* Wednesday C&C "No Theme" Thread #789 / Revived #009 on 2023 05 31 *

Minnie, Roel,

Initially I wasn't going to post this for the very reason you mentioned: the branch to the left is fully blown and a distraction.
The pic is a ~ 650x500 crop from the 4000x3000 original and given the lowish light was already suffering. The Lorikeet had a much higher % of frame and full light.
Because I liked this pic I cloned the blown lichen and branch areas with some creamy adjacent bits. It was a slight improvement but not enough...
If time permits I may revisit it and grab some more darker areas.
It would be nice if we had a gallery here as I like the idea of posting originals for a comparison, without cluttering threads such as this one.
Thx for your positive comments, really appreciated.

We don't mind the clutter. If we ever get threaded view that will be easily sorted. Gallery displays never seem to get the discussion that we get in threads like this. By the way, what software do you use for editing?

I have to admit I am only using the simple tools in FastStone image viewer. The crop had noise reduction 20, sharpening USM 20, contrast 30, saturation 30 and highlights -20. These changes are on the jpg not the raw. I do shoot jpg + raw for a rainy day when I get comfortable with more capable pp software.
I have RawTherapee but haven't done anything with it. For a start my camera's WB generally produces much darker raw files and I never learnt where to start. I have WB set to auto (the only auto setting, all other iauto stuff is off, pic style standard and noise, saturation etc are set to recommended by other users). I will start to explore WB in camera settings as most pics seem to need a push in contrast and saturation. Exception being vivid colours seem to be close to expected.
I see DarkTable appears to have more users in the free pp threads here. I will probably install it at some point.

This time, I disagree with everyone. You have to consider what the image is trying to do. I don't think any editing is needed to the original photo, all it needs is a new title. If I understand the post and intent correctly, the image is about showing the effectiveness of the bird's camouflage. We should be looking at this as it might be seen by another critter in the trees. The colours of the bird and its positioning with the curved back nestling into curve of the creeper behind it, are excellent camouflage. It's the tail that eventually gives things away. All I'd do is change the title so this becomes a search for the bird in the overall picture. A "Where's Wally" image. Here, the relative size of the bird and the distracting elements become positives. Re-title the picture something like "Camouflaged" and don't change anything else.

Hear hear.
What Pete said X 2.
Layered landscapes are how I like landscapes best.
This is a prime example.

Dear all,

As it is Tuesday and nearing the evening hours (in Belgium), we are slowly winding down after another succesful week.
I've enjoyed many of the images and much of the discussions

Tuesday is often a slower day, winding down and replying to messages and comments.
Everybody is gearing up of tomorrow's new edition.
Obviously, it is still allowed (and encouraged to continue commenting on photos, and replying to comments).

But please be advised that if you want to post another image, it is often better to wait until the new edition on Wednesday.
This is good for the poster in order to get more traffic.
And also for the group, in order not to confuse the different sequential weekly threads

I will take care of starting the new edition tomorrow. Usually I manage to do that before 12.00 noon (Brussels time).
As I will be occupied between 7.30 AM and 11.30 AM, I will either start the thread VERY early, or only around noon or a bit later (again : Brussels time).
See you then.

This is one more oddity that proves that Mike and I must be twins that have been separated at birth (and then one of them got cryogenically frozen for a while).
I also have this persistent unintended tilt in far too many of my images if I don't consciously pay attention.

Count me in the same camp of the lovers of this image. Reflections are always cool. Street art is often cool. Reflections of street art can be cool².

And now that you post the original, I am inclined to agree with Mike. The work of repairing the cropped version is going to be onerous, and it will still be a very small crop with some pixelation at any reasonable size. In its original form it is a fascinating "find me" puzzle in a charming wilderness setting. And the blown areas are smaller percentages of the overall picture so they assume much less importance. Lower your highlights as best you can without turning them gray and let it remain full size. Maybe crop a little off the top where that blown piece of light bark is. And now that you know that your camera may tend to lose highlights, you can shoot for that. I have the same problem with egrets, whose reflective white feathers sometimes fool the camera's exposure system. When I think it's gonna do that to me, I underexpose a bit and bring the brightness back in post.

Man...looking at this image on mobile is not what it was designed for.