Pallas's Grasshopper Warbler, Locustella certhiola

Jakoetsk, Siberia, Russia 2019. A skulker during autumn migration, but much easier to see in the breeding season.
Bought myself Photoshop and Topaz Denoise, so hopefully this will improve the quality from what I show on this forum.

Well, this is terrible. There is no doubt about it. I have some work to do, bloody.

This should be much better.

A beautiful calling pose with SH right where it needs to be. Wish it was a tad brighter and the large stalk right in front of this beauty wasn't there. TFS

David Roach said:

A beautiful calling pose with SH right where it needs to be. Wish it was a tad brighter and the large stalk right in front of this beauty wasn't there. TFS

Click to expand...

You know, it's nature. This plant is what it is and for me it is not disturbing. A bird in it's natural habitat. To many "clean" images makes it less interesting, I'll like the diversity in photographs.
Agreed about a little bit brighter, but only a tiny bit.

Nice calling pose, repost better. Wish the bird were parallel to the focal plane but you can't always get what you want.You didn't indicate SS or Aperture, so it's hard to tell if there is motion blur or DOF issue. Good to see a new species in its habitat; but some habitats can be more distracting than others.

Bill Dix said:

Nice calling pose, repost better. Wish the bird were parallel to the focal plane but you can't always get what you want.You didn't indicate SS or Aperture, so it's hard to tell if there is motion blur or DOF issue. Good to see a new species in its habitat; but some habitats can be more distracting than others.

Click to expand...

Hello Bill, you can't have it all indeed, the bird was refusing to sit paralell. The original is tacksharp, even without sharpening. Aperture 5.6. Can be bigger, but most of the time it create's a more disturbing background is my opinion. I would like to see a more crispy image back after uploading, but maybe I'am expecting to much??
Of course there are limitations to size and KB's.

Hi Jan, can you also add in:

What camera, lens, SS, Aperture and ISO, HH or tripod ie EXIF data, if food, water, audio etc was used to attract the subject, adding or removed elements for composition, just helps folk build their feedback.

Hi Jan ... nice calling pose and I do actually not mind the clutter background , agree with you that we cannot have everything sometimes . But disagree that a cleaner image is less interesting ... but no problem if you like it that way .

Both postings are looking technically speaking not very good . Not sharp , no fine details visible and look partly hammered with NR .... greetings from Topaz :w3. Not knowing how good this plugin is ... at least you used it too heavy . Just my take .

It would be good , for a better understanding , if you could add your equipment used and the shooting techs . Just check what all other folks provide ...

TFS Andreas

Third attempt.
Camera 1DX, 500mm with 1.4 extender. Speed 1/400, aperture 5.6. ISO 1250, Tripod of course (Gitzo and Sachtler), I'am not that big and strong:S3:. This plant was it's singing post, very fanatic. Topaz Denoise, pretty low value (can recommend it)
Getting somewhere hopefully with this attempt. Thanks for the help.

Ahhh, now we can see it is clearly sharp right where it needs to be and your choice of aperture looks spot on. The BG is sufficiently soft and beautiful. Even the stalk I was mentioning is mitigated slightly by your aperture choice. Still wish it wasn't there as it crowds your singing beauty. I love this frame overall and you controlled what you could perfectly. TFS

Andreas Liedmann said:

Hi Jan ... nice calling pose and I do actually not mind the clutter background , agree with you that we cannot have everything sometimes . But disagree that a cleaner image is less interesting ... but no problem if you like it that way .

Both postings are looking technically speaking not very good . Not sharp , no fine details visible and look partly hammered with NR .... greetings from Topaz :w3. Not knowing how good this plugin is ... at least you used it too heavy . Just my take .

It would be good , for a better understanding , if you could add your equipment used and the shooting techs . Just check what all other folks provide ...



TFS Andreas

Click to expand...

Hi Andreas, placed a third image. Think were getting somewhere. Also, I do have what I call "nude" images of birds as well. But I'am often trying to get some surroundings in the image to, although it makes it a bit more difficult not to disturb the whole image with that. It's a matter of taste I think.
The way the backgrounds looks is in the original itself and has more to do with the aperture used. Denoising was at a very low level, brought it down manually. But I can recommend Topaz. Thanks.

Hi Jan ... looks a bit better . But I do not see what David is seeing in terms of sharpness and even more finer detail , what you have in your image is sharpness that is looking somehow coarse . Not fine . But just my take . Just take one of Steve Kaluski´s images posted ... and display them side by side in Photoshop elements , then judge yourself :w3.

Thanks for the recommendation of Topaz Denoise ... again your call ... I use Neat Image , longer and well maintained piece of software on the market . The company has only this piece of software .... not like Topaz Labs with all the junk they have . But as long as you are happy .... again your call .

As I have the 1DX as well .... I do not even use NR at that low Iso , if shot with the right exposure ( ETTR ) . Your shutter speed is borderline ... as your tripod will not really help , I assume this little critter will move a lot and does not stand still . But again your call ....

I am fine with your thinking about the BG .... but know how the majority of folks is thinking here .

Cheers Andreas

Hi Andreas, from my understanding is, if Jan is using Topaz DN (AI) Auto applies both NR & additional sharpening based on what it sees. You can 'tailor' the amounts, but I guess folk just leave it to Auto and so you are allowing the software to take charge rather than the author being in charge!!!!

I would ask Jan to fwd the Raw, then you can see to a degree the camera set-up too, but what he has capture ie how sharp & the exposure, then, as we do in Wildlife advise with a better understanding and so Jan can improve both capture & how much he needs to address in his web set up.

now we can see it is clearly sharp right where it needs to be and your choice of aperture looks spot on. The BG is sufficiently soft and beautiful.

Click to expand...

That is down to f/stop & the compression the 500mm delivers David.

Hi Steve ... at this stage it is just simply " fishing in grey waters " for the viewer , as you have an image and some minor additional info about software used . You know that yourself .... and you are right about the raw for a first look how good the base image is . But even if send you my raw .... you can only judge on my output , you do not know what I am doing on the way , so again " fishing in grey waters " . Without seeing the detailed WF ... very difficult to find " eventual errors" in the process IMHO . Just guess work .

Steve Kaluski said:

Hi Andreas, from my understanding is, if Jan is using Topaz DN (AI) Auto applies both NR & additional sharpening based on what it sees. You can 'tailor' the amounts, but I guess folk just leave it to Auto and so you are allowing the software to take charge rather than the author being in charge!!!!

I would ask Jan to fwd the Raw, then you can see to a degree the camera set-up too, but what he has capture ie how sharp & the exposure, then, as we do in Wildlife advise with a better understanding and so Jan can improve both capture & how much he needs to address in his web set up.


That is down to f/stop & the compression the 500mm delivers David.

Click to expand...

Hi Steve, I am confused as to why you repeated my exact point. Is f/stop not aperture. To be clear, my point was the face looks sharp to me and the "spot on aperture choice" made the BG sufficiently soft and helped a little with that FG stalk. The crown, the eye and those chin feathers all look sharp to me. I would love further explanation on the sharpness in those areas and how it could be better. Perhaps I am to used to the poorer resolving power of my old glass.

For me, the first base is review the Raw as it can tell a lot:

How is the camera set up, as often some of the basic issues seen here on BPN have been the camera's configuration.
The techs, SS, f-stop ISO...
How well is the image exposed, and ultimately, is it 'Critically' sharp, prior to any input/output sharpening. As we know, you can make a 1600px image look stunning, but when you see the original...
How much is the image cropped by

Then if need be questions can be asked to the Workflow as you 'drill down' to find and address the issues if required.

I like the calling pose, but I agree the image is too cluttered, I wish the rest of the bird was in focus, he is not parallel to the back of the camera

TFS

David, my reply is to Andreas's reply.

Steve Kaluski said:

David, my reply is to Andreas's reply.

Click to expand...

My bad, I saw my response quoted and thought you were talking to me. At any rate, I would still love to know your take on the sharpness in the face area.