Editing bird photos that are too dark

[Bubbahotep]

I took this photo last year. I've struggled mightily to reveal an image that I have in my head. I just can't quite get it as I would like a little more eye detail in the lower bird. In trying to bring out that eye detail, the higher bird's breast becomes oversharpened while the body's back becomes overly smoothed. What are your thoughts on how to process this photo? Am I wasting my time on this image?

Unprocessed RAW file

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

Processed image

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[EricBowles]

Thanks for posting.

The short answer is yes - you may be wasting your time with this one. It is severely underexposed, and lacks attractive lighting on the subject. While you can boost the exposure in post processing, it's never going to achieve the look of the subject in daylight or even a nice backlit image.

That said, you can learn from the image. One learning is how to recognize the potential problem when you made the image so you can adjust your exposure settings. Silhouettes and birds with sky as background can be challenging, but the lighting is predictable. You might simply dial in 1.3-1.7 stops of exposure compensation next time you have sky as a background. The Exp Comp button on your camera is right next to the shutter so it's a very quick adjustment. Even if you are not perfect, you know you need +1.0 or more of compensation.

Another thing to learn is what you can recover with dark shadows. Sometimes it's good to know you can recover something so might not discard an underexposed image. There may be specific tools or setting, and you might even have steps you take with noise reduction on a heavily underexposed image.

I love images of backlit birds with rimlight or light coming through feathers. Even a silhouette image can be a good photo, so you don't necessarily need to make every image a frontlit image. I would photograph a little tighter if you have a longer zoom or telephoto. In this case, my goal would be to simplify the image to bring out the graphic design of the backlit birds.

 

[Bubbahotep]

Thanks, Eric. This is helpful feedback. I have troubles shooting backlit birds in trees.

 

[Woody Meristem]

Looks like you've done just about all that can be done with that photo.

 

[Bubbahotep]

Thanks. I'm just starting to develop my processing skills so I appreciate your insight. I just wanted to be sure that I wasn't missing anything that an experienced photographer would have been able to fix with ease.

 

[bleirer]

If you are using any program capable of masking, such as Lightroom, you can apply an adjustment to only one bird at a time. I'm not saying you can recover fully, but it's something you could try. What editing program do you use?

 

[Calson]

This is a good example of the value of using flash even without a Better Beamer or similar flash extender. At high ISO settings only a tiny amount of flash is needed for fill and it makes all the difference in the world.

What is overlooked is that boosting the EV in post also distorts the color in images.

 

[jeffnles1]

• Camera: NIKON CORPORATION NIKON D500
• Lens: 500mm f/5.6
• Focal Length: 500mm
• Shutter Speed: 1/2500
• F/Stop: F/7.1
• ISO: 360
• Exposure Bias: -0.3

First, I see you have an exposure compensation of -.3. That's the wrong way to go on an image like this. The flat blue sky in the background isn't really an interesting part of your image. Might as well go ahead and blow it out so that the waxwings can be seen better. On images like this I may go +1.7 to +3 depending on what I want to do. At any rate, holding the +/- button and spinning the wheel to give a few clicks to the + side will mean less shadow lifting you have to do in post. In manual mode you can do the same thing by adjusting your aperture or shutter without hanging ISO. I just prefer how fast the exposure compensation is.

Otherwise nothing to add to what has already been stated.

 

[bleirer]

The old saying for exposure compensation: background brigher-brighten (positive exposure compensation). Background darker-darken.

 

[Turberticus]

This might be a little harsh, but I would not have taken the photo at all had I been standing in your place. The light is bad and the bird is too high in the tree. I would have walked by and looked for better opportunities. One of the best pieces of advice I've heard repeatedly is to get eye level with your subject, and to ensure you have a distant out of focus background that is not the sky.

 

[Bubbahotep]

This might be a little harsh, but I would not have taken the photo at all had I been standing in your place. The light is bad and the bird is too high in the tree. I would have walked by and looked for better opportunities. One of the best pieces of advice I've heard repeatedly is to get eye level with your subject, and to ensure you have a distant out of focus background that is not the sky.

I'm learning and hopefully I'll become good at imaging and processing.

 

[EricBowles]

I'm learning and hopefully I'll become good at imaging and processing.

That's part of it, but it's also important to know what photo actually works. For me, that's a bit based on the end use.

• A photo for identification or proof is the lowest standard and can be out of focus or poorly exposed, and you still might edit it moderately.
• A photo for social media is downsized significantly, so it can be cropped deeper. It's still important to only share your best work, so it needs to be a good photo rather than and average or poor photo. Think a limit of 1-2 images in a day so make them your best ones only.
• A print to hang on your wall needs to be your best work. You've got more cost and time involved, and it is printed at a large size so editing and quality need to be high.
• Competition worthy is the highest level - a photo that in addition to excellent execution needs something special or out of the ordinary. Often this is behavior or action capturing a point in time, unique lighting, etc. It also needs to avoid common or cliche subjects unless your image is truly exceptional.

 

[Bubbahotep]

These are good guideposts. I often do the first bullet point to see what I captured.