LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


Annoying Branches

FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Bird Talk
Thread started 04 Jun 2012 (Monday) 23:22   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
CommanderStrax
Mostly Lurking
Joined Jan 2012
11 posts
New Zealand
[MORE/SHARE]

I don't photograph birds much as I don't really have a long enough lens. However when something does catch my eye it is usually up a tree with branches in the way. I find they make a very distracting background as well.

How do you experienced bird photographers deal with this? Remove the offending branches in post? Prune the tree and hope the birds land in the right place?

To show what I mean, this is the best shot I got a couple of days ago. Apart from some heavy cropping (my longest lens is a 70-200 f4 IS) it is straight out of the camera, but all those little branches ruin it for me. Most frustrating.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

Post #1, Jun 04, 2012 23:22:00


Canon 1000d | 70-200mm f4L IS | 18-55mm IS | 50mm f1.8 | 75-300mm

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Duane ­ N
Cream of the Crop
Duane N's Avatar
Joined Nov 2007
8,514 posts
Chesapeake, VA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

For me I would pass on the shot unless it was a rare bird but those photo's would just be for documentation. I don't like to do much in Photoshop because I like to keep the images looking as natural as possible. Of course, I do experiment in PS just to see if I can do it.

Post #2, Jun 05, 2012 03:38:43


www.3rdicreations.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
imonkey89
Senior Member
imonkey89's Avatar
Joined Jan 2009
444 posts
Sydney, Australia
[MORE/SHARE]

This is easier to do in Photoshop than it might appear. Although, it is obviously desirable to avoid Photoshop altogether with this kind of photography.

I started out by creating a blue layer above the bird (with a touch of noise) and masking out where the bird is. Then the branches that are actually covering the bird were cloned out. It was a 10 minute job, max!

edit: clearly I missed a shadow on the wing...

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos.

Post #3, Jun 05, 2012 05:24:17


Website/Blog: It's Worth a Shotexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
jhayesvw
Cream of the Crop
Joined Jan 2011
6,392 posts
Tucson AZ
[MORE/SHARE]

nice photoshop.
I will take the pic if the branches are minimal.
Usually I just leave the branches in the pic, but I may remove one if its very distracting.

Post #4, Jun 05, 2012 17:35:49 as a reply to imonkey89's post 12 hours earlier.


Jeremy
7d, 50mm 1.8, 17-55 2.8 IS, 18-55 IS, 100-400L,430 exII
My Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
CommanderStrax
THREAD ­ STARTER
Mostly Lurking
Joined Jan 2012
11 posts
New Zealand
[MORE/SHARE]

That makes a huge difference. Clearly I need to do a bit of practice with photoshop :D

Post #5, Jun 05, 2012 22:35:05 as a reply to jhayesvw's post 4 hours earlier.


Canon 1000d | 70-200mm f4L IS | 18-55mm IS | 50mm f1.8 | 75-300mm

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Levina ­ de ­ Ruijter
I'm a bloody goody two-shoes!
Levina de Ruijter's Avatar
Joined Sep 2008
14,256 posts
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
[MORE/SHARE]

Yes, it's a nice Photoshop job, but it's not what bird photographers do. Like Jeremy says, we will clone out the odd branch in the corner or in the background if it is distracting but to manipulate an image to the extent of the above pic is crazy and not done.
If a bird is in that cluttered a spot, you simply don't take the shot, or you wait until the bird moves to a better, less cluttered spot or you yourself move to a better spot. Bird photography is all about patience and waiting for the right moment.

I forgot to say that if there is no way that I can get a clear shot, I will take the shot anyway, clutter and all. But that's me... :)

Post #6, Jun 08, 2012 18:49:08


Levina - BAT
AMASS - If you were thinking about donating, this would be a good time!
gear

LOG IN TO REPLY
lifeofbrian2007
Member
lifeofbrian2007's Avatar
Joined Apr 2012
83 posts
Mytchett, Surrey
[MORE/SHARE]

Great job, I'm uploading a few thousand branch ridden pics for you to ps right now m8.:p

imonkey89 wrote in post #14533213external link
This is easier to do in Photoshop than it might appear. Although, it is obviously desirable to avoid Photoshop altogether with this kind of photography.

I started out by creating a blue layer above the bird (with a touch of noise) and masking out where the bird is. Then the branches that are actually covering the bird were cloned out. It was a 10 minute job, max!

edit: clearly I missed a shadow on the wing...

Post #7, Jun 08, 2012 21:04:19


flickrexternal link
Canon 550D 18-55mm, 55-250mm, Canon EF 35-80MM 1:4-5.6 III Macro Conversion, Slik Easi-Glide tripod with 506qf head, Tamrac Evolution 6 Sling Backpack

LOG IN TO REPLY
Candor
Goldmember
Candor's Avatar
Joined Jan 2009
4,319 posts
Richmond, VA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #14552483external link
Yes, it's a nice Photoshop job, but it's not what bird photographers do. Like Jeremy says, we will clone out the odd branch in the corner or in the background if it is distracting but to manipulate an image to the extent of the above pic is crazy and not done.
If a bird is in that cluttered a spot, you simply don't take the shot, or you wait until the bird moves to a better, less cluttered spot or you yourself move to a better spot. Bird photography is all about patience and waiting for the right moment.

I have to agree with Levina.

I don't have Photoshop and with DPP you can do some minor cloning but I keep it to a minimum and use it probably on 1-2% of my photos. It is impressive what some can do with pp but to me it kind of defeats the purpose of bird photography. I only use DPP so my pp is limited and I enjoy trying to get everything right on the front end without relying on pp if I miss the mark. We're not graphic artists or at least I'm not so I like to keep my shots as close to how I saw them in field as possible. Putting in the time and energy is the best way to capture the image you're after and branches, leaves and other obstructions are just part of the challenge and when you get a clean shot it is an accomplishment that I wouldn't feel if I just digitally manipulated it into being.

Post #8, Jun 08, 2012 21:54:39


Mike
MikesWildLifeexternal link
flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
imonkey89
Senior Member
imonkey89's Avatar
Joined Jan 2009
444 posts
Sydney, Australia
[MORE/SHARE]

I agree with both of you. I was merely showing him an option.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #14552483external link
Yes, it's a nice Photoshop job, but it's not what bird photographers do. Like Jeremy says, we will clone out the odd branch in the corner or in the background if it is distracting but to manipulate an image to the extent of the above pic is crazy and not done.
If a bird is in that cluttered a spot, you simply don't take the shot, or you wait until the bird moves to a better, less cluttered spot or you yourself move to a better spot. Bird photography is all about patience and waiting for the right moment.

Candor wrote in post #14553064external link
I have to agree with Levina.

I don't have Photoshop and with DPP you can do some minor cloning but I keep it to a minimum and use it probably on 1-2% of my photos. It is impressive what some can do with pp but to me it kind of defeats the purpose of bird photography. I only use DPP so my pp is limited and I enjoy trying to get everything right on the front end without relying on pp if I miss the mark. We're not graphic artists or at least I'm not so I like to keep my shots as close to how I saw them in field as possible. Putting in the time and energy is the best way to capture the image you're after and branches, leaves and other obstructions are just part of the challenge and when you get a clean shot it is an accomplishment that I wouldn't feel if I just digitally manipulated it into being.

Post #9, Jun 09, 2012 02:37:29


Website/Blog: It's Worth a Shotexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Black ­ Bart
Senior Member
Joined Aug 2009
211 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

I prefer the original photo I see so many photos on this forum that look phony a bird on a large limb with no twigs just don't look right.

They look just like what they are a doctored photo.

Post #10, Jun 16, 2012 02:43:41 as a reply to imonkey89's post 7 days earlier.




LOG IN TO REPLY
Duane ­ N
Cream of the Crop
Duane N's Avatar
Joined Nov 2007
8,514 posts
Chesapeake, VA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

Black Bart wrote in post #14586641external link
I prefer the original photo I see so many photos on this forum that look phony a bird on a large limb with no twigs just don't look right.

They look just like what they are a doctored photo.

100% natural. No cloning done to this one. I followed this young Red-shouldered Hawk for 3 hours without scaring it away from any perch it sat on that morning. And I passed on more shots than I actually took patiently waiting for the Hawk to land on a favorable perch without twigs.

http://duanenoblick.ze​nfolio.com ...03759/h137ac843#h13​7ac843external link

http://duanenoblick.ze​nfolio.com ...03759/h3ac5d14d#h3a​c5d14dexternal link

Similar situation with a Red-tailed Hawk as it hunted....patience.

http://duanenoblick.ze​nfolio.com ...20331/h21963112#h21​963112external link

Belted Kingfisher...although not a natural perch I did pass on shots of it in clutter as it fished a canal.

http://duanenoblick.ze​nfolio.com ...41519/h195d1b13#h19​5d1b13external link

Chipping Sparrow.

http://duanenoblick.ze​nfolio.com ...42334/h17856a98#h17​856a98external link

I could go on but as many others have already said nothing beats having patience and waiting on the shot you're after. Having some luck also helps. Your assumption is wrong. I have seen some photo's where it's obvious the background or environment has been altered in Photoshop just don't assume every bird photo without clutter has been "doctored" up in Photoshop.....it's an insult to the ones that actually have patience and put in the time to get a clutter free enviornment. ;)

Post #11, Jun 16, 2012 04:02:46


www.3rdicreations.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
Black ­ Bart
Senior Member
Joined Aug 2009
211 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Duane N wrote in post #14586744external link
100% natural. No cloning done to this one. I followed this young Red-shouldered Hawk for 3 hours without scaring it away from any perch it sat on that morning. And I passed on more shots than I actually took patiently waiting for the Hawk to land on a favorable perch without twigs.

http://duanenoblick.ze​nfolio.com ...03759/h137ac843#h13​7ac843external link

http://duanenoblick.ze​nfolio.com ...03759/h3ac5d14d#h3a​c5d14dexternal link

Similar situation with a Red-tailed Hawk as it hunted....patience.

http://duanenoblick.ze​nfolio.com ...20331/h21963112#h21​963112external link

Belted Kingfisher...although not a natural perch I did pass on shots of it in clutter as it fished a canal.

http://duanenoblick.ze​nfolio.com ...41519/h195d1b13#h19​5d1b13external link

Chipping Sparrow.

http://duanenoblick.ze​nfolio.com ...42334/h17856a98#h17​856a98external link

I could go on but as many others have already said nothing beats having patience and waiting on the shot you're after. Having some luck also helps. Your assumption is wrong. I have seen some photo's where it's obvious the background or environment has been altered in Photoshop just don't assume every bird photo without clutter has been "doctored" up in Photoshop.....it's an insult to the ones that actually have patience and put in the time to get a clutter free enviornment. ;)

Well I guess it comes down to personal preference.
What you call clutter I call environment.
While a bird setting on a branch with nothing else in sight does draw your attention to the bird after all that is all there is to look at it just don't look right to me.

My wife is much worse than me about this she has a fit when she sees these doctored photos.

I guess it is different strokes for different folks, What ever makes you happy is the right one.
The way I see it if you like something different that don't make it wrong just different.
Your Eagle shots are awesome but I have seen photos that some posted that were over sharpened and over saturated and cloned till IMO they looked BAD.

Post #12, Jun 16, 2012 09:29:19




LOG IN TO REPLY
jhayesvw
Cream of the Crop
Joined Jan 2011
6,392 posts
Tucson AZ
[MORE/SHARE]

I agree with Duane and I have posted what I do.

I think most people do similarly to what I do. Only remove a very distracting branch or bright spot. Otherwise most people just wait til they can get a shot they want.

I dont look very closely at the background of most photos, but I havent noticed many photos that look cloned or anything.

Some people are after the ultimate detail photo they can get. This sometimes requires an artificial perch and lots of waiting to get CLOSE.
some people prefer completely natural shooting and hope to get pretty close.

Other people have nice BIG lenses and can isolate their subject even though its in a relatively cluttered area.

I just wouldnt say that the photos on this site look doctored or cloned.

Post #13, Jun 17, 2012 00:15:38 as a reply to Black Bart's post 14 hours earlier.


Jeremy
7d, 50mm 1.8, 17-55 2.8 IS, 18-55 IS, 100-400L,430 exII
My Flickrexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Oldjackssparrows
Jeeeez, incredible comments!
Oldjackssparrows's Avatar
Joined Oct 2009
12,471 posts
Tol Eressea
[MORE/SHARE]

Do you ever hear a little chuckle or laughing noise when they go to the branches like this one? I say they are playing with us smart humans, having fun. I hear them laughing all the time!

Post #14, Jun 23, 2012 11:55:40


1DX, 400/f2.8 and other Canon gear
OldJackBAT

LOG IN TO REPLY
Duane ­ N
Cream of the Crop
Duane N's Avatar
Joined Nov 2007
8,514 posts
Chesapeake, VA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

BGgraphy wrote in post #14620991external link
Do you ever hear a little chuckle or laughing noise when they go to the branches like this one? I say they are playing with us smart humans, having fun. I hear them laughing all the time!

I think you're right..I can always hear laughing but never know where it's coming from. :p

Post #15, Jun 23, 2012 13:09:53


www.3rdicreations.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
1,701 views & 0 likes for this thread
Annoying Branches
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Bird Talk



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.00092 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
722 guests, 507 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is sulina

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.