Well for me I look at edges of high contrast and see how much a "halo" effect is appearing when applying sharpening. When it becomes noticable, I back it up a bit, and stop. But most of the pictures that are in-focus are really IN-FOCUS with the 400mm in good light. No sharpening needed! Hope this helps.
noelle wrote:
Ok can we talk about sharpening and PP??
PetKal or Wing or anyone who may be lurking
I am using the MKII and I like to up size my images and then they need sharpening
How much do you sharpen? What method works best for our birds?
Any other tips for PP would be great!!
I start with in-camera settings of Sharp (6), Contrast (1), Sat (2) and Tone (0).
If properly focused, exposed etc., those JPGs do not need any PP work.
On occasion I pass an image thru USM......typically 200-300/0.3/0.
However, when doing enlargement cropping for web posting, I vary USM untill the cropped image looks OK.
Also, after NR, I usually sharpen using USM.
Most people sharpen too much....even the birding "stars" .....that's the caveat. Birds are soft creatures, thery are not supposed to look like porcupines.
All in all, my emphasis is on camera/lens work so that I do not have to do fancy PP which holds no appeal to me. I guess that's why I seldom shoot RAW.
PetKal wrote:
I start with in-camera settings of Sharp (6), Contrast (1), Sat (2) and Tone (0).
If properly focused, exposed etc., those JPGs do not need any PP work.
On occasion I pass an image thru USM......typically 200-300/0.3/0.
However, when doing enlargement cropping for web posting, I vary USM untill the cropped image looks OK.
Also, after NR, I usually sharpen using USM.
All in all, my emphasis is on camera/lens work so that I do not have to do fancy PP which holds no appeal to me. I guess that's why I seldom shoot RAW.
Wow... Peter do you feel you (and ME) are in the minority here when shooting JPG? Because I tend to feel like I do not need to use my RAW copies (I shoot jpg+raw) too much. And is it a personal preference to reduce noise THEN sharpen? I've been doing it the other way around.. Hmmm....
Conrad Tan wrote:
Wow... Peter do you feel you (and ME) are in the minority here when shooting JPG? Because I tend to feel like I do not need to use my RAW copies (I shoot jpg+raw) too much. And is it a personal preference to reduce noise THEN sharpen? I've been doing it the other way around.. Hmmm....
Shooting JPG is fine. The only time I dial in RAW is when I am uncertain about WB.......low light, deep shade, artificial light.
NR first, then sharpening.....that's the normal sequence.
Conrad Tan wrote:
Nuggets of GOLD I tell ya! Nuggets of GOLD! Hehe... Thanks Peter.
Conrads, nuggets or gold or road apples......but that's the way I do it. Then I get results like this, similar to your duck crash landing. Granted, I was using the 300 f/2.8 IS for this shot which renders great colours and is sharp enough.
PetKal wrote:
I start with in-camera settings of Sharp (6), Contrast (1), Sat (2) and Tone (0).
If properly focused, exposed etc., those JPGs do not need any PP work.
On occasion I pass an image thru USM......typically 200-300/0.3/0.
However, when doing enlargement cropping for web posting, I vary USM untill the cropped image looks OK.
Also, after NR, I usually sharpen using USM.
Most people sharpen too much....even the birding "stars" .....that's the caveat. Birds are soft creatures, thery are not supposed to look like porcupines.
All in all, my emphasis is on camera/lens work so that I do not have to do fancy PP which holds no appeal to me. I guess that's why I seldom shoot RAW.
PetKal wrote: Conrads, nuggets or gold or road apples......but that's the way I do it. Then I get results like this, similar to your duck crash landing. Granted, I was using the 300 f/2.8 IS for this shot which renders great colours and is sharp enough.
noelle wrote:
Ok can we talk about sharpening and PP??
PetKal or Wing or anyone who may be lurking
I am using the MKII and I like to up size my images and then they need sharpening
How much do you sharpen? What method works best for our birds?
Any other tips for PP would be great!!
Best thing to do is do a search in the Post-Processing forum, some good reads there, from basic to advance and links to dissertations! I shoot raw and I do my pp quick and fast in DPP, no magic just play around until I see something I like without the Conrad halos and without producing noise. I keep contrast in the RAW tab at 0 and use saturation to create a sense of contrast and pop, but don't overdo it either. I do use the brightness and contrast (and saturation) in the RGB tab especially with white egrets. Before I post or print, I go into zoombrowser to crop and tweak the jpg especially the levels if the pic is underexposed. I use Photoshop only if I want to get intimate with the pic Again, better reading in the post-processing forum.
Noelle, IMO no improvements could be made on your fine capture of Osprey in flight other than the framing. The key with BIF is to maintain/aid birds flying momentum and to keep them aloft. So you got to leave them enough space to fly into, without banging their heads against the image frame.
Sometimes when you have a bird clearly ascend in flight, then you'd consider leaving more space at the top of the frame.
I have reframed your osprey just to show you what I mean. See if you like that kinda approach.
wing tong wrote:
Best thing to do is do a search in the Post-Processing forum, some good reads there, from basic to advance and links to dissertations! I shoot raw and I do my pp quick and fast in DPP, no magic just play around until I see something I like without the Conrad halos and without producing noise. I keep contrast in the RAW tab at 0 and use saturation to create a sense of contrast and pop, but don't overdo it either. I do use the brightness and contrast (and saturation) in the RGB tab especially with white egrets. Before I post or print, I go into zoombrowser to crop and tweak the jpg especially the levels if the pic is underexposed. I use Photoshop only if I want to get intimate with the pic Again, better reading in the post-processing forum. ...Show more →
PetKal wrote:
Noelle, IMO no improvements could be made on your fine capture of Osprey in flight other than the framing. The key with BIF is to maintain/aid birds flying momentum and to keep them aloft. So you got to leave them enough space to fly into, without banging their heads against the image frame.
Sometimes when you have a bird clearly ascend in flight, then you'd consider leaving more space at the top of the frame.
I have reframed your osprey just to show you what I mean. See if you like that kinda approach.
Thanks.... I agree it does look nicer framed this way.
I appreciate everyones help.....like Conrad said, nuggets of gold!
Hope this helps. 
