litte birds

[dbaker1221]

nothing exotic

http://snapshotz.smugmug.com/photos/227996638-L.jpg

http://snapshotz.smugmug.com/photos/228017722-L.jpg

[BigAl]

Very nice Dave! Are these with the new camera?

[dbaker1221]

Very nice Dave! Are these with the new camera?

thanks ...yes d300 & bigma. 800iso...i did use some noise ninja on it.

[Harryb]

Good captures and at ISO 800. :clap

[Ric Grupe]

Let's see them without the noise reduction, Dave. They look a little smudgy to me. The colors and exposure are very good.

Personally I think that NR software does more harm than good. Unless you just want to clean up a deep shadow...I would never use it on the whole frame.

[BBiggs]

Very nice! I like them both... ALOT :thumb

[Giphsub]

The d300 with the bigma? :D I am waiting for my bigma to arrive and then I'll be slingin the same gun!

[Maestro]

Cool captures in low light! Referring to Ric's comment, you can use the "quick selection tool" to outline the subject, in this case the birds, then right click and select "inverse." Now you can run your noise reduction software but it won't touch your main subjects, just the background and surrounding areas around your subject. In this way, you can retain sharpness in the feathers and the like as noise reduction software tends to soften and smooth the details too much in subjects with such fine details as feathers. I find though that this type of software does very well when photographing people.

I feel like I am rambling. Is this clear as mud? :D

[Jack'll do]

Very nice Dave. What was the approximate distance to the subjects that the Bigma allowed you to shoot from?

[dbaker1221]

Let's see them without the noise reduction, Dave. They look a little smudgy to me. The colors and exposure are very good.

Personally I think that NR software does more harm than good. Unless you just want to clean up a deep shadow...I would never use it on the whole frame.

I missed my exposuer on these shots Ric & had to lighten them in pp.

before noise reduction
http://snapshotz.smugmug.com/photos/228601768-L.jpg

& now that I'm looking at them , I may have loaded the one with out noise reduction.
anyway I think I lost the detail because I shot them so dark & had to bring them up alot. the day before my shots were too bright so I over comped for that.....Hey, I'm no Harry:dunno :D

2nd shot no niosse reduction
http://snapshotz.smugmug.com/photos/228604175-L.jpg

[dbaker1221]

Cool captures in low light! Referring to Ric's comment, you can use the "quick selection tool" to outline the subject, in this case the birds, then right click and select "inverse." Now you can run your noise reduction software but it won't touch your main subjects, just the background and surrounding areas around your subject. In this way, you can retain sharpness in the feathers and the like as noise reduction software tends to soften and smooth the details too much in subjects with such fine details as feathers. I find though that this type of software does very well when photographing people.

I feel like I am rambling. Is this clear as mud? :D
thanks Stephen

[dbaker1221]

Very nice Dave. What was the approximate distance to the subjects that the Bigma allowed you to shoot from?

well..........the feeder is set up behind my garage so I can shoot out the window of it. I was about 10-15 feet away.

[Ric Grupe]

Thanks, Dave.

I see now that what I thought was an NR problem was not. You didn't use much of it. Stephen's suggestion was right on the money as far as I'm concerned.

What I thought was too much NR was probably due to shallow depth of field and those little buggers ruffling their feathers. (they tend to do that ya know:rofl) Just below the neck on the second bird stands out the most. You most likely had your focus on his noggin.

[kdog]

That first one is beautiful, David. :thumb

I agree with Ric and Stephen that selecting blurring and sharpening are important skills to have. I like the article by Stephen Ting here:

http://rohirrim.smugmug.com/gallery/1212902/1

You can use this technique to apply other effects selectively as well.

Cheers,
-joel

[dbaker1221]

thanks everyone ....I got some good info out of this series

[Maestro]

Thanks, Dave.

I see now that what I thought was an NR problem was not. You didn't use much of it. Stephen's suggestion was right on the money as far as I'm concerned.


They are right on the money because YOU are the one that first pointed me in the direction of selective sharpening. :D :bow Oh you mighty PP master. :roflSeriously, I am just passing on what you taught me. :thumb