Watch the birdie

[peter]

Hi folks, I took this photo of a partial solar eclipse: from my place at 8:15 am, a few years ago, half awake I was and yet somehow after getting about 27 pictures, this was one was the one that surprised me. I never saw the bird through the screen.

 

I haven't edited it at all.

 

Any ideas how to improve this? Does it need tweaking at all? All comments welcome.

 

peter

[justwilliam]

Hej Peter!

 

A very fortuitous capture. It is always satisfying when, after having set up for a pleasing composition, something enters the frame which helps to bring the image to life adding a sense of scale and animation. I have spent some long periods of waiting for something/someone to come along and turn a carefully framed shot from being just a nice background into becoming an interesting image. (many times I have waited in vain; or not, it can be quite peaceful to sit quietly with a Thermos of Bovril at the edge of a meadow waiting for moose, cranes, a girl in a red dress, or whatever else the day has on offer to meander into my exposure.)

 

Were I to edit this image, I would likely begin in the Develop persona on the Exposure Pane and try to recover the highlights. I would probably hop over to the White Balance Pane to get the temperature to either match what was seen when the shutter button was depressed (or to match the direction in which this image wants to be taken). Then back up to the Enhance Pane for some basic adjustments. I would then visit the Tones Tab and see if a Curves adjustment benefitted in any way and most likely, while I was there, fiddle with Split Toning a bit as that could possibly provide some interest. I would pehaps finish up in the Develop persona with a little Noise Reduction under the Details Tab.

Back in the Photo persona, I would revisit both Exposure and White balance before looking to see if any HSL and Vibrance adjustments were helpful.

 

​I, personally, would likely try to concentrate first and foremost on recovering as much of the the highlights as possible, 'silhouetting' the bird, and reducing the noise. Without doubt, I would also look at a 16:9 crop to see if it would allow for both showing the solar eclipse area of the shot and placing the bird nicely into the corner (which it looks like it would; thus placing the bird in the centre of the lower right square of a 'rule of thirds' grid and the highlight on the intersection of the four upper left hand squares. This could be a pleasing balance (the dark bird having a similar 'weight' to the 'lighter' highlights when placed farther away, apparently, in the image space) and also provide a nice sinister diagonal to make the image more dynamic.) In fact, a crop may well be what could benefit this image the most; contrary to what camera manufacturers want us to believe, image IQ is not the do all and end all in photography - it is how, and what, the image makes us feel that is important. Our 'editing' need be with that in mind as much so as our original captures.

 

Perhaps someone with more experience would have a better order in which to perform these adjustments or even others which I haven't mentioned; but that is probably how I would begin.

[peter]

I only have AD at the moment. The file was a jpg and not a RAW file; so some of my options are li

 

BTW, that was some thought you put into that review!

[justwilliam]

I always put thought into something I say; what would be the point of anyone taking the time to make a 'thoughtless' comment. I have an added advantage here since writing in English forces me to consider each word and therefore allows 'extra' time for the thought process to perform its procedure.

 

Having only a .jpg to work with can indeed somewhat limit your options as regards editing, but that is not entirely a bad thing. (some adjustments in the Develop persona will still function, with limited expected effect, but the Exposure slider really won't be of much use there) You can just work with what you have in the Photo persona with 'improving' the image in mind (rather than trying to make it 'perfect’).  But ‘perfection’ is overrated anyway. Henri Cartier Bresson's images would be a good point of reference; they were not technically perfect with high IQ nor were they ever ’tack sharp' yet they are some of the richest and most awe-inspiring images of the genre (he is one of my favourite photographers). Neither was Van Gogh’s ‘The Starry Night’ a perfectly clear and sharp image duplicating or depicting our universe with astronomical accuracy - yet when viewing it we ‘feel’ a certain something as we are transported to the windowsill of his room in that asylum in southern France and stand there with him, breathing in the cool night air deeply while discussing the wheat fields, the orchards, and the olive trees as we watch them through the bars.

 

That is what a photograph is meant to do; take what is in the photographer’s head and put it into ours - as does poetry, music, and song. Or, better yet, to place us in the photographer’s mind itself!  It is not about the other 26 images you got. It is not about RAW or jpg - or megapixels, FPS, or f-stops. It is not about how accurately your sensor captures the image or how realistically you perfect each pixel in Affinity Photo; it is only about whether your image can carry me there to share that experience with you at 8:15 in the morning. And yours did. I may have even heard the bird which you failed to see until later.

 

I haven’t had my breakfast yet so I digress. The image you posted is fine if, and only if, you are satisfied with it and it conveys the experience. It does convey the experience already. With a few ‘tweaks’ in Affinity Photo I am sure you will be very satisfied with it - at least you should be, it is a ‘good’ capture. (Any photographers who believe that Affinity Photo will make their photos perfect are doomed to disappointment; but anyone who learns to use Affinity Photo to improve what they have captured will be more than satisfied.)

 

Attached is what I meant about the crop (plus some); I spent a whole 3 - 4 minutes on it. I lost a bit of detail in the feathers (which you needn't do) but I thought that the overall 'smoothness' lent a certain 'early morning' quality to the whole (just my opinion).

 

(BTW I twisted the truth a bit as I am quite certain that Vincent painted The Starry Night from memory - much in the same way you will edit Watch the Birdie from memory - and we are, of course, allowed to adjust the memory)

[justwilliam]

EDIT to my previous post:

 

I just realized that by quickly latching on to your saying that you had only a .jpg rather than a RAW image to work with, I failed to comprehend that you also only had Designer and not Photo to work in. My bad. I guess as well as putting some thought in my replies I need to make sure I put some time into reading more carefully. But on the topic of the software, why have you not picked up Photo as well?

[peter]

Thanks for your input...all appreciated. Don't worry about reading too fast, your speed reflects your enthusiasm.

 

OK, now for my setup...I have no drawing skills, though I can trace with pencil and tracing paper. My camera is a Fuji s1730. I own a MBPro 2009 15". As for not buying APh, cost and usage. I'd rather concentrate on AD first, get to grips with it (like I did with DrawPlus 2.0, all those years ago). But I can say that I am looking forward to APu later on this year. So I'd probably manage with those two apps. 

 

So with no drawing or photo training/skills, I am self taught. Some of the best tips I've learnt are actually from adverts. David Bailey has said a few things, I'll aways be quoting. These include taking his models for coffee, not just to hydrate them; but to analyse/frame/admire bone structure, whilst getting to know his model better. Emotion through exposure, that sort of thing. Simple, but he does produce the goods. As I said to Blind Lens "Train your eye".