Warbler practice

[MARINERMAGNUM]

Tried to do some practice on small birds,handheld,in anticipation of the Warbler migration. This Nuthatch was all I could find. He was suckin sap like a big dog!

I also saw a flock of Robins!

These were all shot handheld with the 2x Teleconverter @600mm.

I re-posted the Nuthatch images full frame/un-cropped using DPP as I think my older version of Photoshop is having issues interpreting the 50D's information. For some unknown reason,after cropping in Pshop,they lose sharpness. ? I can't explain it,but it definately happens. These only had a 60 sharpening in DPP and look much sharper than doing a 90% USM in PS. I never had these issues with the 30D. Maybe Dan or Steve or anyone else might have a theory?

I only used PS for it's cropping tool anyway,so I guess it's not a big loss-I'm not a big pixel pusher.

My only guess is that Canon's current software interprets the info better than Adobe's OLD software.

This caught my eye on the way home. Partridge?

[Steve Foss]

Good to practice now. Those little warblers are mighty flitty birds. Looks like the critter in your last image is a sparrow or longspur of some type. It looks a good bit like a first-winter Lapland longspur, but sparrows and their allies are not my strength when it comes to ID, so it's just a guess.

[JayinMN]

Nice job, I have no idea what the last bird but I really like that shot.

I have noticed when I view my pictures in Zoombrowser then pull them up in Photoshop Elements they are always less sharp. Cropping them takes a little more away too. I would also like to hear more on this.

[MN Shutterbug]

Cropping will normally result in loss of sharpness, due to the image being magnified. Magnifying the image will magnify any imperfections. I've never used Zoombrowser, so I have no knowledge of that.

MM, my ghillie suit is in transit. I'll let you know what I think of it, once it arrives. I'm ready for spring.

[Birdsong]

I have noticed when I view my pictures in Zoombrowser then pull them up in Photoshop Elements they are always less sharp. Cropping them takes a little more away too. I would also like to hear more on this.

Me too! I have some of the same issues with Elements including some pixilating(?) on strong edges. I always take everything back to look at in ZoomBrowser because I can tell far better what the photo actually looks like. I often crop there before going to PSE. Now, if it only had the ability to lasso.

[MN Shutterbug]

Now, if it only had the ability to lasso.

You have the ability, you just need practice.

[Steve Foss]

Zoombrowser is probably applying automatic sharpening when you view an image with it. When I double click on a jpeg I get via e-mail and JPEG Viewer opens it, it sharpens it.

The actual post processing programs don't do that.

Cropping degrades an image past acceptable limits when what is left after the crop isn't enough to support printing or online viewing. You can crop more from a 15 Mp image than an 8 Mp image, all else being equal, and still have a usable file.

Also, a key when it comes to cropping is lens performance. A sharper lens allows you to crop away more of a file and still have an acceptably sharp print with what remains than with a softer lens.

As an example, when I'd shoot with my 100-400 and want to crop away to get a distant subject to appear closer, the remaining image would fall apart faster than when I did the same thing with my 400 f5.6L, which is a sharper lens.

As a further example, I posted an image of a pair of eagles perched in white pines last year shot with the 400 prime that was 30 percent left after cropping an 8 Mp image. It made a tack sharp 11x14 print. My 100-400 would not have resolved those distant subjects as sharply, so I would not have been able to get the shot with it. Another image, one with a wolf, some wolf droppings and ravens flying in to get the droppings, makes a great 8x10 and is what's left after cropping away 80 percent of an 8 Mp file. It was shot with the 400 f2.8L, another very sharp lens.

Zooms softer than the 100-400 will show poorer crop performance than the 100-400, and so on down the line.

There are other considerations regarding IQ after significant cropping, but these are a couple of the primary factors.

[MARINERMAGNUM]

I get all that you're saying Steve,but there is definately something going on with the 50D files that wasn't with the 30D files. I have 100's of 30D files and when they are opened in my older version of ps,they appear sharper right off the bat than do the 50D files.

If I have the 2 programs running [dpp & ps] and view the same 50D image at the same size in both,it appears sharper in dpp. This is with all settings at zero,so nothing is being applied.

If I do the same exact test with a 30D image-they look identical in both programs-so I know it's not my imagination.

All I can come up with is that maybe my older version of elements can't handle this file size. I have CS2 on my other puter,so I'll try it on that. Maybe I need to update my video card?

[Steve Foss]

MM, when I first viewed your post this morning and made my comment on the birds, I hadn't seen the part of your post about those differences among files. Certainly you know your files better than I do. And I hadn't gone back to re-read your original post before reading others' comments, so it was their comments about cropping and sharpness I was replying to, not yours.

Sorry. Not sure how I'd have missed all that in the OP, but stuff happens.

Anyway, I can assume you're using the latest version of DPP, the one that came with the 50D, but if some total technical whiz is going to help you figure things out, they'll need to know which version of Photoshop you are using as well. I'm not that technical whiz. Of all the photographers on this board, I suspect Dan is your man. But your hypothesis makes sense to me.

In the end, it could also be a difference in the way DPP and PS go about sharpening, and it would be no surprise if a different sharpening regimen is required for a 50D file than for a 30D file. There is quite a large difference in pixel size between the two, and there are some other characteristics (such as light sensitivity in the pixels and the way the processor renders info), that have changed.

[MARINERMAGNUM]

Quote:

In the end, it could also be a difference in the way DPP and PS go about sharpening, and it would be no surprise if a different sharpening regimen is required for a 50D file than for a 30D file. There is quite a large difference in pixel size between the two, and there are some other characteristics (such as light sensitivity in the pixels and the way the processor renders info), that have changed.

This makes good sense. I wonder if one needs to change the "radius" and "threshold" in USM for a file with that many more pixels?

[Borealhunter]

Well the bird pictured in the corn field stubble is not a partridge nor a sparrow species of any kind, its a Horned Lark.

[ShawnZ]

Borealhunter is totally correct on the id of the last image. Background control on the second image is superb and the details look like they would hold up to a decent crop. Nice work.