Last of the Lazuli

[Brian Sump]

• Brian Sump Photography
• Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.3.1 (Macintosh)

This is the last of the Lazuli Buntings I processed from the summer.

That said, I just wanted to say thank you to those who have shared processing tips through the years (Dan, Steve and others) and especially Andreas. My friend, you have gone so far above and beyond to share ways to improve and I am forever thankful :5

R6
840mm
Handheld
ISO 2500
1/2000
f5.6

LR and PS. Chose to leave the Mullein plant leaning as it was in the field. Also, the light blue on the top of the beak is native.

 

[Jonathan Ashton]

I think it is a great shot Brian! I have some reservation over the appearance of the image, the seed head looks fine but the bird looks to me to be a tad overhsarpened - slightly refractile - perhaps this a a perception due to the contrast with the background (??)

 

[Brian Sump]

Hey Jon, yeah maybe the background could have something to do with it. I could probably pull back sharpening just a touch preferentially.

 

[Brian Sump]

Here's a better version. Got a little carried away perhaps for FB or something...

• Brian Sump Photography
• Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.3.1 (Macintosh)

 

[Jonathan Ashton]

Brian, I prefer pane#4

 

[Steve Kaluski]

Hi Brian, I like the simplicity of the capture, but I'm with Jon, the OP & RP booth look a bit hammered and yes... the Blacks/Contrast I can't help but feel are just dominating the scene. Highlighted for me by the bottom LHC, once you start to back things off that corner reduces slightly, best addressed IMHO for a more uniform backdrop. You haven't added a vignette too???

Going to f/8 perhaps may have been better, why f/5.6, and that my gut feeling is that the sharpening aspect is partly to obtain more detail, but compounded by any stronger amounts of the following: Curves, Contrast, Clarity, Levels, as these are all forms of Contrast sharpening, just my take/hunch as I'm basing things on the postings.

Brian, if you are Exporting from Lr, just check that there is no sharpening being applied ie no check box is ticked.

TFS
Steve

 

[Brian Sump]

Hi Brian, I like the simplicity of the capture, but I'm with Jon, the OP & RP booth look a bit hammered and yes... the Blacks/Contrast I can't help but feel are just dominating the scene. Highlighted for me by the bottom LHC, once you start to back things off that corner reduces slightly, best addressed IMHO for a more uniform backdrop. You haven't added a vignette too???

Going to f/8 perhaps may have been better, why f/5.6, and that my gut feeling is that the sharpening aspect is partly to obtain more detail, but compounded by any stronger amounts of the following: Curves, Contrast, Clarity, Levels, as these are all forms of Contrast sharpening, just my take/hunch as I'm basing things on the postings.

Brian, if you are Exporting from Lr, just check that there is no sharpening being applied ie no check box is ticked.

TFS
Steve

Steve, not sure what your critique is exactly. The LLC is too dark for you and...?

Perhaps you can give some more specificity as to what you mean about blacks dominating or whatever you're seeing.

Yes, I often will use gradients to darken certain parts of the image, as you and many others do. People seem not to like a stark and smooth backdrop these days anyway. The LLC specifically was a darker portion of the image but it's not distracting or too black to me - are you saying it distracts you from the subject?

The entire subject and perch are in plane so why go f8? The sun was a bit in and out and when it pops I usually dial up SS or dial down ISO but rarely spin the aperture dial unless I want more dof.

Steve, my workflow is very complicated. You and Dan seem to always say "keep it simple or you're doing too much" yet for me, building up depth and nice tones starting with a linear file is not super straightforward as waving a magic wand (all due respect). It's something Andreas was sharing some good thoughts with me about recently, which I'm very grateful for. For certain though, I can absolutely tell you I don't just sit here and crank up the clarity and contrast sliders, I know better than that

Sharpening wise, I had two layers of USP at .3 and didn't really need the second one for BPN, simple as that.

 

[Steve Kaluski]

Brian. my points are very much along Jons original points. As I said, I'm having to second guess with my thoughts here, not knowing your workflow etc.

Steve, not sure what your critique is exactly. The LLC is too dark for you and...?

It has a slight 'texture' to it like noise but its not and if you have darkened it then I might just go with Exp nothing more, or personally leave it off, I don't think it adds.

Perhaps you can give some more specificity as to what you mean about blacks dominating or whatever you're seeing.

What I'm seeing Brian is a 'contrasty' image with no real fine detail either in the primary or chest plumage and if the sun was out then it may impact creating stronger darks????????

Yes, I often will use gradients to darken certain parts of the image, as you and many others do. People seem not to like a stark and smooth backdrop these days anyway. The LLC specifically was a darker portion of the image but it's not distracting or too black to me - are you saying it distracts you from the subject?

Great if you are and also applying where the masks can either added or subtracted from areas too, good that you are. Plain backdrops can look a bit two dimensional I feel in a single colour, and often where DN had been applied it can look, as Artie would say, a bit plastic. Its nice occasionally to see a small amount of granular in a background as it gives authenticity and if ever print I would be very surprise if you ever saw it in the print.

The entire subject and perch are in plane so why go f8? The sun was a bit in and out and when it pops I usually dial up SS or dial down ISO but rarely spin the aperture dial unless I want more dof.

Yes, both are on the same plane of focus, but how far were you to the subject. I'm just asking and making a suggestion nothing more Brian, but you could leave the F-stop & SS at a fixed amount ie f/5.6 and SS 1/2000 and dial the ISO up or down according to the Histogram in the EVF????

Steve, my workflow is very complicated. You and Dan seem to always say "keep it simple or you're doing too much" yet for me, building up depth and nice tones starting with a linear file is not super straightforward as waving a magic wand (all due respect). It's something Andreas was sharing some good thoughts with me about recently, which I'm very grateful for. For certain though, I can absolutely tell you I don't just sit here and crank up the clarity and contrast sliders, I know better than that

Brian whatever works for you, its just something in that WF I just can't pinpoint and its frustrating because you get some awesome captures, with great kit, but there is something IMHO....

Sharpening wise, I had two layers of USP at .3 and didn't really need the second one for BPN, simple as that.

Fine, I just wondered if you Exported from Lr and you had any Output sharpening applied in the Output, then used Ps to sharpen that might be compounding things?????

Brian, they are just thoughts that's all.

 

[dankearl]

Checked in after a long while.

This is a Top notch photo of a species that is hard to get.
Congrats Brian.

 

[Brian Sump]

Brian. my points are very much along Jons original points. As I said, I'm having to second guess with my thoughts here, not knowing your workflow etc.


It has a slight 'texture' to it like noise but its not and if you have darkened it then I might just go with Exp nothing more, or personally leave it off, I don't think it adds.


What I'm seeing Brian is a 'contrasty' image with no real fine detail either in the primary or chest plumage and if the sun was out then it may impact creating stronger darks????????


Great if you are and also applying where the masks can either added or subtracted from areas too, good that you are. Plain backdrops can look a bit two dimensional I feel in a single colour, and often where DN had been applied it can look, as Artie would say, a bit plastic. Its nice occasionally to see a small amount of granular in a background as it gives authenticity and if ever print I would be very surprise if you ever saw it in the print.

Yes, both are on the same plane of focus, but how far were you to the subject. I'm just asking and making a suggestion nothing more Brian, but you could leave the F-stop & SS at a fixed amount ie f/5.6 and SS 1/2000 and dial the ISO up or down according to the Histogram in the EVF????

Brian whatever works for you, its just something in that WF I just can't pinpoint and its frustrating because you get some awesome captures, with great kit, but there is something IMHO....

Fine, I just wondered if you Exported from Lr and you had any Output sharpening applied in the Output, then used Ps to sharpen that might be compounding things?????

Brian, they are just thoughts that's all.

I get they're just thoughts Steve. And I'm more than willing to hear feedback as I want to continue to improve my skills. The issue is, when comments come in that are very vague or there's no willingness to problem solve and suggest possible solutions it is extremely frustrating. That's why I try to make specific suggestions to others whenever possible and they can take them or leave them. Just being real because I don't think you mean any ill will.

Thanks for the positive sentiment, we all work hard to get quality shots but I apply everything I read here and study online and a person can only get so far. That's what I'm saying about Andreas more recently, he's at least been willing to jump in privately to share some techniques that can help avoid some of the things you have mentioned. Again, I'm so far from just jerking the contrast or blacks sliders but I can't add any more layers to things. Perhaps I'm just off somewhere in the process compared to you and others...

 

[Steve Kaluski]

Brian have you got High Tone Priority Enabled, it’s in the red Menu?

 

[Andreas Liedmann]

Hey Amigo ... I am always glad , when I can help or give ideas how to improve things from my perspective . Hoping that the person on the other side does think about it .... it is mainly another way of doing things . Feel free to implement them into your WF to a degree , whenever it is useful from your POV .

Regarding image ... well I do love the image , just because of the super spectacular colorful subject .
Gave you great posing on a nice looking perch ... against a color contrasting soft BG , what is one asking for more ???!!!
Without going into the discussion :w3 , for a good reason ... I think the OP does look already very good .... man love the color intensity !!!! . Would partly agree on the sharpening critique ...wherever it does come from ( light and/or your WF ) , but you solved the " issue " with your RP . Albeit I think if this was put on a layer .... I would go to 50 % opacity ( meaning bit more for me ) .But we see things different and it might appear different on different monitors .

So I would say a super shot , well processed with or without my input on the processing front , as I have no idea how much of it was used .

Keep going amigo :wave::cheers: , keep asking and you will get detailed answers , if I have them .

TFS Andreas

 

[Brian Sump]

Hey Amigo ... I am always glad , when I can help or give ideas how to improve things from my perspective . Hoping that the person on the other side does think about it .... it is mainly another way of doing things . Feel free to implement them into your WF to a degree , whenever it is useful from your POV .

Regarding image ... well I do love the image , just because of the super spectacular colorful subject .
Gave you great posing on a nice looking perch ... against a color contrasting soft BG , what is one asking for more ???!!!
Without going into the discussion :w3 , for a good reason ... I think the OP does look already very good .... man love the color intensity !!!! . Would partly agree on the sharpening critique ...wherever it does come from ( light and/or your WF ) , but you solved the " issue " with your RP . Albeit I think if this was put on a layer .... I would go to 50 % opacity ( meaning bit more for me ) .But we see things different and it might appear different on different monitors .

So I would say a super shot , well processed with or without my input on the processing front , as I have no idea how much of it was used .

Keep going amigo :wave::cheers: , keep asking and you will get detailed answers , if I have them .

TFS Andreas

Again, very much appreciated amigo. Will continue onward (and hopefully upward) :cheers:

 

[Brian Sump]

Brian have you got High Tone Priority Enabled, it’s in the red Menu?

It is currently disabled/OFF Steve.

 

[Andreas Liedmann]

(and hopefully upward) :cheers:

I am very much pretty sure , you are going the " right way " .... in the end , you have to be happy with your work !!!! Regardless what other folks are thinking ......
Luckily we are free in our art , we just have to accept other thoughts and tastes .... which is sometimes hard .

 

[Sidharth Kodikal]

Stunning colors, and light, Brian. I see absolutely nothing wrong with the colors or the blacks or the contrast. Just a killer shot overall. I personally find the pose a tad bit awkward. A slightly more relaxed pose would've been better, but maybe I'm nitpicking. Thanks for sharing Brian.