This shot of an Eastern curlew in flight had everything wrong.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/7377/1_Eastern_curlew_4__1003_x_668_.jpg
The bird was too far away, the light was bland, the lens (Sigma 70-300) was at its max and is very poor at that point and I was hand-holding it, with watering eyes, in a howling gale! I want to enlarge it, but you'll see for yourself why it's not good enough. "Why not just chuck the photo?" you ask. Well, this bird is my favourite and is quite rare around here. The best I could do with the shot is twiddle around and turn it into a strictly non-realistic photo. https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/7377/1_Eastern_curlew_5__865_x_1026_.jpg

I'd welcome any other ideas of how it might be salvaged.

Cheers,

Les

[CSoars]

You didn't give a very big filesize to work with. Crop to recompose for more interest, add some punch via contrast or boost the blue levels up a bit, recover some of the clouds, and then try some channel mixing/aberration treatment on the curlew.

With the original file (about 2000x3008?), you could crop in a similar fashion but with a much bigger bird.

[LaRee]

I'd be very happy to get a Eastern Curlew in flight as you have here. I actually like what you've done with your non-realistic photo. The bird has pretty good detail at the distance you were. I am post processing challenged myself, but I also like what CSoars has come up with on this one too.

[little laker]

If you cared to share a larger pic with us, I imagine that some people might see what they can come up with.

I could give it a shot, although I'm on the road with my laptop only for a couple of days. And I don't have the best results while working with it's monitor

[Frank Fletcher]

Well here is another take. It's not meant to be realistic. More stylistic. Had to deal with lots of noise and jpeg artifacting. Colors will be way off because this is from my laptop, uncalibrated and using gimp. And because I didn't really try to keep it realistic in the 15 minutes I spent on it.

In any case - it's just to see what can be done with some severe PP.

[Wombat]

Thanks, everyone, I appreciate your comments and your willingness to share your skills. Here's a bigger image:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/7377/1_Eastern_curlew_3.jpg

CSoars, would you mind elaborating on channel mixing/aberration? I sort of know what you mean, but I'd appreciate some more detail on what you might do.

You've all reminded me that before I buy any more lenses I'd better invest in an external monitor for my laptop. (I knew if I got back into photography it was going to be a bottomless pit!). Frank, I also use Gimp. What did you do with the pic? Looks like you put the sky through a polarizing filter, but I can't find such a thing in any of the Gimp menus.

[Peter Zack]

How about this, Some levels and curves adjustments. Noise reduction and a little sharpening. With some blue added.

[Wombat]

Thanks, Peter. I can get it to that stage, but if I crop it and try to enlarge just the bird to print out, say, an 8x10, the sharpness just isn't there. Maybe it's a question of accepting the fact that, as LaRee intimates, under the circumstances this was the best the lens could manage. I know it's a mediocre lens (I was seduced by the price - bad mistake) and perhaps I've been asking more than it has to offer.
Nevertheless, I'm most interested to see how much further yourself and others can take it.

[Lowell Goudge]

I think you are being too hard on both yourself and your kit.

You simply cannot to make an 8x10 out of a shot where you will only use about 5% of the total image.

a better lens, higher resolution camera, and even ideal conditions simply make life easier but won't give you, at the shooting distance much better results.

As a long time bird photographer, I can tell you that there are times when you have to accept this is all you will get, a shot useable for identification.

I think you should take a different approach, accept this will never be other than a snapshot, and keep the bird on you list of need a better shot.

[DuckysDoll]

It's hard because it is so small. Not much to play with, but here is my shot =)

[spyglass]

Hey Duckysdoll..... it looks like you pointed him in the right direction - LOL (ok that was punny)

[DuckysDoll]

Hey Duckysdoll..... it looks like you pointed him in the right direction - LOL (ok that was punny)

Better to be right then wrong!

[Wombat]

I think you are being too hard on both yourself and your kit.

You simply cannot to make an 8x10 out of a shot where you will only use about 5% of the total image.

a better lens, higher resolution camera, and even ideal conditions simply make life easier but won't give you, at the shooting distance much better results.

As a long time bird photographer, I can tell you that there are times when you have to accept this is all you will get, a shot useable for identification.

I think you should take a different approach, accept this will never be other than a snapshot, and keep the bird on you list of need a better shot.

Sage advice, Lowell. Thank you, you turned a light on for me. After reading that I feel much better about the lens. I've only recently got it and doubtless need to spend much more time with it. And you're right, the conditions were pretty ordinary and the shot was never going to give me a pin-sharp close-up from that distance. Sometimes you need other people to point out the bleeding obvious!
Thanks, DuckysDoll. Why did you reverse the shot, out of interest? I know ducks fly backwards but I've never seen a curlew do it...

[rmtagg]

Ok, I am not good with photo shop but I did have fun playing. It is very artsy looking...lol

[Wombat]

Lovely, Rosemary. You've somehow made the sky look almost like sea spray, which is so appropriate for these birds. In this part of the world they migrate every year from Siberia to all parts of Australia, even right down the bottom where I am, then go back north after summer to breed. (Some, usually young ones like this one, stay over during winter). It's a staggering effort and your treatment gives that sense of drama that characterises the epic journey they go through twice a year. Thanks.