Not the big white chicken Look closely to the right of its neck, if you would.
So my question has to do with what I see to the right of the egret's neck. There seems to be some grid-like, linear noise/artifact that I usually see with low light. You can see some of the pink pigmenting in the reflections on the water. I shot this with my 400 5.6L around noon on a slightly overcast Florida day. ISO 1000 f8 and 1/3200, Av mode, center weighted, RAW then processed in Aperture 3.
I try to shoot this lens at least around f8 thru f11 because it tends to be soft below that.
Any thoughts or input on that, as well as C&C on the shot are very well taken and appreciated.
It was. It was overcast that day and there were tall oak trees on the other side of the pond with a lot of shade. And it is pretty much non-moving water so the bottom is very dark, also.
What is DR?
Looking at the darks and highlights in Aperture I see that I didn't pull them too much, although a little may be too much regardless. The turtle's underside and the egret's legs are still highlighted as being the darkest areas, possibly even too black.
Thanks for taking time to help me with this. It's something I'd like to be able to move past/conquer and not blame the camera.
DR is Dynamic Range. The way I'm seeing this is the highlights are clipping a little bit on top of the egret. If it had exposed properly the background would have been even darker than it was with no clipping on the egret. Once you start trying to pull detail out of the shadows you'll get these fragments if you over cook it.
Knowing this forum however this might turn into a 6 page argument about the 5DII "shadow banding"
I know, right?? Totally the piece of junk camera's fault!!
I know it has to be something that I am doing. I find with these white birds I am better of using center weighted metering when in Av mode or the whites get blown. And I use center point focusing as well (pretty much always). Doubtful I'll get back to this specific spot again but next time I have white birds that stand this still I may try manual mode instead of Av.
Sure appreciate your input - thanks a bunch!
Helimat do you think that is a noise-prone ISO level? I've always found one of the beauties of the 5DII is its ability to do that cleanly. SO the reason I chose that was purely so I could get a decent shutter speed while keeping the lens at f8. Obviously 1/3200 is a fast enough click, though... I reckon I could have notched it down some. Funny thing with overcast skies here is that the sun sometimes pops back out without warning.
But these are good things to consider. I appreciate both of your input!
I probably would have backed it off a bit, down to ISO 800 at least, especially if hoping to pull it out in post a bit afterwards. I have my camera set to use the base ISO's only, as I had heard that they are the cleanest... Although that might be internet rhetoric. It does speed up switching ISO levels though.
The artifact isn't all the noticeable to me - but that's quite a turtle!
I don't see this as a dynamic range issue. Some 5DII's do have a banding issue (as far as I can tell, mine doesn't.) So my only suggestion is to install the latest firmware update for your camera is you haven't already. I have a vague recollection this issue was (partially?) addressed early on in the FW cycle.
Very cool, Brian - thanks for your compliments. Thank you also for taking time to help me and showing me by your example.
Honestly, I've gotten into sucha habitual flow with my processing. I see that in instances like this I need to mask and go back.
Thanks everyone for all of your input. I've learned some new things. We've got lots and lots of white birds and sunshine here so this is very useful to me.
squareeyez wrote:
...I'll get some time this week to mess with PS again. I'll see if I can't reproduce this flow. So much to learn with PS still...
With Photoshop you can create masks right on the image layer. With Elements, which is what I use, you couldn't do that until version 9 or 10 (not sure), and so in version 8 or earlier you had to make an adjustments layer, create the mask on it, and then lock it to an image layer. So if you have PS it'll be a bit easier than what I did.
We used Photoshop in a photography class I took at the local college a couple of years ago, but only the most basic functions. I want to take an actual Photoshop class sometime, because there is so much that it can do; but because there's so much that it can do it's a bit daunting to me...and expensive! Elements does most of what I want. (I'm going to upgrade from v.8 to v.10 next payday.)
Don't know if it would make a difference but you might want to try running this through DPP. I just recently bought a 5DII and was doing a portrait with a gridded light. The falloff on the arm was very dark. When I opened it up in Lightroom that dark shadow on the arm looked pretty bad. When I opened the same file up in DPP the shadow was nice and clean. Worth a shot?
squareeyez wrote:
Not the big white chicken Look closely to the right of its neck, if you would. So my question has to do with what I see to the right of the egret's neck. There seems to be some grid-like, linear noise/artifact that I usually see with low light.
That is mirror bounce which is a timing issue that signals impending shutter failure. Notice the slight curvature to the shape of the artifacts.
I don't think anyone has mentioned that in this thread. It is not a dynamic range issue because the variation in density does not follow the scene. There is not only the lighter pinkish stuff, but the dark heavy bands on the right, most prominent in the top half of the right. Those have no place in the scene.
It was shot on a cloudy day. I've photographed egrets on sunny days and on cloudy days. Sunny days make it difficult to get the right exposure to be sure to fit it in without blowing the white or alternatively depressing the shadows into noise. Cloudy days: no sweat fitting that reduced dynamic range.
Question to OP squareeyez: have you seen any other banding in other shots, slightly curved, along the long edge of the shot? Sometimes slightly brighter bands, sometimes darker bands.
Interesting perspective. I've never liked the sound of this camera from first click. Others have said the same. What would be an ideal condition to best exploit that symptom? Is there a 'test shot' I could perform to really exaggerate that response for verification? I've certainly seen this phenom in other pictures I've taken, yes.
Try taking a photo of some blue sky with no clouds, at a standard or medium long focal length, at different angles to the sun. Look for slight arcs (large diameter) near the long edge or streaks.
I don't wish to be alarmist, but it is one of the leading possibilities and the ones others proposed don't seem to fit.
Look closely to the right of its neck, if you would.
It does speed up switching ISO levels though.