Hooded Merganser... trying out a new 4 stage sharpening process.

[sk66]

I've been playing with the D810's ISO invariance by setting the camera to underexpose by 2 stops. I'm using manual mode with auto ISO enabled (min/max limits set) and highlight weighted metering.
The only point here is to underexpose by using a lower ISO in order to save highlights... it could be done a half dozen different ways.

I'm also playing with a little different sharpening methodology in LR.
Step 1: I'm using the global sharpening in deconvolution mode (radius .5-1, detail 100)... this is "high frequency capture sharpening"... the key here is to use masking and care to not increase the noise in smooth/low detail areas.
Step 2: I then use the brush to selectively apply (unsharp mask type) sharpening. This is "creative sharpening."
Step 3: This image was also/optionally sent to PS for a bit of advanced editing and a touch of luminance sharpening on top as another level of creative sharpening (copy image, convert to smart object, unsharp mask, layer mode set to luminance, masked in selectively).
Step 4: Output sharpening... since this is for web display at various sizes I didn't do any additional sharpening here.

I'm quite happy with the results, but I'm looking for feedback on the processing and the image overall.
Probably better viewed on flickr where it can be viewed larger if desired.



Hooded Merganser by Steven Kersting, on Flickr


Original image

 

[gramps]

It looks good to me, though maybe just a tad dark?

One question though, you say you are using 'Auto ISO' ... isn't it the case that some 'mid-range' settings (125, 160 etc, for example) are not truly ISO-invariant?
If this is the case is it best to use Auto ISO or simply fix at an ISO that you know to be ISO-invariant?

 

[sk66]

It looks good to me, though maybe just a tad dark?

Looking at it here it does seem a bit flat maybe...

isn't it the case that some 'mid-range' settings (125, 160 etc, for example) are not truly ISO-invariant?

No, not really. I believe there is a point on most cameras at high ISOs where invariance is lost (digital ISOs,etc), but IME it is well above any ISO I would typically use anyway. There are some cameras that have dual stage gain at intermediate ISOs (like my D5 and many Canons), but I wouldn't consider them to be invariant. If you are underexposing using one of those cameras I guess they key would be to use a "good ISO" and not one with excessive noise (and experiment).

The benefit of using auto ISO as opposed to just locking it down at minimum is that I get a better image to review.
I do the first quick cull during import, deselecting any images that are sub-par. A lot of the time I'm only importing images that may be as good as/better than images I have previously taken of the species (a lot of rejects). If I had to import everything, and then adjust the exposures just to do the first cull it would suck a lot of time and annoy me. Being 2 stops under does mean I might import a few rejects, but I can generally see focus/DOF/BG/etc well enough.

 

[wezza13]

On my monitor, it looks quite flat. Definitely looks better with the white points adjusted and the black point slightly lowered. The white part of the birds hood, seems grey on the one you've posted.

Hope that helps. Lovely composition too

 

[sk66]

On my monitor, it looks quite flat. Definitely looks better with the white points adjusted and the black point slightly lowered. The white part of the birds hood, seems grey on the one you've posted.

Hope that helps. Lovely composition too

I did adjust the BP/WP using levels in PS...

 

[sk66]

Re-edit. Same WP/BP as before, but I added a curves layer with a luminance mask to brighten the image overall. I also removed a slight blue cast in the white hood area.


Hooded Merganser by Steven Kersting, on Flickr

 

[Kodiak Qc]

•


Woah!!! very nice take Steven!
I too see it as a tad dark and it seems to
lean to the right as well!

Never met one of those!

 

[Kodiak Qc]

Re-edit

This one went too far IMO.
I use the tonal taming method in cases like this.

 

[pukkagen]

Excellent first post shot, really love the tones, when I opened it in PS the image appeared brighter than here, maybe photographs appear different on a forum. However, upping the contrast plus 15 while keeping the whites *as are* then saturation minus 10 to allow for the contrast on the colours, was also a nice rendition. But as said in PS it was nice unedited. Top stuff indeed.

 

[gramps]

Edit seems to have diluted the colour a little, particularly the brown.

 

[sk66]

•


Woah!!! very nice take Steven!
I too see it as a tad dark and it seems to
lean to the right as well!

Never met one of those!

Thanks. Adjusted the lean using the body line and brightened a little.
These birds are only in North America...

This one went too far IMO.
I use the tonal taming method in cases like this.

I think I agree...
It's impossible to account for monitor variances... but I really hate to blow out all of the white detail after working to retain it initially.

When I post the fix, the original will be replaced.

 

[sk66]

Excellent first post shot, really love the tones, when I opened it in PS the image appeared brighter than here, maybe photographs appear different on a forum. However, upping the contrast plus 15 while keeping the whites *as are* then saturation minus 10 to allow for the contrast on the colours, was also a nice rendition. But as said in PS it was nice unedited. Top stuff indeed.

Thanks! I do think linked images don't show their best here...

 

[sk66]

Deleted second edit and replaced original edit with some small tweaks...

 

[Kodiak Qc]

replaced original edit with some small tweaks...

Quite better… but I believe the shot has a lot more
to offer with less PP headaches.

 

[sk66]

Quite better… but I believe the shot has a lot more
to offer with less PP headaches.

I'm game.
Here's a link to the original raw file in dng format

 

[Kodiak Qc]

•


This is what I get…

 

[Kodiak Qc]

•


OK… got the right one…
I'll be back… shortly!

…and why DNG?

 

[Kodiak Qc]

•


Here you are, thanks for the trust!
Sorry for the delay… supper time!
Two tweaks in less than 30 seconds…

 

[pooley]

I couldn't resist a little play Steven, but to be honest I don't think its an ideal shot to be looking at sharpening methods and ISO invariance. The bird is too small in frame in the original to be effectively looking at 4 step sharpening due to the lack of pixels on the bird, and the light was too bright for the dynamic range of the camera. The shot was underexposed by about 2 stops just to try and retain the highlights, but the conditions then left the blacks with virtually no detail. In fact there were black clipped areas in the histogram of the file I downloaded.

That all said, it does still work as a web sized jpeg, and has a nice calm pose and head turn with a lively low shooting angle.

I probably spent far longer on this than anything I can remember for a while! I found the whites on the head the largest challenge, and had to use a variety of techniques to retain some form of detail - I used a luminosity mask that was multiplied several times to target just the very brightest whites which were then pulled down on a curves layer. I then went to 'white' in selective colour and pushed the blacks slider quite a way over, before performing some burning of the whites using the Tim Grey method. I didn't want to go too far with any of it though as for me, there is too much greying out on the original frame.

I just used 3 steps of sharpening here (and its an area I want to learn more about) with the original input LR sharpening, before running a contrast mask over the entire shot, then finally some output sharpening after resizing.

I think there is going to be a lot of mileage in ISO invariance over the coming years - just not really useful for this particular shot - I still needed to run a little NR over parts of the end file which I don't think I should be doing at ISO 100.

Anyway, its an interesting thread, so here my version



Mike

 

[sk66]

I probably spent far longer on this than anything I can remember for a while! I found the whites on the head the largest challenge,

LOL! Yes, it's a difficult image. Optimally the image would have been taken in softer light with less DR demands. I agree the bird was a bit far, but these wild ducks are VERY nervous/flighty... and they are quite small. While I agree it may not be the best subject/situation for the methods employed, I do think anything else/less would not have been as good... I've tried numerous times over many years...

 

[sk66]

Two tweaks in less than 30 seconds…

I'm sure you could do better with more time/effort... But I do appreciate the looser crop/composition.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

I'm sure you could do better with more time/effort

Yes, but what I wanted to do was

• come to an acceptable result showing that all data is at hand
• in the shortest possible times
• demonstrate that even the sharpness is there no need for more

There is of course the fact that I was not there and I don't know how you
would want to render it.

Like I said, the data is all there and I did not understand why one should
sweat so much on such a cool capture.

 

[sk66]

The shot was underexposed by about 2 stops just to try and retain the highlights, but the conditions then left the blacks with virtually no detail. In fact there were black clipped areas in the histogram of the file I downloaded.

BTW, with this image the underexposure is/was not an issue... that is the point of using an ISO invariant sensor for this. I could have increased the ISO, but the results would have been worse (unrecoverable highlights). Ideally, I would have used a slower SS as I was on a tripod; but I was really hoping for some action shots.

 

[sk66]

Like I said, the data is all there and I did not understand why one should
sweat so much on such a cool capture.

Because I wanted to get the most out of it possible... that was the whole point of the exercise.

 

[pukkagen]

Still here processing? The first is the best when I view PS, subtle tones yet a prominent and striking lil subject, remember some are viewing on a 21/27retina, some maybe a Dell IPS, some an iPhone, some on a blackberry

I would be perfectly happy if it was my picture on all accounts. I do understand when you have a nice shot it's nice to process for hours to achieve your goal. Kodiak's crop was rather cool.

Good luck anyhow.

 

[Kodiak Qc]

wanted to get the most out of it possible

My suggestion was only to present what was the best output
— through CO of the recorded data: DRL, tonal values, and
WB. Anything else is artistic intent and I would not interfere
with one's own.

 

[sk66]

I would be perfectly happy if it was my picture on all accounts. I do understand when you have a nice shot it's nice to process for hours to achieve your goal.

Thanks!
Nothing like "hours," maybe 20 minutes which is at the longer end of how much time I usually spend on images. Well, initially at least... the minor tweaks/re-edits added a few minutes.