Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Resident Drake

Versions (Reportage)Version Help

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Upgrade to e2

Tired of clicking to see a large version? Upgrade to e2 to browse all photos automatically at their largest size.
Add Comment

The resident drake, with an eye this time Pamela. Certainly the light was better and he decided to 'face-me-down'. I think the term 'resident' has gone to his head a little. Grin Grin

Brand:Nikon CORPORATION
Camera:Nikon D100 Check out Nikon Nation!
Lens:18.0-200.0 mm f/3.5-5.6
Recording media:JPEG (digital)
Date Taken:16 May 2011 - 4:41 PM
Focal Length:200mm
Lens Max Aperture:f/5.7
Aperture:f/5.6
Shutter Speed:1/250sec
Exposure Comp:0.0
ISO:200
Exposure Mode:Aperture-priority AE
Metering Mode:Multi-segment
Flash:No Flash
Title:Resident Drake
Username:strokebloke strokebloke
Uploaded:16 May 2011 - 6:10 PM
Tags:General, Mallard, Wildlife / nature
VS Mode Rating 100 (0% won)
These stats show the percentage of wins and the rating score that your photo has achieved. You can go to the VS Mode by clicking on this icon.

Signup to e2

Signup to e2 to see which photo this has won or lost against in the vs mode
Votes:Voting Disabled
Critque wantedCritique Wanted
Has Modifications Modifications Welcome (Upload a Modification)
Variant - ReportVariant - Report
Awards have been disabled on this photo

Comments

This photo is here for critique. Please only comment constructively and with suggestions on how to improve it.
saeidNL
saeidNL  4 Netherlands3 Constructive Critique Points
16 May 2011 - 6:13 PM

Lovely capture,in good light,
saeid

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

Jestertheclown
16 May 2011 - 10:56 PMConstructive Critique!This comment was flagged as constructive critique! 

Hi Jack,
I rather like this.
I've uploaded a mod. in which I've desaturated it a bit, well quite a bit actually, using just the yellow channel as I thought that the grass was a bit erm, green!
There's loads of really vibrant colour in the rest of the shot but I thought the green was a bit overpowering.
I always think that with shots of ducks or most wild birds for that matter, it's possible to get quite carried away with adjusting colours in software until it looks nothing like the original, yet no-one notices. I've got a few on my website and I've found that the best policy, in my opinion anyway, is to keep the tweaking to the minimum.
I also sharpened it but that was because I was uploading it as a mod. and as you know, they always seem to suffer a little. At least, mine do!
Anyway, it's good to see you still posting.

Cheers,

Bren.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

strokebloke
16 May 2011 - 11:40 PM

My word, that does make a difference, doesn't it? I honestly didn't realise I'd saturated it that much Tongue

You've done that by balancing the yellow channel?

I can see what you mean. It's toned down the whole image slightly, but most noticeably and significantly, the grass.
There was a lot of sunlight, to the left & behind the drake, but your mod looks a lot more natural, particularly when the two are available to be compared with one another.

I'll go back to the original and see if I can replicate your mod Grin

Thanks Bren

PS: I'll keep on posting [for critique], simply because I'm learning so much

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

strokebloke
17 May 2011 - 12:00 AM

Well it's certainly not identical to your mod Ben, but is arguably more in keeping with it.
If you look at the description for V3, you'll see how I processed it.
It would be helpful to know how you processed your mod Smile

Now I'm wondering whether I fell into the same error with the duck (V2) Grin

Last Modified By strokebloke at 17 May 2011 - 12:01 AM

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

Jestertheclown
17 May 2011 - 12:23 AM


Quote: It would be helpful to know how you processed your mod Smile

No problem Jack.

It was actually very straightforward. I used CS5 but any half way decent editor will have the tools.
Open your original image. Click on "image," then "adjustments" and "hue/saturation." Whatever software you use, I'm sure there will be a version of that. Then using the box containing the word "Master," click on the arrow and using the drop down, select "Yellow." Then just use the de-saturation slider as if you were de-saturating the whole thing. Just move it until the grass (or whatever you're adjusting) looks OK.
For some reason, "Yellow" works better than "Green" for desaturating grass. I think it must be to do with the fact that yellow is a factoring colour in making green.
There doesn't seem to have been much excessive green or yelow in the drake himself so he's come out pretty unscathed. If he had been affected, I'd have isolated him and dealt selectively with the background.

I can't really see anything obviously wrong with V2. I think it's one of those images where you could play with the channel mixers/levels/curves etc. for ages and only end up with an image that's different but no better, as I pointed out earlier.
As it is, it's got plenty of nastural looking colour, it's as sharp as a tack andthere's nothing wrong with the composition so I'd leave it alone!

Hope all of that helps!

Best wishes,

Bren.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

strokebloke
17 May 2011 - 12:24 AM

my Mod ~ yellow channel-desat (-50) ~ no adjustment to hue

It looks as if you went even further than that with your desat (-55/60) Gulp.......

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

Jestertheclown
17 May 2011 - 12:26 AM


Quote: It looks as if you went even further than that with your desat (-55/60) Gulp.......

I didn't look at the figures Jack.
I just stopped when it looked OK.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

strokebloke
17 May 2011 - 12:35 AM


Quote: Hope all of that helps

Bren, it certainly does. Splendidly ~ another constructive step forward Grin
Very much appreciated

Jack

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

pamelajean
pamelajean Critique Team 8776 forum postspamelajean vcard United Kingdom1605 Constructive Critique Points
17 May 2011 - 3:46 PM

Well, that was all interesting, Jack. So glad you are such a model pupil. You have some very obliging models here, who seem very happy to stay with you for a while. You have lovely detail on the male's head, especially the eye and bill (yes, you have an eye!). It's amazing how the male mallard's head colours change, depending on the light. Just a few tips for wildfowl photography - always get down low, try to have eye contact, and leave space in the area into which the bird is looking/moving, all of which you have achieved here. Watch those whites, the back of the bird and the tail feathers are suffering a little. You will already know the problem you are faced with here, very dark and very light plumage. The female in V2 is fine, but she would stand out a lot better with a background that didn't echo her own colour so much.
You might now like to think about some closer shots, perhaps just of their heads?
Pamela.

Last Modified By pamelajean at 17 May 2011 - 3:47 PM

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

strokebloke
17 May 2011 - 5:00 PM

Thank you Pamela.
The drake's tail feathers and the burned-out areas on his back & rump were the first thing I spotted, as soon as I put the image up on PS.
I don't yet know how to isolate specific parts of an image and work on them, in PS.
And I certainly don't know if anything could be done.

I've thought a couple of times of just head shots.
Maybe I'm just being evasive, but thought I would be benefit most when the light is not so stark [a little overcast, but not too much ~ enough to get what I call 'the diesel oil colours' from the drakes head plumage.
I have a lot more of the summer to go yet [& for sure, it's not going to stay sunny until October]

Thanks also for your encouragement & patience Grin

Jack

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

pamelajean
pamelajean Critique Team 8776 forum postspamelajean vcard United Kingdom1605 Constructive Critique Points
20 May 2011 - 2:13 PMConstructive Critique!This comment was flagged as constructive critique! 

I use PaintshopPro, Jack, but the principles should be the same. Ways of dealing with burn-out in editing:-
1. If you shoot RAW, the whites are more recoverable.
2. If you underexpose, you can get detail in the whites and deal with the darker areas in editing.
3. You can use the Burn Tool, but it often looks obvious. Use it on quite low opacity.
4. Use highlights/shadows and reduce the highlights. I often find this is the most satisfactory way, and some detail can usually be recovered with this method. I always adjust levels after doing this, but care is then needed not to re-blow the highlights again.
5. You could select the area with the lasso selection tool and try different methods of correcting it such as curves, darken or otherwise.
6. If you are good at cloning, you can take detail from another area where the whites have detail and fill in the burnt-out area. If I do this, I will use a low opacity brush so that it isn't too obvious. I have done it on swans where everything is fine except for one small area that was affected by strong light.
7. Shoot when the light is less intense.
Pamela.

Nominating Constructive Critique

Please ensure that you understand what is meant by Constructive Critique - see FAQ here. If you still wish to nominate this comment click Yes

- Original Poster Comments
- Your Posts

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.