Part 2 - Off-Topic - advice, experiences, and examples for images being processed in DxO Photolab

[mikemyers]

@swmurray

Are you testing shutter speed, various hand holding techniques to get sharper photos, etc?
Intentional practice, not random shots, will get you better results.

That is exactly what I was doing. I went out on my balcony, and followed every boat or bird to try to keep the camera from “wobbling” in my hands. This pelican came by about an hour after I started, and I tried to do exactly what I did while practicing. I figure it does no good to fill the frame, until I can hold the camera steadily.

I suspect it was helpful to use shutter priority, with the shutter speed set to 1/2000th.

For my purposes, this shot was perfect - and out of the 18 images I ended up with, from the first to the last were equally satisfactory.

First image of my ‘burst’:
780_2584 | 2024-03-10.nef (25.0 MB)

Last image:
780_2616 | 2024-03-10.nef (25.0 MB)

I will certainly check out your two links, but for my purposes, the image I got was perfect - I’m still debating what I think about @Joanna’s image. At the same time I think it’s more beautiful, but less realistic.

The shots I took were very much intentional but I obviously need to zoom in a lot more.

Here’s a 100% crop of my first image, and my last, no editing:

I hope I can do as well, zoomed in all the way.

By the way, it’s difficult for me to consider a 300mm lens as “medium length”. This is the longest lens I have ever owned, and my experience with a Sigma 600mm is that I’m not strong enough to hold it out in front of me, let alone holding it still. I think a monopod would be essential for me, yet one more thing to learn.

Thank you for the YouTube links. I’ll watch both of them after breakfast this morning.

Strange - you are suggesting “pre-visualizing”, while my goal right now seems to be just holding the camera steady while keeping the bird within the frame. Maybe I’ll (eventually) improve.

[mikemyers]

This image is horrible, but at some point in the future, I’d like get a photo like this, but photographed properly. This bird went over my head and out of sight behind my building.

780_2584 | 2024-03-10.nef (25.0 MB)

I don’t recall ever seeing a bird with its wings like this.
I’m just adding it to my “wish list” for the future.

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

@mikemyers

was to hold the camera steady enough that the image would be sharp

But it isn’t. At 100%; the bird is only just visible, but the eye is barely discernible…

At 400%, the details aren’t really sharp…

And, at 800%, you can begin to see why the details on this this image can never be sharp…

There are not enough pixels to render the eye shape as a curve and no amount of sharpening will ever improve this. In fact, what sharpening has been applied is already creating halos around anywhere where dark and light areas join.

@mikemyers

the image created by Topaz doesn’t look “real” to me. It’s crisp, and sharp, and clear, but almost too much so

My image from Topaz shows what happens when you try to get rid of these halos - you start to get that horrible “over-sharpened” “plastic” look.

@mikemyers

Do you agree, or is that the kind of end result to aim for?

I agree totally that that is not what you should be aiming at. It was an example of an image that should have been correctly framed in the camera, not cropped in post processing.

@mikemyers

The shots I took were very much intentional but I obviously need to zoom in a lot more.

Here’s a 100% crop of my first image, and my last, no editing:

What do you mean, no editing?…

Cropping is editing. And, even with the 300mm focal length, the bird is no bigger in the frame than your previous shot at 175mm.

@mikemyers

I hope I can do as well, zoomed in all the way.

But, for the first one, you were zoomed in all the way.

Mike, let me say it again - if the subject doesn’t fill at least half the frame in the viewfinder, you might as well not press the shutter. Believe me, I have tried shots like this in the vain hope that I might make something out of them but they sit there in my library still unused.

The only time a smaller subject can work is if it has some dynamic about it - like this image of “La Patrouille de France”…

Which I didn’t dare crop beyond this…

… because the planes need somewhere to fly into and the smoke trails come out of the top-left corner.

In reality, this really is a non-picture. Whereas, this one…

Cropped from this…

… is much more of a keeper.

Better still, totally uncropped…

… but I had to take over 600 shots and junk 550 to get that. Even now, there are still a lot more that are more private memory shots than worthwhile ones.

That entire shoot was taken with my 80-400mm, just in case thangs were too far away but, in fact, I’ve only got 15 shots at 400mm - the majority, like the previous uncropped shot were at 250mm on average.

My best shot of the day at 400mm has to be this one…

… even though it is a full height (4912px) centre crop from a landscape frame, I’m not sure whether this would really stand up to my normal print size of 20" x 16" mainly because there is a lack of sharpness caused by atmospheric haze.

[platypus (Canon & Mac (Intel and M1))]

Catching birds in flight needs some overexposure, specially when the sky is overcast.

Try with +1 and +2 and raise your iso settings to prevent motion blur…and shoot “with the sun” in order to prevent backlighting.

If you check the times of day when birds mostly fly, you can set yourself up accordingly.
More birds → more exercise → more hits (after some time)

Simple as that.

[mikemyers]

@Joanna

But it isn’t. At 100%; the bird is only just visible, but the eye is barely discernible…

Some more criteria for whether or not an image is sharp:

Can YOUR PHOTOS Pass My Sharpness Tests?

I’m not sure if I’m ready for this yet, but I guess I need to leave my lens at 300mm most of the time, instead of zoomed out until I see the bird, then start zooming in. First thing for me, now - get subject inside field of view, and start shooting. It takes some time before the lens and my camera and I settle down, but I guess I need to go right to 300 as soon as possible.

Next, I need @Joanna to send me some “sharpen pills” so my body can do what it’s supposed to do, better. …or more realistically, lots more practice at this.

@Joanna

… but I had to take over 600 shots and junk 550 to get that. Even now, there are still a lot more that are more private memory shots than worthwhile ones.

Are you suggesting that for you, one shot out of 500 is what you would call “sharp”??

[mikemyers]

Tried, w/o success, to get an answer from Nikon Tech Support.

My Nikon 70-300 VR ED AF-P 70-300 lens has two switches on the side. The top one lists A/m M/a and M.

With the regular tech person on the phone, she had no idea of the difference between the first two.

The more experienced person I asked for gave the same definition for the first and second choices - and when I asked him what the difference was, he had no idea, and offered to send me the user manual for my lens - but even that he messed up, sending the wrong link.

I think I eventually did find the explanation:

M/A : Autofocus can be overridden by manually focusing with the focus ring. A/M : Autofocus can be overridden by manually focusing with the focus ring, but focus ring detection sensitivity is lower than in A/M mode. Use this mode to avoid canceling the AF setting by unintentionally moving the focus ring.

I think I left them both rather frustrated, but as for me, I will use the first choice A/m. I have never yet attempted to use Manual focus with this lens.

[Wolfgang ([ Win10, PL+VP+FP, Nik6 (+3) ])]

@mikemyers

I think I eventually did find the explanation:

check the manual if you don’t trust your beloved Ken Rockwell anymore

( and has nothing to do with DxO … )

[mikemyers]

Thanks - the link you sent me was what Nikon tried to send me, but they sent the wrong link.

Your link has lots more information, but what I found on-line explains things better. From your link:

The information I found on-line seems like a better explanation:
" M/A : Autofocus can be overridden by manually focusing with the focus ring. A/M : Autofocus can be overridden by manually focusing with the focus ring, but focus ring detection sensitivity is lower than in A/M mode. Use this mode to avoid canceling the AF setting by unintentionally moving the focus ring."

Back to reality, I only plan to practice and use the left-most setting, A/M. @Joanna suggests I replace this lens with her all-in-one 300 zoom.

You’re right, this has next to nothing to do with PhotoLab, only with which lens to use, and how to use it, and that’s because I’m trying to take acceptable photos of birds, and do the processing in PhotoLab.

[mikemyers]

I haven’t posted this yet, but I’ve been searching all over my PhotoLab menus for a single tool labeled “sharpen image”, which would affect the entire image. Does such a tool exist?

[Wlodek]

Poor pelican cries for moire treatment.

[mikemyers]

You lost me.

I did find this:

What is Moiré and How it Can Ruin Your Photos

…but please elaborate.
Just when I think I’m understanding things, you lose me.
Sorry. Maybe everyone else understands, but not me.

[Wolfgang ([ Win10, PL+VP+FP, Nik6 (+3) ])]

@mikemyers

The sky appeared blue to my eyes, …

… and in fact was mostly gray. – There’s nothing wrong with highlighting colors, but I think it’s more important to focus on the subject first.

• a quite simple mask
  

  

• left: your version || right: VC 1
  

  
  
  → 780_2597 2024-03-10.nef.dop (28,7 KB)

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

There is no single tool. There’s the lens sharpness tool, which helps globally but sharpness can be more selective by using the fine contrast sliders.

[Joanna (Joanna Carter)]

@mikemyers

Are you suggesting that for you, one shot out of 500 is what you would call “sharp”??

Not at all. What I am saying is that I only kept about ten percent of the shots I took at that event. And, even then, a lot of what was left wasn’t particularly inspiring.

[mikemyers]

@platypus

Catching birds in flight needs some overexposure, specially when the sky is overcast.

Try with +1 and +2 and raise your iso settings to prevent motion blur…and shoot “with the sun” in order to prevent backlighting.

If you check the times of day when birds mostly fly, you can set yourself up accordingly.

I learned this in India. The Black Eagle was way above me, lit from above by the Sun, I was shooting up at the Eagle, and I got lots of silhouettes, with a black bottom, no detail, no nothing. Very under-exposed. If I have that situation again, I plan to use +2 for exposure. I worked so hard to try to get a decent image, and people told me the images I got were OK, but I felt they were garbage, like what @Joanna is always telling me.

As for motion blur, I set the camera to Shutter Priority, and bumped that up to 1/2000th. As for ISO, I left that in “auto-ISO”. I wasn’t all that concerned with ISO, thanks to PhotoLab.

As for checking the times of day for when birds mostly fly, I suspect that is early morning and late afternoon/evening, but I ought to look into this better. I wish I had more opportunities to take bird photos, as every time I do, I learn just that little bit more.

Oh, and I took my camera out of “quiet” mode, and put it into high speed burst mode. I start taking images before the bird is where I want it to be, and continue until long after.

The part of all of this I need to work on most is ME, not the camera, or the lens, or the PhotoLab, but how well I do everything, starting with how well I hold and move the camera, and how well I can zoom in to 300 and leave it there.

[Louie (Louis David Durpanski)]

@mikemyers

As for checking the times of day for when birds mostly fly, I suspect that is early morning and late afternoon/evening, but I ought to look into this better.

I think you would do well to do exactly that. Find yourself a location to shoot in the morning or early evening and keep the sun at your back. Lighting is everything when it comes to taking quality photos. Pretty much every image you have posted was taken without any regard to the direction of light or the lighting on the subject itself. Start trying to take photos of only well lit birds and I guarantee you will achieve better results. If you continue to shoot birds above you with overhead sun, you will continue to get the same results. Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result by definition is insanity. Change it up and watch what happens. With the sun at your back, track the bird at 100mm and then while still tracking zoom out to 300mm. Take the shot(s).

[mikemyers]

@Louie

Pretty much every image you have posted was taken without any regard to the direction of light or the lighting on the subject itself.

Quite true - I was already there, and the birds found me, not the other way around.

I hope to go to some places where others go to photograph birds, with my friend, and he knows places like what you describe. My recent photos were taken from my balcony, and I simply aimed my career where the bird was. There are good bird watching locations not too far from Miami, and that’s where I will be going. Ditto, when I get back to India.

I’m not a “bird photographer”, just a photographer who likes to take photos of many things, one of which is birds, when I get an opportunity.

Something else I need to learn - try to not loan my camera or lens to others to try, as that seems to guarantee that I will find what I think is a good photo, but be unable to capture it. Outside, I’m smiling. Inside, I’m thinking “GRRrrrr…”

Oh, and the city of Miami or Miami Beach isn’t the greatest place for bird photography, unless I decide to photograph pigeons or sea gulls…

[Louie (Louis David Durpanski)]

Then photograph whatever birds you have in your area. The idea is to get a properly exposed image that is in focus. Hone your skills and don’t concern yourself that they are only pigeons or seagulls. By the the time you get to the right place you’ll have the skills to capture the images you desire.

[platypus (Canon & Mac (Intel and M1))]

I occasionally try birds, but it’s really not my field of interest and I am not going to buy a lens that I’ll almost never use…unless I decided to go all-in.

If I need long reach, I use my long lens on an APS-C sensor camera. Teleconverter bonus without optical penalty

[JoJu (Joachim)]

@platypus

If I need long reach, I use my long lens on an APS-C sensor camera. Teleconverter bonus without optical penalty

Which is nothing else than “cropping in advance” but you’re right. Birds in flight are far too busy keeping themselves in the air and don’t bother much to become proper models. After a while I really felt sorry for all the unused pixels. Too much skies cluttering my hard drive.

Speaking of clutter, I’m looking forward to the next 3k+ threads, when Mr. Myers tries to master, no, dive into (without getting too wet) macro, and the next 3k+ for astro and so on, all under the false flag “processed in DxO PL” transforming a user forum into a chat portal