converter) brings up noise that’s inherently there.

1 Like
18

Hi Ann,

Sorry for the late response.

I bought the Topaz Photo AI “All in one” version over the holiday season because they had a special holiday price, but I didn’t fully realize how ineffective that software was until it was too late (or at least I thought it was too late).
The noise reduction edit I did on your image was done with that software but shortly after that I wrote to Topaz asking if I could trade the Photo AI package for their Denoise AI and Sharpen AI and to my surprise, within two or three hours I got a message stating that they traded with me, no questions asked. :slight_smile:
I’ve used the new individual Topaz programs a few times on some difficult images and I have to say that I’m very pleased with the switch, I have much more control over the results.
There are others like DxO PureRAW2 that some swear by but I’ve never tried it.
I was out of editing photography for a few years so I’ve just recently started learning about all the new stuff available. I never stopped shooting though.
Topaz is purchased rather than a subscription and and they have free software updates from time to time so that’s a plus in my book.

No problem with not having the jpeg files if you always download through Lr.
The only reason I save a jpeg copy is so I can review them on my laptop while away from home on a trip, my laptop isn’t set up with Lr and it isn’t that powerful so viewing images in jpeg is pretty quick and easy for me in that case, otherwise I wouldn’t save a jpeg copy either.

The cRAW version with the Canon 90D is 20MB while the RAW version is 35MB, the image is the same pixel size with both versions so that means that cRAW is compressed somewhat. (the “c” in cRAW stands for compressed).
And, the uncompressed version allows for more cropping options when needed, I realize you are a deliberate shooter, meaning you prefer not to crop but it’s good to have that option left open IMHO.
Personally, I always use the uncompressed version because the details are better. With your 90D, you can store 850 images on a 32GB card so if you’re close to home in most cases or have a 64GB card or two or three 32GB cards, that’s a bunch of images in my pinion and the RAW uncompressed version is always worth the space. And, reliable storage is really cheap these days.

Mine is much worse in those terms, most of my RAW uncompressed files are usually between 115MB and 130MB per image, I can only fit about 370 images (+jpegs) on a 64GB card but my camera has two card slots for a total of 128GB. Yeah, it takes a while to download my images.

Just thought I’d expand on a point here, The WB setting for “cloudy, twilight and sunset” on the 90D is 6000K but if Lr imported it as 3350, I’d have to say that the camera wasn’t actually set for cloudy, maybe it was just an oversight or it could be that something is not working properly with the camera?
The setting on the 90D for tungsten is 3200K so I’m not sure where 3350K come from unless there was an offset for WB correction set somewhere along the way?
It makes sense that your image turned out blue if the camera was actually set at 3350K, that would definitely make the image blue looking overall when the image was captured in roughly 6000K light.

Here’s a good video explaining in a visual way what different Kelvin temperatures look like and how various settings effect an image in different lighting scenarios.
Kelvin Temperatures and Example Settings with Varying Results (Link)

Personally, I always shoot with the WB in auto, the camera adjusts for a neutral color, (neutral between blue and yellow).
When I’m in a certain lighting condition I always take a shot of a white card at the start of the shoot, then use that to set the white balance in Lr for all images shot in the same lighting scenario. If the lighting conditions change much, I take another shot of the white card, again, just for reference in Lr.
Here’s another good video, this one shows how to use the white card for setting WB in Lr., he shows it in a studio scenario but it’s the same for outdoors.
Using White Card for Adjusting WB in Lr (Link)

I done some more research on the Tamron SP 150-600 lens you have and most are saying to use Mode 3 for general purpose image stabilization. (VC Mode 3)
I could go into a bunch of details on lens stabilization but the best advise is to recommend taking a few fairly close up shots of something detailed and stationary (in auto focus while on a tripod) just to see if the lens needs to be calibrated or not and you may have already calibrated it.

Tamron lenses on DSLR cameras are the ones that may need some calibration but if the lens software is up to date, the calibration should be good as is.

I hope this helps, Ann!:slight_smile:

Have a great evening :slight_smile: