More help with cropping and/or removing distractions

[James Babbitt]

• Canon EOS R5
• ƒ/8
• 238mm
• 1/1600s
• ISO 1000
• Sun, 02 June 2024 6:51 PM

This shot of a European Turtle Dove was taken in Spain at a hide overlooking an artificial water pool. The pool was elevated and had a golden dry grass BG about 20 meters away; hence the upper BG. This was shot with a Canon R5, 100-500 at 238. It was originally in landscape but I cropped it in a portrait aspect to remove some distracting elements in the FG and sides. A couple of questions: first, would you crop more? Second, with or without further cropping, would you attempt to remove the dark "blob" (actually a reflection of a distant tree) from the R foreground? Third, too saturated? Thanks for the help in advance.

 

[Steve Kaluski]

• Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.5.1 (Macintosh)

Hi James

It was originally in landscape but I cropped it in a portrait aspect to remove some distracting elements in the FG and sides.

Personally I would crop still in Landscape format, in this instance, it would be good if you posted a second image FF. This would then be helpful to offer a better crop solution, as presented its too limiting IMHO.

Second, with or without further cropping, would you attempt to remove the dark "blob" (actually a reflection of a distant tree) from the R foreground?

Unless you are Harry Potter leave as is, its way more complicated and all AI generated changes are all low res.

Third, too saturated?

Yes.

James its all looking off and muddying the colours, if you strip it all away and just get a better WB then really I think you would need minimal tweaks resulting in a better looking file. Also there are a lot of 'dust bunnies' on the sensor.

Ignoring the crop, this may give an indication in terms of a basic direction and what I was suggesting.

 

[Narayanan Mangalath]

You are so lucky to have that flower , bird and river exactly positioned !

Yes I feel it is over saturated . I like the reprocessed version that Steve posted better.

This photo reminds me that bird photography does not need to be just a picture of a bird and it actually becomes an art work when you have other related elements in it just like yours ! Thanks for sharing

 

[Daniel Cadieux]

I too would be interested in seeing the original uncropped image - it may very well look great in landscape, depending on how much distractions are in there and how much work is needed. I like Steve's repost, but think the blue water is too blue - somewhere between the two would work well IMO.

 

[Steve Kaluski]

I like Steve's repost, but think the blue water is too blue - somewhere between the two would work well IMO.

Totally agree Dan, I just tried to balance things out a bit more overall, I left the blue as is, so I can only assume it's a carry-on from the original input, albeit (great word) I did add +5 of clarity which is minimal in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Jonathan Ashton]

I feel the repost is better and a landscape preentation would be a good idea. The big thing for me is that the pond and edge look entirely artificial, i.e, it looks elevated, the background is so flat and OOF there is no continuity.... I don't recall any natural situations like this. The reason I say this is because I am guilty myself, I have previously made refelection pools in the garden and I feel there is a need for continiuty in the backkdrop... yes I can anticipate the full frame photographers disagreeing but for me there is is not usually an abrupt junction between a pond or pool and the background.

 

[James Babbitt]

• Canon EOS R5
• ƒ/8
• 238mm
• 1/1600s
• ISO 1000
• Sun, 02 June 2024 6:51 PM

I am so sorry this is slow coming back. I have been dealing with some internet issues, finally resolved. I am posting the original-this has been converted to JPEG with just Adobe Color Profile in ACR. Several things; one, I forgot I cloned out a fly and a small blade of grass. Second, as Jonathan stated, this was an elevated reflecting pond. As I look at Steve's repost, I find that I would prefer something in between as far as saturation and WB is concerned.

 

[James Babbitt]

An ancillary question: do you have any guidelines that you use to determine if your image would look better in portrait or landscape? I struggle with this. Sometimes, like a woodpecker on a tree, it is fairly obvious, but other times not so much.

 

[Phill Luckhurst]

It depends on what you want and what makes you happy. I often take a shot with 16:9 in mind as that is the ratio of most of my screens. I like to use all available space, even if that is negative space, in my images as a result. So maybe I do have a woodpecker on a tree, I might have it looking into a nice blurred background or one with nice bokeh highlights for instance.

So for me, ai just process to what I like, and to what suits my displays. My audience is me. If I was not a hobbyist I would think differently. For instance I would be thinking of library shots, magazine covers and phone aspect ratios etc.

 

[Faraaz Abdool]

Beautiful photo of this turtle-dove. When considering composition, I tend to reduce the birds and their surroundings to a series of lines of varying thicknesses and directions. Here we have a reasonably strong line (bird) making a lovely arc that's pointing roughly toward 4 o'clock. This would tell me that I'd need more space in the frame in that direction - which when creating the image itself would encourage me to point my camera more to the right to create that space. I like the broken flower which mirrors the line created by the bird, with a slightly weaker intensity. This juxtaposition is ideal for depicting repeated patterns. I prefer Steve's edit as it brings out the blues in the water/sky (always remember that the sky is almost always blue, so water that reflects the sky should follow).

 

[Steve Kaluski]

• Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Classic 13.5.1 (Macintosh)

James based on the attached how about this. Maximising pixels and not cropping so tight to compromise IQ?

 

[James Babbitt]

It depends on what you want and what makes you happy. I often take a shot with 16:9 in mind as that is the ratio of most of my screens. I like to use all available space, even if that is negative space, in my images as a result. So maybe I do have a woodpecker on a tree, I might have it looking into a nice blurred background or one with nice bokeh highlights for instance.

So for me, ai just process to what I like, and to what suits my displays. My audience is me. If I was not a hobbyist I would think differently. For instance I would be thinking of library shots, magazine covers and phone aspect ratios etc.

Absolutely agree. 99% of my images never see the light of day, other than my monitor and TV. That said, I am amazed how often I post an image here or other sites and ask for opinions. When I get suggestions and try them on the imae, I am often impressed with how much more I like the edit than my original.

 

[James Babbitt]

Beautiful photo of this turtle-dove. When considering composition, I tend to reduce the birds and their surroundings to a series of lines of varying thicknesses and directions. Here we have a reasonably strong line (bird) making a lovely arc that's pointing roughly toward 4 o'clock. This would tell me that I'd need more space in the frame in that direction - which when creating the image itself would encourage me to point my camera more to the right to create that space. I like the broken flower which mirrors the line created by the bird, with a slightly weaker intensity. This juxtaposition is ideal for depicting repeated patterns. I prefer Steve's edit as it brings out the blues in the water/sky (always remember that the sky is almost always blue, so water that reflects the sky should follow).

That is a cool way to look at this question. I just do not have the eye! If I really want the best crop, I have to have my wife come and look at the image. Almost instantly she can look at an image and suggest a crop that looks better than my original plan.
Thank you for your thoughts.

 

[James Babbitt]

View attachment 230662
James based on the attached how about this. Maximising pixels and not cropping so tight to compromise IQ?

Thanks Steve for all your time and thoughts. I am leaning to going back with the original and using a landscape crop. Not sure exactly how I want it. I can also see that the Adobe Color Profile (which I rarely use) is likely creating the over saturation. I originally processed this image on a laptop while on an airplane so I did not have the Presets I normally use for conversion, hence the Adobe Color. I also did not use DXO PR4 for conversion which I often do ( I know you are not a fan).

 

[James Babbitt]

I feel the repost is better and a landscape preentation would be a good idea. The big thing for me is that the pond and edge look entirely artificial, i.e, it looks elevated, the background is so flat and OOF there is no continuity.... I don't recall any natural situations like this. The reason I say this is because I am guilty myself, I have previously made refelection pools in the garden and I feel there is a need for continiuty in the backkdrop... yes I can anticipate the full frame photographers disagreeing but for me there is is not usually an abrupt junction between a pond or pool and the background.

Thank you for your thoughts. I shoot a great deal from hides and use "set up" type environments. I enjoy this, but as importantly my wife likes to do this. As a result, she readily agrees to traveling to many of the places we have been. She would not be so agreeable to walking in the woods and looking for shots.
At home (Southern California), I do a lot more field photography.

 

[Bruce Elkman]

Ones eyes first go to the brightest areas in an image and so the composition and camera settings need to allow for this. In this image the flowers to the right of the dove and the bright background compete with the bird.

Always better to make adjustments before shooting then to fix problems in post. I would have removed the flowers to the right and if anything was to be in this spot it would be better to have a darker flower with some color contrast in the frame.

 

[Steve Kaluski]

I can also see that the Adobe Color Profile (which I rarely use) is likely creating the over saturation.

James, DO NOT allow the profile to go to Adobe Color, its PANTS for many reasons, plus as you see to a degree, it skews things. Swop it to Adobe standard, flatter in looks, but to a degree, it will have Adobes stuff it puts into the BKG which you won't really see, just avoid putting too much Black, Contrast, Clarity into the basics it has a habit of killing your mid tones where your detail hides! Then try to get a fairly neutral WB, then you have a bedrock to take the image to where you want it.

I also did not use DXO PR4 for conversion which I often do ( I know you are not a fan).

We've have run various tests between Lr/Ps using their own DN & DXO 4DP, the later needs about 2/3rds the amount of LrPs ie 10 for Lr, 6 for DXO or less. In addition it over sharpens the DNG file, even with a setting of Soft, but here's the kicker, it also ramps up your file size big time. Files like this rarely need any NR unless you have heavily under exposed and even at a whole stop I doubt the recovery would be that bad.