Female Belted Kingfisher

[StevieJSmall]

I posted a sample photo in a separate thread on the main forum. After reviewing all my images, I chose this one as it offered the most to work with in processing. Welcome any and all feedback, thank you!

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

 

[NorthernFocus]

You found the bird on a nice perch and captured it in a good posture. The BG stinks. What were your hopes/intentions for this shot?

 

[StevieJSmall]

No hopes or intentions. Was out in morning practicing capturing with 180-600 as it’s my first experience with that lens. Hadn’t been able to put serious time behind it until past weekend and was primarily focused on White Egrets and Great Blue Herons.

On way back to car, saw a bird flapping about and landed on perch, didn’t know what it was until I captured it and saw that it was a Kingfisher which I had not captured before.

So I guess more than anything, it’s an ID shot?

As to background stinks, what stinks about it from your eye? Learning here, so appreciate the feedback, thanks!

 

[Turberticus]

No hopes or intentions. Was out in morning practicing capturing with 180-600 as it’s my first experience with that lens. Hadn’t been able to put serious time behind it until past weekend and was primarily focused on White Egrets and Great Blue Herons.

On way back to car, saw a bird flapping about and landed on perch, didn’t know what it was until I captured it and saw that it was a Kingfisher which I had not captured before.

So I guess more than anything, it’s an ID shot?

As to background stinks, what stinks about it from your eye? Learning here, so appreciate the feedback, thanks!

Kinda jealous you got that close to a Kingfisher and had a relatively clean shot! I agree about the background. It's too close to the subject. A lot of leaves and sticks are in focus and take the attention away from the subject. Ideally the background should be farther away so it's more of a blur which will make your subject 'pop'. I also understand you didn't really time time to worry about the background because this was a spur of the moment photo, so all you can do is keep at it!

 

[StevieJSmall]

Thanks! Learning real quick that I’m not paying attention to backgrounds as much as I need to, so this is great learning!

Given that I’m wide open on this lens, any idea how to create separation more in the field or is this something I’d need to try and address in post?

 

[Anjin San]

You found the bird on a nice perch and captured it in a good posture. The BG stinks. What were your hopes/intentions for this shot?

Stinks is kinda harsh…one takes the BG you get a lot of the time…especially with birds like kingfishers that rarely stay still very long. Not optimum I agree…but toning the exposure down a bit in post and/or a little selective blur in PS can help. A well bokehed BG is always a nice touch though…but sometimes that’s not in the cards.

 

[StevieJSmall]

Stinks is kinda harsh…one takes the BG you get a lot of the time…especially with birds like kingfishers that rarely stay still very long. Not optimum I agree…but toning the exposure down a bit in post and/or a little selective blur in PS can help. A well bokehed BG is always a nice touch though…but sometimes that’s not in the cards.

All good, I’ve got thick skin and stinks is alright by me. I’ll let them respond to what they think would make it better but I suspect I understand why they don’t like it.

I don’t think I can get the separation needed in that specific scenario in the field short of a faster lens so I think doing it in post is the route I’d have to go which it looks like you’re suggesting may be an appropriate measure on this photo?

Thanks for the additional weighing in!

 

[NorthernFocus]

So I guess more than anything, it’s an ID shot?

As to background stinks, what stinks about it from your eye? Learning here, so appreciate the feedback, thanks!

As an ID/documentary shot it's great. Particularly as kingfishers are hard to come by. Way better than any shots I had of them for YEARS. And still have precious few.

As to the BG there's an old saying about imagery to the effect that anything that doesn't add to the image subtracts from it. The BG doesn't really give a sense of place/environment so doesn't add in that regard. OTOH it's very cluttered, draws attention from the bird, and interferes with the bird's outline/details so prevents isolation of the subject. So the BG doesn't really offer the opportunity for an environmental shot nor a portrait. Might have been OK if you'd been closer with shallower DOF. So I guess that's the long description of "stinks".

 

[NorthernFocus]

Stinks is kinda harsh…one takes the BG you get a lot of the time…especially with birds like kingfishers that rarely stay still very long. Not optimum I agree…but toning the exposure down a bit in post and/or a little selective blur in PS can help. A well bokehed BG is always a nice touch though…but sometimes that’s not in the cards.

We always take the BG that we get. And sometimes it stinks.

 

[StevieJSmall]

As an ID/documentary shot it's great. Particularly as kingfishers are hard to come by. Way better than any shots I had of them for YEARS. And still have precious few.

As to the BG there's an old saying about imagery to the effect that anything that doesn't add to the image subtracts from it. The BG doesn't really give a sense of place/environment so doesn't add in that regard. OTOH it's very cluttered, draws attention from the bird, and interferes with the bird's outline/details so prevents isolation of the subject. So the BG doesn't really offer the opportunity for an environmental shot nor a portrait. Might have been OK if you'd been closer with shallower DOF. So I guess that's the long description of "stinks".

Thank you, helpful to read/hear!

Working on backgrounds in field and/or post is something I’m learning I need to spend practice and time on, appreciate it!

 

[NorthernFocus]

Thank you, helpful to read/hear!

Working on backgrounds in field and/or post is something I’m learning I need to spend practice and time on, appreciate it!

You're in good company. In my experience over many years of my own progression and watching that of others paying attention to the BG is typically the last thing that people master. And no matter how much experience we get there are times when things happen too fast or it's a new subject, or etc, etc, and we still end up with BG that stinks Then it's just a question of what happens to the image after capture. There are plenty of other threads discussing file management, etc.

 

[Anjin San]

All good, I’ve got thick skin and stinks is alright by me. I’ll let them respond to what they think would make it better but I suspect I understand why they don’t like it.

I don’t think I can get the separation needed in that specific scenario in the field short of a faster lens so I think doing it in post is the route I’d have to go which it looks like you’re suggesting may be an appropriate measure on this photo?

Thanks for the additional weighing in!

I’m thick skinned too…but still think it was a bit harsh…and it’s so close that I’m not sure even a 2.8 or 4 lens would make much difference. But sometimes you get the BG you get…and sometimes you get a better one...and kingfishers are so hard to photograph ya gotta take what they offer you.

 

[Anjin San]

We always take the BG that we get. And sometimes it stinks.

And I still think stinks is a bit harsh if you say it about somebody else’s shot…but that’s just me. I would say less than desired about their shots but stinks about mine…

 

[StevieJSmall]

@NorthernFocus and @Anjin San: Out of curiosity, I've been learning about Texture Compositing with Photoshop. Since I want the focus to be on the subject and not have the background detract, is this texture overlay something that could work. I'm still new to working with Photoshop's tool sets but maybe this could be "saved" with respect to a more artistic background? Realize I still need to work on better blending/better backgrounds but as a rough sketch idea, worth pursuing or no?

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

 

[Anjin San]

Works for me…but that particular combo looks a bit artificial…I would look for one that was more bokeh like and would also select the BG in LR and bring the exposure and contrast down there or blurring in PS to deemphasize the BG. It won’t be as good as a real bokehed BG would be of course…but given the shot you got and the BG it had…deemphasizing is about all you can do outside of cropping in more to have less BG altogether. Best output might be a combo of exposure, some texturizing, and some blur…with effects on different layers and mess around with sliders and transparency until it looks the best.

 

[StevieJSmall]

Works for me…but that particular combo looks a bit artificial…I would look for one that was more bokeh like and would also select the BG in LR and bring the exposure and contrast down there or blurring in PS to deemphasize the BG. It won’t be as good as a real bokehed BG would be of course…but given the shot you got and the BG it had…deemphasizing is about all you can do outside of cropping in more to have less BG altogether. Best output might be a combo of exposure, some texturizing, and some blur…with effects on different layers and mess around with sliders and transparency until it looks the best.

Copy that, thank you for the guidance! I'll keep playing around with this more, appreciate it!

 

[NorthernFocus]

@NorthernFocus and @Anjin San: Out of curiosity, I've been learning about Texture Compositing with Photoshop. Since I want the focus to be on the subject and not have the background detract, is this texture overlay something that could work. I'm still new to working with Photoshop's tool sets but maybe this could be "saved" with respect to a more artistic background? Realize I still need to work on better blending/better backgrounds but as a rough sketch idea, worth pursuing or no?

Whether it's worth pursuing is a value judgement that you have to make. For me photography is mostly about what goes on in the field. So not my thing personally. At least at this stage of life.

 

[StevieJSmall]

Whether it's worth pursuing is a value judgement that you have to make. For me photography is mostly about what goes on in the field. So not my thing personally. At least at this stage of life.

Understood, thanks!

 

[Anjin San]

Whether it's worth pursuing is a value judgement that you have to make. For me photography is mostly about what goes on in the field. So not my thing personally. At least at this stage of life.

That’s a good approach…mine is does it look nice on the blog…nothing wrong with either approach though.

 

[MMoretti]

Here’s a (very) quick edit using the new AI blur tool in LR. (Oops, I see where it clipped the branch…)

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

 

[StevieJSmall]

Here’s a (very) quick edit using the new AI blur tool in LR. (Oops, I see where it clipped the branch…)

View attachment 71493

Thanks! I tried it myself too and it did a nice job!

Doing that along with making it a portrait crop really brought it out, so I think I found a happy medium. Fortuitous timing on the update from Adobe

 

[MMoretti]

Great to hear (and good idea on the crop)! I have just started to check it out… only learned of the feature when I was updating this week. I’m traveling currently, so have only tried it out on my iPad. Looking forward to seeing it on the desktop apps.

 

[Tiago C]

Welcome to the forums.

Positives about the image, great subject, pose and light.
Some are for improvement from my perspective, it looks like the image is a bit cropped and still the subject is very small in the frame. Less than 5% of the pixels? I suggest get closer to your subject. This usually help with background separation which others also feel like the image needs. If you can't get closer, sometimes changing your position (left/right) is a great way to find a better/more distant background. As others said, background elements with sharp edges can distract from the main point of interest.
You shot at 540mm. 600mm likely would have been better.
I avoid "fixing" images in post as much as possible.
Finally, careful not clip subject highlights. Sometimes it's better to underexpose.

 

[BAL Land]

I haven’t read most of the comments, but even from the downsized version, when I zoom in on the original photo, I see a heck of a lot of noise for ISO 720.

 

[marlowtravelsoften]

Thanks! Learning real quick that I’m not paying attention to backgrounds as much as I need to, so this is great learning!

Given that I’m wide open on this lens, any idea how to create separation more in the field or is this something I’d need to try and address in post?

Get closer to the subject or try to photo a subject that has a background further away from it.