Osprey, redone

[Scottes]

One of my Osprey pictures, redone a bit.

Developed in Capture One
Soft-look sharpening, developed as 16-bit TIFF (otherwise untouched in C1)
Opened in PS CS
Cropped to ~1200x800
Neat Image Noise Removal
Levels Adjustment
Resized to 800x534 (Fred Miranda Plugin)
Sharpened (Fred Miranda Plugin, Level 3)
Converted to sRGB
Saved for Web, Very High Quality

The image obviously needed contrast, sharpening and noise removal, but seemed to be OK otherwise. Do you see anything that might have been done otherwise?

Given that this is fairly close to captured size, does this look OK? particularly the sharpening?

http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/CRW_4994_800.jpg

Oh yeah: ISO 400, 1/1000, f/8, EC + 2/3, Canon 100-400 @ 400, Canon 10D

[G3]

What can I say, Scottes? Very nicely done. The slight blur of the wingtip feathers in contrast to the ultra-sharpness of the rest of the bird nicely conveys a sense of motion. The white feathers on the side of the bird's torso are blown out just a little, but the dynamic range of this picture would make it just about impossible to prevent that, plus it doesn't really detract from the photo in my opinion. I like it.

[PhotosGuy]

I like it, but the wings might be a touch too sharp? My personal preference is that a little (more) blur helps in action pics. Still, it's a great shot as it is.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Scott, this is looking great.

Your workflow on this is very advanced and definately has made a great photo "pop".

Here is something I would add to your post process as an option.

I've actually got a thread somewhere I'll try to dig up.. but in an instance like this.. the noise removal process to me does something to the subject that I find immediately recognizable.. and a little displeasing.

The white areas on the wings and torso are the most notable area.. they look "too clean" after Neat Image.

The trick is to run Neat image on a second layer above the original.. and then use the erasor tool to erase the "clean up" processing off of the detailed areas of the bird. (or subject)

That way you get to clean up the sky.. but leave the subject looking more natural..

This is not a step that most people will want to take all the time.. but as you are allready putting the effort in this photo (that deserves to be it's best) you may want to consider this extra step.

[Scottes]

The white areas on the wings and torso are the most notable area.. they look "too clean" after Neat Image.

Actually, I ran through that last night because I remembered your post. But it didn't help on this one. You're not seeing clean wings, you're seeing blown-out wings! ISO 400 over-exposed has no noise, trust me!

If I had a different attitude I would have cloned/healed in some feather details into the blown-out areas. But I just can't do that with wildlife. Well, maybe, but I'd have to clearly mark it as modified. And I'd probably hate it afterwards.

Is that strange? I think that it OK to change color/exposure/noise/cropping/contrast, but I won't change a *detail* in a wildlife shot.


But no fears CDS, I remember that post well and it *will* be used on noise and a few other similar changes. I almost used the technique to perform selective sharpening but it was so very late by the time I was done with this. I went through a number of iterations and movements trying to get a workflow down to create 800-, 600- and 400-pixel images and a thumbnail. This was the culmination of ~3 hours work trying to develop an automated workflow, which will hopefully end up as a Photoshop Visual Basic script.

One thing I learned - after trying 4 different sharpening techniques at various levels - Fred Miranda's Intellisharpen kicks butt.

[tommykjensen]

Scottes, I noticed You also used a resize plugin from Fred Miranda. Any particular reason for that?

[Scottes]

Scottes, I noticed You also used a resize plugin from Fred Miranda. Any particular reason for that?

The FM plugin is nice in that it automatically resizes in small amounts until it gets to the size you want. If you go from 3000x2000 directly to 600x400 it looks OK, but it you resize it from 3000x to 2700x to 2430x to 2250x to 2000x.... well, it looks a lot better. With the FM plugin you type in the desired final size and it steps it down for you.

For $15 it's worth every penny, even though I could PS-Script the same routine myself in a night. And actions will do almost the same thing, but they don't have the brains to multiply by .9 or to stop at a particular point... You could come close with several actions, like one to do 3000x2000 stepping down to to 800x534, another to do 2500x1665 down to 800x600. Then you'd just crop or resize the last step by hand.

But for $15....

My normal workflow is 4 steps - levels, crop, FM resize, FM sharpen. VERY easy...

[tommykjensen]

Sounds like I should visit the FM site. I already have the intellisharpen plugin - haven't used it much yet.

[rick barclay]

Are you saying that gradually stepping my Photoshop photos down from
large to small will give me a sharper picture than if I do it all at once?

I guess I'll try that and see for my self.

[Scottes]

Are you saying that gradually stepping my Photoshop photos down from
large to small will give me a sharper picture than if I do it all at once?

Yes.

To go from 3000x2000 to 800x600 takes about 8 separate resizes using the Fred Miranda plugin.

[rick barclay]

To go from 3000x2000 to 800x600 takes about 8 separate resizes using the Fred Miranda plugin.

Do I have to use the plug-in? I can't do the same thing in Photoshop/Image/Image Size?

[tommykjensen]

Scottes, I visited the Fred Miranda site but could not find the plugin. Do You think he has discontinued it? Whats the exact name of the plugin?

[PhotosGuy]

Do I have to use the plug-in?
No.

I can't do the same thing in Photoshop/Image/Image Size?
Yes, you can. You can even automate it by making an 'Action'. Better yet, make a set.

[Scottes]

Scottes, I visited the Fred Miranda site but could not find the plugin. Do You think he has discontinued it? Whats the exact name of the plugin?

Web Presenter Pro - yeah, not very intuitive, so I apologize for not mentioning it before.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/shopping/WPpro


Edit: Harumph - it's $20 now. Maybe it always was.

[Scottes]

I can't do the same thing in Photoshop/Image/Image Size?
Yes, you can. You can even automate it by making an 'Action'. Better yet, make a set.[/quote]

The problem that I see with making an action is that actions can't do math. So you can't say "make this 10% smaller" let alone "repeat the last step until it's 400 pixels wide"

Each step in the action has to be very specific - "resize to 2700x 1800" then the next step is "resize to 2430 x 1620" and so on with the last step being "resize to 800x533." So if you *always* start with 3000x2000 images and end up with 800x533 then you're all set with an action. But run that action on a 1600x1200 cropped image and the first thing it's gonna do is resize it to 2700 x 1800, then start stepping down until it hits 800x533.

The FM plugin is nice because it does the math. Give it an image of ANY size and give it your desired size and it does the math.

Now, you could make a number of actions and they'll work great IF you always work in the same sizes - start and finish.

[rick barclay]

Thanks for the info.

Any of those FM plugins worth the $30 or so he charges, IYO?

[PhotosGuy]

Each step in the action has to be very specific - "resize to 2700x 1800" then the next step is "resize to 2430 x 1620" and so on with the last step being "resize to 800x533." So if you *always* start with 3000x2000 images and end up with 800x533 then you're all set with an action. But run that action on a 1600x1200 cropped image and the first thing it's gonna do is resize it to 2700 x 1800, then start stepping down until it hits 800x533.

"...you're all set with an action." No, not AN action. Make a SET of actions:
Start with 3000x2000 & reduce the size. DON'T STOP! Now, reduce it again, etc., 'till you reach your target size. You wind up with a set of actions.

If you later need to start out with on odd sized pic, you just turn off the actions you don't need before you start.

[Scottes]

"...you're all set with an action." No, not AN action. Make a SET of actions:
Start with 3000x2000 & reduce the size. DON'T STOP! Now, reduce it again, etc., 'till you reach your target size. You wind up with a set of actions.

If you later need to start out with on odd sized pic, you just turn off the actions you don't need before you start.

Ahah! I took a closer look at the actions and noticed the little checkmarks next to each. So you could create an action that resized in several steps - but then disable the steps that you don't need.

Is that what you mean?

Give me a minute... <clunk> <shatter> <bang bang bang> <CLICK>

Got it: http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/ResizeInSteps.atn

Two actions to resize from 3072x2048 down to either 800x533 (in 13 steps) or 600x400 (in 16 steps). If your image is smaller than 3072x2048 then simply uncheck the steps that are larger than your image. WARNING: If your image is not very very close to 3:2 aspect ratio it will come out looking stretched.

Here's the end result:

From 3072x 2048 directly down to 400x266 in one step, done plain bicubic
http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/resize_test_1_step.jpg

Done in 20 steps, plain bicubic
http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/resize_test_20_steps.jpg

Fred Miranda Web Presenter Pro Plugin:
http://www.itsanadventure.com/postimages/resize_test_fm.jpg

Edit: Just in case you saw this in a 10 minute lapse, I removed all Bicubic Sharper and just did plain Bicubic so that sharpening can be user controlled.

Edit 2: Add Fred Miranda plugin comparison

[Scottes]

Thanks for the info.

Any of those FM plugins worth the $30 or so he charges, IYO?

Depends. If you have the money to spare, and are new to Photoshop, then yes. But if you answer "no" to either question then you can create actions that will almost duplicate them.

I say almost because the plugins have some intelligence and/or easily selectable choice that are either difficult or impossible to duplicate with simple actions. For instance I duplicated FM's Web Presenter Pro in the actions above. But my actions work on images with a 3:2 aspect ratio ONLY. And if your beginning image is smaller than 3072x2048 then you have to manually disable the larger steps.

But I think that I'm also going to duplicate his Intellisharpen in actions, too. That should actually be a rather identical duplication, although to actually duplicate the FM plugin I'd have to create 15 actions. The FM plugin has 15 degrees of sharpening. I barely ever use level 4, and it's a tough photo that needs level 5, so I'll probably just do 5 actions.

[PhotosGuy]

So you could create an action that resized in several steps - but then disable the steps that you don't need.
Is that what you mean?

That's it.

WARNING: If your image is not very very close to 3:2 aspect ratio it will come out looking stretched.

You didn't put a check in the "Constrain Proportions" box? Using that, you should only have to enter one dimension & the other will be entered automatically. Shouldn't be any "stretch".

[Scottes]

You're right. I got mixed up with doing an action that I wanted. My real goal was to get 4 images, all at 3:2 aspect: 800x533, 600x400, 400x266 and 150x100. So I "locked" those very particular sizes in at one point because the algorithm often likes 800x534 and such.

I could have constrained the whole way through and it would have been fine for those widths, but I wanted the exact heights, too.

Oh well. It's easy enough for anyone to duplicate - it's just a pain in the butt to get it right for 23 steps in a row... :)

[tommykjensen]

Scottes, I visited the Fred Miranda site but could not find the plugin. Do You think he has discontinued it? Whats the exact name of the plugin?

Web Presenter Pro - yeah, not very intuitive, so I apologize for not mentioning it before.

http://www.fredmiranda.com/shopping/WPpro


Edit: Harumph - it's $20 now. Maybe it always was.

Thanks, found it, bought it and used it to create my new avatar.