Jump to content
Whatbird Community
Sign in to follow this  
RobinHood

Not sure if ID is possible from this photo.

Recommended Posts

Southern Ontario this morning.

Very high in the trees and very lively so poor photo. Maybe Philadelphia, throat did appear yellow, but only one local recent sighting?

Thanks.

Vireo ID HVT-7500212.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Benjamin said:

Is this photo edited?

Never been asked that before. All my photos are edited (I shoot Raw) but I only do minimal colour management for Raw to jpeg conversion for bird photos so that colours are accurate.

This one is original with no editing - just straight raw to jpeg.

You've got me wondering why you asked.

 

Vireo unedited HVT-7500212.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
31 minutes ago, RobinHood said:

You've got me wondering why you asked.

There's an obvious halo around the bird and limb in the first picture.  You've been here long enough to have seen photos that were edited more radically that yours, often sharpened or enhanced literally beyond recognition.

Edited by Charlie Spencer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Charlie Spencer said:

There's an obvious halo around the bird and limb in the first picture.

Yes, not unusual under certain lighting conditions. This morning was kind of flat lighting, with thunderstorm conditions around, and I was shooting almost vertically for some really high birds (my neck started to hurt). If you look around the image you can see it elsewhere - it's also possible the image stabilization was not fully locked in, this also produces some strange effects.

Fortunately it is fairly difficult to get away with manipulation these days. The edit metadata for a photo can be seen with software and the original "raw" image (mine are always retained and available) shows the starting point. If this was manipulation it would be considered a fairly pathetic attempt.

Interesting topic though. I suspect most of the bird photographers here who shoot "raw" images apply less colour correction (vibrance, saturation etc.) than is applied in-camera to produce "out of camera jpegs" but I don't think it is much of an issue.

I've posted Philadelphia Vireos for this particular location before so I had nothing riding on this ID.

PS. Of course there are also times when fairly radical editing is required to produce an image that is at all useful for ID purposes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RobinHood said:

Yes, not unusual under certain lighting conditions. This morning was kind of flat lighting, with thunderstorm conditions around, and I was shooting almost vertically for some really high birds (my neck started to hurt). If you look around the image you can see it elsewhere - it's also possible the image stabilization was not fully locked in, this also produces some strange effects.

Fortunately it is fairly difficult to get away with manipulation these days. The edit metadata for a photo can be seen with software and the original "raw" image (mine are always retained and available) shows the starting point. If this was manipulation it would be considered a fairly pathetic attempt.

Interesting topic though. I suspect most of the bird photographers here who shoot "raw" images apply less colour correction (vibrance, saturation etc.) than is applied in-camera to produce "out of camera jpegs" but I don't think it is much of an issue.

I've posted Philadelphia Vireos for this particular location before so I had nothing riding on this ID.

PS. Of course there are also times when fairly radical editing is required to produce an image that is at all useful for ID purposes.

For the record, I have no idea why @Benjamin asked.  I offered one item that caught my eye as indicating potential manipulation.  I stick with the .JPGs the camera spits out because i find post-processing confusing - i don't know what my goal is or when I'm 'finished'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Benjamin, I assume, asked because he thought that maybe it was edited to look like the bird appeared more yellow than in reality, which is important in distinguishing Philly vs. Warbling Vireo. Even if it was edited, the facial pattern and sheer amount of yellow meant Philly, which is confirmed by the unedited photo. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, you guys nailed it. I asked simply because I noticed a 'halo' effect, which can indicate that the clarity was turned up too high, in turn suggesting that the contrast may have been adjusted which could skew the perception of yellow in the photo. As @blackburnian points out, this is important when distinguishing Philly and Warbling Vireos, but I agree that this is a Philly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...