[Ashley beolens]

Reed bunting (male)

CP4500- LCE adaptor-Optolyth TBS80

Now all I have done to this is remove some of the saturation, and sharpen it up a bit (I have yet to master removing vignetting), what else should I be doing to clean it up, which branches do people think need removing.

[normjackson]

Hi Ashley.

I've now just "rediscovered" the "Improving your photos in - Computer" forum under Andy Bright's digiscoping forum. (I was trying to relocate that message by Mike McDowell about dealing with vignetting. Dead clever.) I suspect our discussions on Neat Image really belong more there and maybe we've become a little sidetracked (I'll take the blame) from discussing "aesthetic issues" as it were. Maybe your latest picture will get things back on track.

Maybe Richard might want to drop a note in that forum if he wants to direct the "colossi of Photoshop" to the earlier thread here.

I saw you've made contributions to the "other forum". Did the responses to your questions help you find a satisfactory book on Photoshop Elements? Are you happy now with the quality of your digiscoped pictures? Did you manage to identify why they weren't as sharp as you'd hoped initially? Clearly the photos you've posted on this forum have been heavily jpeg compressed and/or sharpened judging by the pronounced 8x8 pixel "blockiness"; hence I suspect they provide little clue as to what problems you may or may not have had with the originals. Would be great if you could find a way of sending a complete untouched original (with Exif data) to the digiscoping forum; perhaps one of the experts there might find the the time to offer advice on how you might optimise your results. Maybe the moderator might come up with an idea. I'm sure there would be plenty of folks interested in this; as long as you don't feel this is sticking your neck out too far


Regards.

[normjackson]

I had a go on the vignetting. I think you can get some idea of the effect from these thumbnails (my first attempt so doesn't bear close scrutiny). Actually, although I realise you digiscopers normally consider vignetting an enemy, I think a bit of vignetting centred around the bird here wouldn't be a bad thing. You mention in your post about removing branches, so I guess you feel there are distracting elements. To remove those branches in front of the bird, though, we'd probably be talking man-hours; and then you may well end up with more of a montage rather than your own digiscoped picture. Not quite the same, eh?

I'm sure it's all been said before about giving marks out of five: about uncertainty about it how it fits in with providing aesthetic "critiques" as contrasted with judging a competition; about discomfort both for judge and judged for beginners attempts and about how awkward it is to be expected to give marks on something you certainly couldn't have achieved yourself. I guess it was decided, naturally enough, that the folks who submit their pictures should be given precedence, and that they probably do want marks ("Yes, but what do you REALLY think".)

I can't give you due credit for the difficulties of securing this image 'cos I aint no digiscoper. As it stands I'd humby give the image as you have supplied it a two. Your original presumably has potential to get a better result re. vignetting, sharpness etc. (and I wonder why you reduced saturation; was the original too gaudy?) The big obstacles to your satisfaction are probably those branches which you apparently feel are too distracting and are nigh on impossible to remove.