Upvote
0
Just like I'm doing. It's fun isn't it ... unless there are 50 000 that should have been taken care of long ago!View attachment 189754View attachment 189755View attachment 189756
Back Garden birds only now !
Keeping busy going back over old images to see if latest post processing improves images
That's terrible newsHave you heard about the new bluetit desease (link is in German)?
It's spreading over Germany and has come to Bavaria now
Beautiful!Checking his six on a foggy morning... Hope everyone is staying safe. Canon EOS R with 600III. 1/800, f/5 @ iso 2000. RAW converted in DPP resized and sharpened in PS. Thanks for looking. View attachment 189708
Nice! Are your new programs compatible with PL3?I have reworked a Hobby catching, flying with and eating dragonflies from this time last year taken with the 5DSR and 400mm DO II. Not the best, but bring memories of a great day of watching and shooting. I switched from DxO PL to Noise Ninja and Topaz AI sharpening to render these.
View attachment 189745View attachment 189748View attachment 189749View attachment 189750
You can use Topaz AI sharpener with other RAW converters. I find the PL3 Lens Sharpness tool problematic with some camera-lens combinations. In particular, it can introduce terrible noise with the 90D and I turn it off. It also oversharpens with the 5DSR and I use a low setting when it gets unnatural. The PL3 lens sharpness tool has hardly any effect on the Nikon D500 + 500 PF, but they are so sharp they don’t need sharpening unless focus is not spot on. I sometimes use PhotoNinja instead of PL3 as a RAW converter as it handles highlightS very well, suppresses noise very well but is not as sharp although more “gentle”. For speed and ease of review and making comparisons for selection, I prefer to stick with PL3 and use alternatives only when I have to. My initial thoughts after only limited attempts is that these sharpening tools are most useful for sensors that have AA-filters or softish lenses, which seems pretty obvious. But, the Topaz did rescue an image of a BIF spoiled by movement, which I will post later. I checked its performance on sharpening lines on resolution charts. As expected, it works by enhancing acutance and increasing contrast, which does bring out apparent detail that has been obscured by blurring but may still be there. This can lead to artefacts, which I have seen.Nice! Are your new programs compatible with PL3?
Have you heard about the new bluetit desease (link is in German)?
It's spreading over Germany and has come to Bavaria now
Great picture, Alan.... We have a Chiffchaff in the back of the garden that I frequently hear singing "chiffchaff" ...
Thanks for doing so, Graham.Hi Maximilian.
Thank you for bringing this to our attention, this is terrible news, a devastating situation.
Just to save a bit of trouble, a link to the page translated to English.
Cheers, Graham.
It's difficult to distinguish between them. My one was belting out chiffchaff, chiffchaff...Great picture, Alan.
And a mere coincidence that I just wanted to look after this English bird name, because a few days ago I saw one, too.
As it wasn't singing I cannot tell if it was a chiffchaff or a willow warbler.
And it wasn't really cooperative so this is the only "good" pic out of three before it disappeared.
View attachment 189777
I knowIt's difficult to distinguish between them. My one was belting out chiffchaff, chiffchaff...
Alan a glance at the shoulder feathers did it for me - the top is better.The Great Spotted Woodpecker thenflew off and perched at the top of a sycamore, as a few days ago. For this very sharp shot, the direct output from DxO PRIME + lens sharpness set at standard (top) was better than from sharpening with Topaz. The middle image to match the sharpness looks slightly unnatural to me and lowering the sharpening (bottom) to remedy is not as good as DxO.
View attachment 189781View attachment 189782View attachment 189783