Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

  

Elk calf
  
 
lighthound
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Elk calf


A couple from last weekend with my new toy.

Just finished making a few custom camera/lens profiles for this new body and applied them to these shots.

I know the BG is busy as they tend to hug the tree line. This was the best I could come home with this time, but I did lay down to get some nice ground level shots on them.

Curious what you think about the colors and overall critiques (anything and everything) on these.


Dave




Cry baby #1

  Canon EOS 6D Mark II    EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM +1.4x III lens    328mm    f/8.0    1/160s    1600 ISO    0.0 EV  






Cry baby #2

  Canon EOS 6D Mark II    EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM +1.4x III lens    328mm    f/8.0    1/60s    1600 ISO    0.0 EV  



Edited on Aug 12, 2017 at 01:28 AM · View previous versions



Aug 12, 2017 at 12:05 AM
beanpkk
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Elk calf


#2 for me. Are these cropped much?
keith



Aug 12, 2017 at 12:40 AM
Kevin T
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Elk calf


2 is a better animal pose but i really like the light in 1!


Aug 12, 2017 at 02:03 AM
ben egbert
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Elk calf


Very nice shots, but 2 for me also.


Aug 12, 2017 at 03:00 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Elk calf


Looks like your diggin' you new digs.

Might be a bit overcooked and cyanic to me. A few tweaks.




  Canon EOS 6D Mark II    EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM +1.4x III lens    328mm    f/8.0    1/60s    1600 ISO    0.0 EV  




Aug 12, 2017 at 04:50 AM
lighthound
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Elk calf


Thanks for the input folks.

Keith - yes these are both crops on the heavy side. Looking at my focal length I see I could have pulled in closer but for some brain dead reason I didn't.
Just prior to these shots, my wife had accidently set off my car alarm in my truck so I had to run back to the truck to shut it off. While running back, I recall having to tighten my zoom lock to keep it retracted.
So my best guess is I might have "thought" I was fully zoomed but in fact wasn't.

So it's the wife's fault I screwed up.
just don't tell her I said that or I'll have to send the camera back.

Kent - As always, thanks for the heads up. I just spent 45 %$#@ minutes trying to correct that shot.
I had one hell of a time getting S/M/H points to somewhat balance out and below is the best I could come up with.
I desaturated it -14 in LR

Look about right now?




De-cooked and WB edit

  Canon EOS 6D Mark II    EF100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM +1.4x III lens    328mm    f/8.0    1/60s    1600 ISO    0.0 EV  




Aug 12, 2017 at 10:08 PM
sbeme
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Elk calf


Second for me. Beautiful.
Greens are quite saturated. I think Kent's rework (yet again!) produced more natural colors.
Nice rig!
Scott



Aug 12, 2017 at 11:32 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 

        


RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Elk calf


Thanks Scott.

Yes, better, but check your bark on the birch trees.

Granted, they are in shadows, and Bambi isn't (i.e. diff light color) ... but a bit of a gauge to help anchor things. Kinda need to mask diff CC for the diff light (vs. trying a global correction).

BTW ... I'm diggin' the rig. It just "feels right" in my hands and on the tripod.



Aug 13, 2017 at 08:34 PM
lighthound
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Elk calf


Thanks Scott and Kent. I went over this one again last evening and made the corrections.

I've come to the conclusion that the extreme time it takes me to properly process (CC) a single image is the reason I fail to ever print anything. I will often have several other images to process but by the time I spend 45 minutes on just a single image the remaining shots never get worked on because I get so frustrated. Thus the reason I've not posted many of my June vac images yet. The mountain of time required is a tad overwhelming.

Shot more yesterday after finding a couple of bull's that have arrived up in the valley. Spent way too much time trying to get the colors right on those and think they might still be messed up. They were in the fog and my processing pretty much killed most of the fog.

I hear you on the new rig Kent! I had been using my 70D w/ flippy screen for years on all my landscapes until I got the 5DII last year. I missed the easy of use a ton so it's nice to have it back again. It really frees up a lot of compositional choices using UWA glass.

Dave



Aug 14, 2017 at 04:58 PM
sbeme
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Elk calf


Dave,
can you explain your workflow a bit? I rarely spend more than 5 minutes processing an image (I dont do composites, blends so that is one reason) and usually more only if there is some careful cloning required.

Scott



Aug 15, 2017 at 02:10 PM
lighthound
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Elk calf


sbeme wrote:
Dave,
can you explain your workflow a bit? I rarely spend more than 5 minutes processing an image (I dont do composites, blends so that is one reason) and usually more only if there is some careful cloning required.

Scott



Oh boy... I'll try.

First, I always shoot RAW never jpeg so I usually just leave my WB set to auto knowing I'll be adjusting later in post anyhow. But I do flip around in LR looking at the various WB defaults to see if anything looks close to the way I remember it. Knowing the trouble I always get into, I rarely ever use any defaults.

With this shot, as with most other wildlife images I shoot, I mainly stay inside LRCC to make basic adjustments. This typically takes me about 5 minutes or less depending on the shot. Until I get into correcting color issues as seen in this thread. I'll go over that process later in the order I typically do it.

On import I have LR setup to make Lens and Camera profile corrections. In this case, it uses my newest camera profile I just made with my colorchecker passport.
I then start at the top and work my way down inside the Basic panel. I usually try to use the eyedropper tool to adjust the WB because all my images always seem to have a cyan cast. In my above OP image I think I selected his pupil or the end of his nose to set WB. Obviously didn't work this time from the sounds of it.
I then adjust exposure if needed and very rarely mess with contrast. Then I usually have to push highlights way down often times to -100 to recover. Shadows I usually give a bump up but often will use a brush to selectively hit the areas I want rather than globally. Same with highlights if some spots are still to bright.
Then I set my Black and White points using the ALT key trick.

Clarity I might bump up 10 or so globally but will usually use a brush to selectively adjust certain areas if needed.
Vibrance I never touch with wildlife shots
Saturation I usually never touch except I have learned from you folks that I almost always have to reduce by at least-10.

Sometimes after the basic adjustments I'll add a little vignette but that is pretty much all I do in LR for the most part.

After LR I will sometimes go into NIK color efex Pro4. This might be where the oversaturated look comes from.

Now for the WB CC nightmare. Stay with me here.
As seen in this thread, after I learned my colors were off using my quick and easy LR eyedropper, I took the image into PS where I then create two points each using the color sampler tool. 2 for shadows, 2 for midtones, 2 for highlights. This is where I struggle VERY much as I'm not sure what points are the proper ones to use from one image to the next. In this image I used the darkest area of his pupil (that still had good data) and I think the end of his nose (not the blue areas) for the shadow points then the birch trees for midtones and then his white area in his ear and one of his white spots for the highlights.

I then create a color balance layer and try to adjust RGB's in S/M/H for each of the two points I created. Typically I can never get both to match so I tend to favor the one that I think is the most appropriate color point. This is the process I get lost in and it takes me FOREVER to get things dialed in.
I so wish I could just look at the image and make adjustments but I have to watch the numbers. On images that have clear S/M/H pick points it seems to work very well based on everyone's previous input on other images, but this is an image type I struggle with.


So there ya have it. Anyone feel free to let me know if you see something fundamentally wrong with my workflow.
Would be appreciated.

Dave



Aug 15, 2017 at 05:20 PM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Elk calf


Don't overlook the blue part of the nose. That's part of your clue to the light which is illuminating your subject ... unless of course, you happen to be home to the elusive Blue Nosed Deer in your neck of the woods.

Kinda like the Arch pic ... think about what direction your light is coming from (top, side, front, back) and which color it would be from that direction. Bear in mind that Sun (warm) & Sky (cool) put together make a different color than Sun by itself or sky by itself. So, if the eye / pupil is facing front or side, and the top of the nose or forehead is facing the sky ... well, that could be two different colors of light that those surfaces / planes are reflecting off.

Think of the blue nose as a blue specular highlight, and the white pupil catchlight ... noting that we are illumating with a warm key light (sun) and a cool fill light (sky). They can kinda blend in some areas, but not in others, depending on the orientation of the reflecting planes involved.

Also, shadows and highlights can have different "sensitivities" to color. By that I mean if we take some thing red and make it super bright, well it simply turns white. The same goes for blue, green, etc. In that regard, our brightest white areas might be "hiding" some color information regarding the true color of our illuminating source. No "exact" formula ... so you sometimes just have to "think it through" as to whether or not it makes sense for an area to be warmer or cooler than as presented / captured.

This is part of where it can be that you can't keep everything "neutral" all together. If you crank on your saturation, gamma, etc. you can get it to show you colors that may have been too subtle to realize. When all else fails ... go mono. Okay, just kidding, but sometimes you do have to use your noodle and do some Sherlock stuff to figure it out ... and then there are those times, that you just gotta go with go with it and/or split the diff.

Also, don't be afraid to mask your color WB areas for the diff portions / surfaces / planes ... the same as you would do for exposure, etc. in selective manner. I typically blend the zones to try an emulate the natural falloff / change in light color from our spherical atmosphere refraction ... i.e. the reason for a blue nose, yet a white highlight / black pupil ... i.e. reflecting two different colors of light of two different planes.



Aug 15, 2017 at 09:54 PM
beavens
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Elk calf


You got the new girl in?? HELL YEAH!!

Made some tweaks to the first shot - lemme know what you think.

Jeff

.edit Hmm looks WAY worse in the browser than it does in PS.

Left PS / Right Firefox












Aug 16, 2017 at 08:38 PM







FM Forums | Photo Critique | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password