Tufted Titmouse

[david spital]

• D.Spital
• Digital Photo Professional

• D.Spital
• Digital Photo Professional

Canon 7D mkII
100-400mm F4.5-5.6L +1.4xTC (560mm)
1/1000sec F/8.0 ISO-1600 hand held
Cape Cod Ma. 2/21/2019 11:33 am

Twigs behind the bird have been removed.
more twigs removed.. re-ran noise reduction.

Second image similar crop with no processing.

 

[Mike Poole]

I like the pose David and the eye level shooting is good. It looks like you may have added too much noise reduction, giving a slightly smeared look and losing some of the finer details. Easily rectified

Mike

 

[William Dickson]

Since you removed some of the twigs, I would have went further and removed all the OOF twigs and also the vertical one on lower RHS. Good POV. I agree with Mike about the smeared look.

Will

 

[david spital]

Since you removed some of the twigs, I would have went further and removed all the OOF twigs and also the vertical one on lower RHS. Good POV. I agree with Mike about the smeared look.

Will

Twigs yeah, I was wondering how far to take it. Maybe I'll do a little more work, redo the noise reduction, and post the results. Not sure about the "smear" look though.
Thanks.

 

[Daniel Cadieux]

Since these guys come to feeders, I'd setup near one to get the good perch and background in-camera. It's fun to find branches and place them too. A bit tight in the frame too, you can use the zoom to your advantage and go wider. The "smearing" is more apparent on the black area between the eyes - it does indeed have the look of NR there. Cute bird, and a fun "studio" pose. I like the raised tuft!

 

[John Mack]

The raised tuft is very nice as is the pose. Solid advice already. Can't wait for the feeder set up season.

 

[Dorian Anderson]

Apart from being too tight in the frame, this image is suffering from over-processing. The cloning work has rendered the background a digital creation, and too much NR has been applied across the image. There is also an odd artifactual pattern in areas (like near the right foot and in the bottom left corner). One you get the set-up stuff going and back off the subject, these issue will start to resolve.

 

[david spital]

Apart from being too tight in the frame, this image is suffering from over-processing. The cloning work has rendered the background a digital creation, and too much NR has been applied across the image. There is also an odd artifactual pattern in areas (like near the right foot and in the bottom left corner). One you get the set-up stuff going and back off the subject, these issue will start to resolve.

I think the analysis is valid although the NR issue is odd being that the image was run through Neat Image only once. (is Neat Image auto profiling to heavy handed??)
The original image has some more room around the bird. I don't think the resulting objection to the image is as much in the setup as it is in the processing.
The first posting here of the image had less processing but some branches still showing. It was suggested that the branches be removed, so more processing.
Maybe I should've left it alone.??

Thanks Dorian