Your opinions on these pictures regarding processing.

In some of my other threads, I mentioned that I purchased a Viltrox EM 1 to try on my Olympus E-M1 Mark2. While it does work to some degree, I find that with lenses..( for example) the Canon 300mm F4L that it does not work as good, so it is a no-go for shooting birds unless they are stationary. It seems to have no problem with lenses with FL such as the 50mm.

However, and the reason for this post is that I ended up shooting these birds with the Canon 7D + the Canon 300mm F4 L, instead, but they were a little darker than I liked so I decided to try the Shadow/highlight feature in Photoshop 6 . I am not sure if these are good or just a little over processed. I am no Photoshop Guru so I am asking for opinions from some of you who are good at processing.

They are not just a little overprocessed. They are vastly overprocessed, I'm sorry to say, especially the 2nd and 3rd. Could you share the original image of either of those?

--
Mark

Completely agree. Too much shadow&highlight clipping, too much artifacts.

Mark9473 said:

They are vastly overprocessed

Click to expand...

Is the shadow/highlight the only tool used or have you done any levels/curves and sharpening?

Mark9473 said:

They are not just a little overprocessed. They are vastly overprocessed, I'm sorry to say, especially the 2nd and 3rd. Could you share the original image of either of those?

Click to expand...

No need to be sorry. This is what I needed to hear. Will post the originals later. As mentioned, I am no Photoshop expert, but I usually shoot raw and process in ACR. I can bring the Highlight down some to add a little detail. I was just playing around with the Shadow/highlight filter in Photoshop to see how it works.

Mark9473 said:

--
Mark

Click to expand...

PR9 said:

Is the shadow/highlight the only tool used or have you done any levels/curves and sharpening?

Click to expand...

They were processed in ACR . No sharpening was done, but when I open the image in Photoshop, I tried the Shadow/highlight filter to lift some shadows and this in where I became confused as to what it did to the image.

Actually those are nice captures!

Except for a little too much saturation for my taste.

On second thought, exposure/gamma could be pushed just a bit more.

Peter

nebulla said:

However, and the reason for this post is that I ended up shooting these birds with the Canon 7D + the Canon 300mm F4 L, instead, but they were a little darker than I liked so I decided to try the Shadow/highlight feature in Photoshop 6 .

Click to expand...

It is my experience that this tool is a halo producing nightmare, as you have demonstrated. I find the tools in ACR/ Lightroom better

There is also weird noise in the out of focus area, too much saturation and too much sharpening. Well something is up

nebulla said:

I am not sure if these are good or just a little over processed. I am no Photoshop Guru so I am asking for opinions from some of you who are good at processing.

Click to expand...

nebulla said:

In some of my other threads, I mentioned that I purchased a Viltrox EM 1 to try on my Olympus E-M1 Mark2. While it does work to some degree, I find that with lenses..( for example) the Canon 300mm F4L that it does not work as good, so it is a no-go for shooting birds unless they are stationary. It seems to have no problem with lenses with FL such as the 50mm.

However, and the reason for this post is that I ended up shooting these birds with the Canon 7D + the Canon 300mm F4 L, instead, but they were a little darker than I liked so I decided to try the Shadow/highlight feature in Photoshop 6 . I am not sure if these are good or just a little over processed. I am no Photoshop Guru so I am asking for opinions from some of you who are good at processing.

Click to expand...

Some of these criticisms are a little harsh, you did, after-all, ask for advice which suggested that you were uncertain about the results.

Are these OOC jpegs? If so, then you are handicapped from the start. Despite under-exposure the white feathers are still a little burnt-out.

I gave the Finch a quick go. Treatment was selection, auto & auto colour with some backing off using the edit key. High radius unsharpening & a little use of shadows - highlights. The results are not perfect but would be better if performed on a RAW file.

Thanks. Much appreciated.

eques said:

Except for a little too much saturation for my taste.

On second thought, exposure/gamma could be pushed just a bit more.

Click to expand...

Yes, this is why I tried the shadow/highlight filter instead of the exposure slider.

eques said:

Peter

Click to expand...

The EXIF data shows these are all Canon captures. Why did you post here instead of the Canon forum or the Retouching forum?

Keit ll said:

nebulla said:

In some of my other threads, I mentioned that I purchased a Viltrox EM 1 to try on my Olympus E-M1 Mark2. While it does work to some degree, I find that with lenses..( for example) the Canon 300mm F4L that it does not work as good, so it is a no-go for shooting birds unless they are stationary. It seems to have no problem with lenses with FL such as the 50mm.

However, and the reason for this post is that I ended up shooting these birds with the Canon 7D + the Canon 300mm F4 L, instead, but they were a little darker than I liked so I decided to try the Shadow/highlight feature in Photoshop 6 . I am not sure if these are good or just a little over processed. I am no Photoshop Guru so I am asking for opinions from some of you who are good at processing.

Click to expand...

Some of these criticisms are a little harsh, you did, after-all, ask for advice which suggested that you were uncertain about the results.

Click to expand...

I get use to criticims on the forum, so it does not bother me anymore. Yes. as you mentioned, I was skeptical as to what the shadow/highlight filter does.

I often see pictures posted here that are very good, and some that are God awful IMO, but some still say that how nice they are which makes me wonder how people see things so differently. I think that the reason is mostly because they are shot with M43. Well as it happens, I do shoot with the E-M1 mark2, but as I am not prepared to spend $3000 on the Olympus 300 F4, SOLD the Panasonic 100-400 because I just couldn't like the lens, I keep my APS-C camera for shooting birds most of the time.

Keit ll said:

Are these OOC jpegs? If so, then you are handicapped from the start. Despite under-exposure the white feathers are still a little burnt-out.

Click to expand...

The originals are shot in RAW, but I did some processing in ACR. I could have increased the exposure, but decided to try the shadow/highlight filter instead, so was uncertain as to what it did.

Keit ll said:

I gave the Finch a quick go. Treatment was selection, auto & auto colour with some backing off using the edit key. High radius unsharpening & a little use of shadows - highlights. The results are not perfect but would be better if performed on a RAW file.

Click to expand...

It looks better.

Thanks

Keit ll said:

Click to expand...

Although not a bird photographer, to me they look under-exposed. My attempt at editing.





Peter Del

--
Gallery: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/8804053911

Albert Valentino said:

The EXIF data shows these are all Canon captures. Why did you post here instead of the Canon forum or the Retouching forum?

Click to expand...

Here we go again. I shoot both M43 and APS-C . I post my pictures in either forum as I belong to both. Don't be so cranky. They are just pictures.

Albert Valentino said:

--
If you don't get older and wiser, than you just get older.

Click to expand...

I apologies if I fall into the 2 harsh bracket. You tried a tool and asked for feedback. I think it produced a poor result. If it were me I'd rather hear it as it is. I've leanrt so much from honest feedback. I have never captured any small birds. Way to hard for me

Taken on a Canon. Who cares. It is no the issue was only relevant one camera brand

The levels tool is a very powerful adjustment tool in photoshop.

In these examples I simply adjusted the mid-tones to open them up a bit (brighten them) then one has to bring a little punch back into the shadows and highlights, so bringing in the highlights (brightening them) and then deepening the shadows (blacks) to add some punch.

In general these were nice pictures, I wouldn't even really say over exposed, shoot in raw, apply corrections then sharpen or do noise reduction for the display media.

Good looking pics in general.

john Clinch said:

I apologies if I fall into the 2 harsh bracket. You tried a tool and asked for feedback. I think it produced a poor result. If it were me I'd rather hear it as it is. I've leanrt so much from honest feedback. I have never captured any small birds. Way to hard for me

Click to expand...

No need to John, and as mentioned earlier I expected some harshness from some, but in honesty, I don't need a primer on how to shoot birds. I have been doing this for a very very long time, and actually do know how to process my images. I was uncertain of how the shadow/highlight works, and I knew something was wrong but could not put my fingers on it right away.

john Clinch said:

Taken on a Canon. Who cares. It is no the issue was only relevant one camera brand

Click to expand...

As for shooting Canon or Nikon, I can tell you emphatically that the biggest mistake that I made was selling my E-m1 to get the E-M1 Mark 2. The facts are... If you are into shooting birds, the only lenses worth buying for the camera is the Olympus 300mm Pro but It is to darn expensive for hobby photographers. Now comes Panasonic with all high end lenses that cost over $3000 except the 100-400mm which I HAD and SOLD. At least with APS-Cs there are third party lenses that are as good and can be had for less than 1/2 the price of the M43 and much greater FL. I shot with my Nikon D7200 and the Nikon 200-500mm for some years, and I can attest to the fact that it was much sharper than the Panasonic 100-400mm. Right now, I am contemplating selling the Olympus E-M1 ii and all the Olympuses/Panasonic lenses that I have and sticking with APS-C. It MIGHT not be that I can't afford them, but I am not stupid with my money either, not when it is possible to get the same great images with other brands that don't break the bank.

john Clinch said:

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/john_clinch/
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/john_clinch/popular-interesting/

Click to expand...