TJMcG122 5
No longer a newbie, moving up!
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2022
- Messages
- 427
- Reaction score
- 822
- Location
- Show Low, Arizona, USA
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
There are eagles everywhere, apparently, but it has never been my good fortune to be there when they were. So when I approached the lake this day in March, and saw this dark dot in the dead tree on the other side, I got out my biggest lens and looked. It was a real, not-in-captivity eagle, and I started shooting. I waited about three hours for the bird to actually take off, because perched birds are boring. When it finally lifted off, I got several shots in flight, but all were from so far away that I had to do extensive cropping.
Wildlife photographer Steve Perry once said that if there is nothing in the background of a BIF shot, he won't take it. But this was an opportunity that had not presented itself before, and so even though the sky was blue and cloudless, and there was no background to be had looking up at it, I just shot away. In editing in Adobe Camera Raw and Photoshop, I decided that replacing the sky would be appropriate, and I added what I thought were some very subtle clouds. I don't want to overpower the bird, but just give it some more context. With Steve Perry's advice in my mind, I left the branch at the bottom as a sort of an anchor. I know the first reaction will be "That's a distraction," but I thought the image needed at least the suggestion of some environment.
I shot raw files and opened them in Camera Raw, applied a camera neutral profile, adjusted shadows, highlights, whites and blacks. In Photoshop, I used a curves adjustment layer and dodged the face and underbody just a little, then added a slight bit of vibrance to the blues and reds.
I would just like opinions on how this treatment suits the image.
Original raw (exported as JPEG) for comparison.
Nikon Z8; Nikkor Z180-600 f/5.6-6.3 VR @ 600mm; 1/3200 sec; f/6.3; ISO 360; Shutter priority
Wildlife photographer Steve Perry once said that if there is nothing in the background of a BIF shot, he won't take it. But this was an opportunity that had not presented itself before, and so even though the sky was blue and cloudless, and there was no background to be had looking up at it, I just shot away. In editing in Adobe Camera Raw and Photoshop, I decided that replacing the sky would be appropriate, and I added what I thought were some very subtle clouds. I don't want to overpower the bird, but just give it some more context. With Steve Perry's advice in my mind, I left the branch at the bottom as a sort of an anchor. I know the first reaction will be "That's a distraction," but I thought the image needed at least the suggestion of some environment.
I shot raw files and opened them in Camera Raw, applied a camera neutral profile, adjusted shadows, highlights, whites and blacks. In Photoshop, I used a curves adjustment layer and dodged the face and underbody just a little, then added a slight bit of vibrance to the blues and reds.
I would just like opinions on how this treatment suits the image.
Original raw (exported as JPEG) for comparison.
Nikon Z8; Nikkor Z180-600 f/5.6-6.3 VR @ 600mm; 1/3200 sec; f/6.3; ISO 360; Shutter priority
Attachments
Last edited:
