Post-Processing

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

D

DL Photo

New member
Member's gallery
Wildlife photography does not give the opportunity to spend minutes or hours composing your shots. Do you have some tips on post-processing such as cropping, composition of crop, positioning of wildlife, enhancements to subjects, close ups vs long distance view, etc. Once you achieve the shot it can be spoiled or enhanced by what is done in post. Any thoughts.
 
Member's gallery
DL Photo said:
Wildlife photography does not give the opportunity to spend minutes or hours composing your shots. Do you have some tips on post-processing such as cropping, composition of crop, positioning of wildlife, enhancements to subjects, close ups vs long distance view, etc. Once you achieve the shot it can be spoiled or enhanced by what is done in post. Any thoughts.
Click to expand...
Great questions but that's a huge topic.

From a composition standpoint, the goals when composing in post are really the same as ideal composition in the field. Things like position in the frame, room for implied sight, motion lines or leading lines, inclusion or exclusion of graphic elements all still apply. From a full workflow standpoint if you shoot a little looser you can plan on some composition adjustments in post though personally I try to get very close to the final composition in the viewfinder when possible. Flying birds is a common place to plan on shooting looser and finalizing composition in post as shooting tight with birds can make tracking a lot harder and can lead to things like clipped wingtips when trying to shoot very tight compositions in the field.

One thing that you can't really alter in post is perspective, and that comes from your position relative to the position of your subject and other graphic elements including the background. Things like getting a little lower or a little higher or backing up or moving to the side can have huge impacts on the final image and that really needs to be done in the field as you capture the image. In workshops I've taught we emphasize finding perspective with your feet and then selecting lenses or zooming to frame the final scene. That perspective part determines how the individual elements in your scene will interact visually and things like whether they pop from a clean out of focus background or blend in to the rest of the scene and you do that by moving either your position or hoping your subject moves where you want it.

Close ups (wildlife portraits) vs wider angle shots (environmental portraits or figures in a landscape type shots) both have their places. It's a pretty natural learning curve to want to get closer and closer to wildlife and fill the frame with beautiful wild subjects. And then it's equally as natural once you can reliably fill the frame and get tight portraits to loosen things back up and look for ways to tell more of a story and include more of the animal's environment or perhaps interactions with other animals. There's no right or wrong here and developing the field skills to fill and even over-fill the frame (e.g. tight head shots of wildlife) will always pay off but some of my favorite images are shot looser and include some of the environment or other animals and tell a bigger story than pure portraits.

Any shot, wildlife or not, can be ruined by poor processing which usually means going too far with some or many adjustments. Typical over processing includes things like: excessive saturation, over sharpening, too much contrast, going too far with shadow or highlight recovery, etc. That said, many if not most images can be improved with some subtle adjustments though it's really satisfying when an image works straight out of camera and really doesn't need anything. Lot's of good tutorials, books and videos out there on processing and processing workflows but there aren't a lot of shortcuts to developing an eye for what's appropriate and helpful for an image and what's pushing things too far. A good rule of thumb when not sure if you're going too far is that less is usually more when it comes to image processing so if you think you're on the fence and maybe going too far with an adjustment it's almost always best to back off a bit.

Sure you'll get lots of thoughts on this as it really is a huge subject and one we're all continually trying to master :)
 
Last edited:
It's too big of a topic for a forum. Better to ask a specific question, maybe with an image to look at. I'd say in broad terms that you think of the old W's of newspaper journalism along with asking yourself what part of the story you are choosing to tell and what feelings you want to evoke. The famous saying is that there are two people in every photo, the photographer and the viewer. If you have a static close up of a bird you answer the who question, if a bird is flying you tell us what it is doing, if you include the shore and some trees now we know where, some snow and we know when, a fish in the talons and we know why.

This is a nice resource, covers creativity and a lot more.

This is a good book on composition, mostly from the Gestalt approach

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1781450633/?tag=backcogaller-20
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Both great comments... I realize this is a huge topic. For me personally.. I am trying to answer the question... what makes a great wildlife photo. I can take great portraits of birds... but doing that does not excite me. But coming up with the story that attacks the eye is truly what I am trying to master. So the answer to my question is what thought process photographers use to approach the scene or subject. But again... great comments. TKS
 
Member's gallery
DL Photo said:
what makes a great wildlife photo
Click to expand...
That's the million dollar question and has as many answers as there are great photographs and photographers.

To me the really great wildlife images tell a story and have some element of action or interaction but always have great light which isn't really a composition issue but IMO it's essential for capturing really great images.

I like the: Who, What, Where, When and Why framework offered above but really to me it comes down to whether the image captures and holds your interest, often by showing you something you wouldn't typically see and doing so in a graphically pleasing way.
 
Member's gallery
DL Photo said:
Wildlife photography does not give the opportunity to spend minutes or hours composing your shots. Do you have some tips on post-processing such as cropping, composition of crop, positioning of wildlife, enhancements to subjects, close ups vs long distance view, etc. Once you achieve the shot it can be spoiled or enhanced by what is done in post. Any thoughts.
Click to expand...

As others have said, a topic with a lot to discuss. What software do you use? Wildlife is a challenge, that is what makes it fun. Knowing your software very well can help you when you take the shot. With wildlife we get handed a scene and then have to quickly figure out how to make something work so simply knowing your gear well and knowing the art of composition can help. You have to figure out, though, what type of wildlife shots appeal most to you, i.e., close up, action, stationary, environmental, and then practice to get better. One basic premise is to leave space in front of the animal so it "has somewhere to go" within the frame, another basic premise is to try to get the eye nearest to the viewer sharp, and a third is to look at the overall scene and try not to get reeds and weeds in front of the animal nor get a tree growing out of its head, these are just a quick start, there is a lot to learn with wildlife photography. Steve's book on the subject is a good read.
 
Member's gallery
DL Photo said:
Both great comments... I realize this is a huge topic. For me personally.. I am trying to answer the question... what makes a great wildlife photo. I can take great portraits of birds... but doing that does not excite me. But coming up with the story that attacks the eye is truly what I am trying to master. So the answer to my question is what thought process photographers use to approach the scene or subject. But again... great comments. TKS
Click to expand...

I usually start with something pretty simple - Where is the light and what kind of image can I hope to make? The light provides a constraint around the kinds of images that are available, the shutter speed and aperture I use, and the kind of equipment that is needed.

Next for me is making decisions about the subject and composition. Even in perfect light, do I really want to fool with another photo of a Northern Mockingbird even if it does have a nice bug in it's mouth, good lighting, good background, etc. On the other hand, I might make an image just for the point of testing or illustrating a point for an upcoming article or class. I'll avoid typical shots that have a low probability of being a successful artistic image. I'll seek out images that are less common or have some outstanding component. It's okay to make images that have a low probability because they are hard to capture because success may produce something exceptional.

For example, on a recent trip to photograph shorebirds, the wind was from the "wrong" direction and the birds were facing away from me. Rather than photographing a bunch of bird butts, I worked on backlit subjects - both in flight and resting. It's more challenging, and has a low keeper rate, but a bunch of birds facing away are almost all discards anyway. I want something that makes the image special.

Often a good wildlife photo is not based just on the subject but also the background. So after looking at the light, I also look at how I can make the background work in my favor. A clean out of focus background, a dark shadow in the right position, or an environmental context are all choices available to compose my background and context.

For landscapes, it starts with light, but continues with where the eye needs to go. I need a subject or destination that is the prime feature of a landscape, then I need appropriate foreground, midground and background elements to make it interesting. Often a landscape works with an exaggerated foreground element so a wide lens is used to increase emphasis on that subject or element. But I might use a long lens like a 70-200 to pick a portion of the landscape that has nice layers of light, shadow or fog.

It's a journey. Look at other really good images - not social media but look at contest results for an idea of what works. Post in the critique forum here.

One final thought. You can't always make the image you visualize. So you may have to go back repeatedly to incorporate what you learn. That's why photographing close to where you live is so useful. But also don't get stuck in the rut that what you visualized is the best photo that can be made. Learn to listen, see, and find what great photos are available with the material at your disposal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top