Juvenile Kingfisher

Wow, stunning levels of detail - very nicely done! :)

The closest I've managed is a distant speck across the lake!
 
Almost missed this super set Mick.......... cracking images :clap::clap::clap::clap: it pays to look back on past threads sometimes.:)
 
3 very nice capture Mick, but the do look quite dull as presented, have you reduced the highlights too much maybe or something similar?

If this is your own setup, then it might be worth raising the perches a little to closer to eye level if the BG allows it.

They're very good detail wise but I think they could be better regarding the tones

Mike
 
Morning Mick ....... wonderful little birds

and your usual top quality shots ......... which are hard to fault ...... so my comments just relate to Critique at your high standards

....... I agree with Mike that the dynamic range could be improved, the shots are on the dull side, (I think that some of the last shots you posted may have received the same comments from me)

......... the images are relatively quite grainy........ the shadows seem to be flat and unattractive ...... it is that "dark" fine noise, (I call it "coal dust" noise) ..... that can effect KF shots because of their particular colouring on the head and wings

....... you can go round in circles with pp, you improve something and it worsens another aspect, etc., etc., ........ but these are such wonderful shots .... so I would spend a little more time on them ......... keep them natural, but try to improve the overall light and definition on the birds

I'll have a go at an Edit
 
Last edited:
3 very nice capture Mick, but the do look quite dull as presented, have you reduced the highlights too much maybe or something similar?

If this is your own setup, then it might be worth raising the perches a little to closer to eye level if the BG allows it.

They're very good detail wise but I think they could be better regarding the tones

Mike
Morning Mick ....... wonderful little birds

and your usual top quality shots ......... which are hard to fault ...... so my comments just relate to Critique at your high standards

....... I agree with Mike that the dynamic range could be improved, the shots are on the dull side, (I think that some of the last shots you posted may have received the same comments from me)

......... the images are relatively quite noisy ...... it is that "dark" fine noise, (I call it "coal dust" noise) ..... that can effect KF shots because of their particular colouring on the head and wings

....... you can go round in circles with pp, you improve something and it worsens another aspect, etc., etc., ........ but these are such wonderful shots .... so I would spend a little more time on them ......... keep them natural, but try to improve the overall light and definition on the birds


Thank's both, as you know editing sometimes it hard to find a fine line between natural and a step too far when they start to look altered to much and over saturated/sharpened etc I agree they may be worth a redo and will try and find the raws to have another look at them?

Here a couple more that I took at a similar time to the others?


Juvenile Kingfisher by Mick Erwin, on Flickr


Kingfisher by Mick Erwin, on Flickr
 
Crikey there's some fussy bu88ers on this site :)
All look good to me.
Matt

I don't think that we are "fussy" I just think that we are really interested in the posted image and would rather say a few words than "good shot" or similar ........... that's how we have all improved by being interested in what is said and what we think of the posted images.

As I have often said there are many images on here that are far better than those that win competitions and similar
 
I don't think that we are "fussy" I just think that we are really interested in the posted image and would rather say a few words than "good shot" or similar ........... that's how we have all improved by being interested in what is said and what we think of the posted images.

As I have often said there are many images on here that are far better than those that win competitions and similar

Totally agree Bill and that's why I like this forum, when I first started it was a great help people telling me what I was doing wrong and I still make great bloomers! Especially when you have been editing for a bit in one session you get fed up and rush stuff often missing obvious things that others see :)
 
Very nice Mick - looks like you've taken the highlights down too far though, to give them the grey-ish look?

We don't like seeing blown highlights, I know, but I was down the lake last night watching the Kingies and the Grebes and do you know what? Even with the naked eye they had blown highlights! ;)
 
Mick_original.jpg


Edit
Mick_Edit.jpg



Mick_original_2.jpg


Edit
Mick_Edit_2.jpg


you could even go further with the highlights ......... I probably would

you could say they all look the same ...... it's just that little bit extra when you have light like that

but it could all be down the the brightness settings we have on our different monitors ........ but the histogram should help ....... particularly if you "blow" the highlights in pp and then bring them back selectively
 
Last edited:
I don't think that we are "fussy" I just think that we are really interested in the posted image and would rather say a few words than "good shot" or similar ........... that's how we have all improved by being interested in what is said and what we think of the posted images.

As I have often said there are many images on here that are far better than those that win competitions and similar
Tongue in cheek Bill, I recognize your skills and those of the various posters of bird shots, far greater than mine and I only wish mine were good enough to warrant your advice.
As I said in another post it's great to see edited shots and how they can be improved as opposed to just saying something needs to be lighter or whatever. I can see in your edits above how the shots have been improved. Care to say what you have done to them.
Matt
 
Last edited:
Back
Top