|
|
|
Steve Tomkinson
{K:3243} 2/18/2005
|
Andre, your comment is amusing because after I trudged through the mud & out of the field where I shot this, I bumped into another walker who stopped me to ask what I was shooting - the 100-400 Canon sticks out like a sore thumb - "wildlife or landscape" he asked. To which I replied, "a blue heron about half a mile over there".
I hope you see where I'm coming from here! I will have a look at your gallery now I've admitted my ignorance!!!!!!!
Steve
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66407} 2/18/2005
|
Hi Steve, I'm sure a serious bird watcher would laugh at me calling it a Blue Heron. There are probably many differences. But to my untrained eye...
There is a shot of a Blue Heron on my site on the second page if you are interested.
Andre
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Tomkinson
{K:3243} 2/18/2005
|
Andre,
I think it's called a grey heron in the UK. My UK bird book doesn't mention the blue heron. It DOES mention a purple heron, but that has a neck almost as long as a giraffe, so it's definitely not one of those!
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Tomkinson
{K:3243} 2/18/2005
|
Amitava
The process is quite simple really, if you use photoshop or similar. You create a duplicate layer, put it on top, do your noise reduction on that layer, then delete the bird from that layer via whatever means you choose, i.e. brush, mask etc. to show the original bird on the lower layer.
There is slightly more to it, but not much. If you want to know more let me know. I could send you Marcus' email if you like. Up to you.
Regards
Steve.
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Denis
{K:66407} 2/18/2005
|
A wonderful photo of the Blue Heron. (is that what it is called in England? )
Andre
|
|
|
|
Marcus Armani
{K:36599} 2/18/2005
|
The main reason Is It does go into some detail, novice users may have problems, and the digital dark roomer's already know the process, It has to do with a layer before de-noise, erasing new layer around the subject after to bring back the detail at different opacitys where needed. If you wish I can email you the the details, you can then distibute them to whoevery you please..
armani222@msn.com
|
|
|
|
|
Amitava Banerjea
{K:7088} 2/18/2005
|
Marcus, why not share the process with the entire community and post it here?
Steve, I love the contrast between the texture of the bird's feathers and the spiky plants in the middle ground.
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Tomkinson
{K:3243} 2/11/2005
|
Marcus,
Yes please! I'm always looking for help from those who know their stuff! My email is tommorules@ntlworld.com.
Thanks for spending the time to comment.
Steve
|
|
|
|
|
Marcus Armani
{K:36599} 2/11/2005
|
Great shot steve, the soft neck is not a factor here, would not have notice if not mentioned..
there is a way to denoise and not bring back the detail, let me know if you want the process...
Marcus...
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Tomkinson
{K:3243} 2/8/2005
|
I tend to oversharpen my pictures, so this a is timely comment, thanks Alex!
|
|
|
|
|
xxxIlonaxxxx xxxxKrijgsmanxxxx
{K:10405} 2/8/2005
|
oooooooooo what a catch Steve.....such a wonderful details..love it very much......
|
|
|
|
Alex Rubin
{K:339} 2/7/2005
|
In my taste, the neck feathers look very good even after noise reduction. And the wing feathers are very sharp. Background is just right. I think if it was sharper it'd possibly distract viewer from the main subject.
|
|
|
|
James Philip Pegg
{K:10138} 2/6/2005
|
It`s just splendid!
Great work!
Best regards!
|
|
|
|
|
Den Thompson
{K:30432} 2/5/2005
|
Incredible image Steve. It doesn't seem to have lost any clarity to me. Wonderful shot.
Den
|
|
|
|
Gregory McLemore
{K:35129} 2/4/2005
|
A wonderfully stately beauty captured marvalously, 800iso? masterful work.
|
|
|
|
|
Margaret Sturgess
{K:49403} 2/4/2005
|
What a great capture you have here - wonderful image.
Margaret
Steve you get your way, I have posted the answer to What The!!!! just for you so you don't have a sleepless night worrying about it LOL
|
|
|
|
Len Webster
{K:25714} 2/4/2005
|
Very effective.
|
|
0 
