Taken from car, 600mm f/4, 1/125 sec @ f11, tripod mounted, electrical cable release used.
Normal Photoshop procedure, whatever that is.
Posted by Steve Fletcher on November 24, 2008 at 3:10 PM
I liked the last one you did, but this one looks really strange on my monitor. I would say, living in Spain as i do, and knowing the sort of light conditions i have to deal with every day, that 125/f11, even at iso 100 is 1 stop overxposed. It looks like it has then been overworked in photoshop, the colours are wishy/washy, and there is a distinct halo around the birds head and back. It also looks quite soft too.
How do you mount a tripod in your car ?
Posted by John Chapman on November 24, 2008 at 3:16 PM
Nice capture Ray.
Posted by Major Gilbert on November 24, 2008 at 3:49 PM
Smashing birds are Little Bitterns Ray.
Like the curious pose look.
There does seem to be a few oddities in the BG though as mentioned.
Major.
Posted by Ian Mason on November 24, 2008 at 6:11 PM
Cracking bird! Never seen one, but I too was immediately struck by the odd colour palette and tones. Reminds me of what I see if I click on the highlight/shadow tool before adjusting the settings, but there could be many reasons for it. Would be interested to here what your "normal photoshop procedure" is, to understand this appearance.
Posted by Magnus Hird on November 24, 2008 at 6:12 PM
Nice looking bird Ray, like the crest and pose. Its probably my monitor but it seems a little blue, or is that just the brightness of the light? (its been so long since I've seen sunshine at home I've forgotten ;-)
Posted by Colin Pickett on November 24, 2008 at 9:35 PM
The colours looks a bit out of whack on this one Ray is it saved as sRGB? sometimes if it not the colours and brightness can look odd in some browsers.
Regards
Posted by Danny Green on November 25, 2008 at 7:19 AM
Sorry Ray but this doesn't quite work for me nice pose but your comp is too central and I think the processing might need looking at again.
I don’t normally reply to comments made on my posts, but I do read them and take any suggestions on board.
But this thread has raised, for me at least, a few points.
First Steve, I think you are going to be a real pain, as it appears that you are one of the few who are prepared to ask questions. You even managed to inadvertently remind me of a promise I made to Andrew Shepherd, about flash supports, which together with your question I will now address in the next few days. The best way being with some pictures accompanied with some descriptive text.
As this thread will inevitably scroll down the page, I think the best way is for you to send me an e-mail, don’t mind if its “Hotmail” “Yahoo” etc. and I’ll endeavour to send you the info. by return. I know I have the images but they have been filed for safety, safely from me that is, will set the “dogs” loose.
There had been a large bloom of the water algae on the river, the previous two days and it all seemed to collect where this shot was taken, a small inlet off of the main river, two days before this area of water was clear. Perhaps the Crakes/Bittern were there because of the algae ??
Anyway, I suspect that the algae could be the cause of the strange B.G. and a contributory factor in the crit’s, even to the “blue” cast mentioned. The halo is on the original, so it might be an abnormality of the lighting. So it looks like I’m back to the original, together with some reference work on the Photoshop training CD’s I have.
Bottom line, it might well be a “PICNIC” problem.
Posted by Graeme Lee on November 25, 2008 at 12:26 PM
Good species to view but I too notice the oddity of the colours. To me, it looks like an overexposed shot that's been adjusted using the shadow/highlight tool to tone evrything down and then increased again using the highlights tool. Not sayin git has, but that's what it looks like to me.
Agree with the comp being a bit too central and not enough for the virtual legs.
Can you not post your bits here instead of private emails? Would be good to continuie to view the thread.
Firstly let me make one point, I am not what you might call a secret squirrel, but there are something’s which are best left unsaid. Use of certain baits & books, calls, etc., I will not discuss, come to that equipment is another, unless asked directly.
But to get back to your question, about my method(s).
There are a number of reasons, which immediately come to mind, why I personally don’t think it would be a good idea to add to this thread.
1. I would quite possibly exceed the amount of images, which any one thread is allowed.
2. Such a addition would highjack this thread, as has now happened.
3. The “technique” isn’t apparent in the title.
4. The thread will scroll down the page and will soon be lost off the bottom.
5. A topic covering such a subject, deserves its own thread, and then it should locked is a prominent position on the forum, together with similar topics, for future reference.
A few nights ago Vincent posted a thread along the lines of increasing the educational value/resources of the forum, but he deleted it for very sound reasons, but I did e-mail him about the thread, and in the e-mail I wrote the following:
1. For potential topics, there is shooting from a Car, how to scrim up a car, I can do it in under two minutes without leaving the car, making a hide, prop/perch supports, feeder mounting, flash gun mounting off camera, pool building, feeder locating re lighting, the list just goes on. Many of these I have images as to how I do it.
2. Bottom line, yes there is a wealth of information out there, and it is readily available, but no one asks, for whatever reason, and in some cases I suppose they don't know the questions to ask.
One last thing, I never advocate my methods as being the be all and end all, but just a starting point for others, but they suit my style of photography.
Graeme does this go someway to answering your question ??.
Right, must get back to the “PICNIC” research.
Posted by Graeme Lee on November 26, 2008 at 5:31 PM
To be honest Ray, I don't understand. I would be only too happy to disuss things regarding my image on this forum. Maybe I'm naive, but I can honestly say that I have gained most of my skills (don't know if that's a compliment!) from postings on this site.
As far as I'm concerned the more elaborate the description on an image, the better it is for me to learn. It is usually only by questioning aspects of the image that this extra info comes out...and is shared.
This forum used to have a lot more technical discussions and the analysis of images were more common place and image processing a lot more widely shared than they are now.
I don't use elaborate techniques to get images, I don't bait (except feeders I suppose), my fieldcraft is rubbish so I perhaps don't see the dangers or concerns with publicly stating my setups and strategies as is probably shown in my very limited portfolio.
This is probably not the place for this conversation, so I will leave it here and appreciate your considered response to my question.
When you say, that you are only too happy to discuss matters on the forum, then I think you are an exception.
Most comments that I read on this and similar forums, are all about how an image can be improved using Photoshop. Rarely, are there any suggestions as to how an image can be improved, prior to taking the image.
When it comes to envisaging an image and setting out to “construct” it, most have only a passing interest in how it is done.
For most, N.H. photography is going to a recognised hot spot, and that includes reserves and wetland trusts. If they do go abroad, it’s basically the same scenario, where their guide shows them where to put their tripod. Occasionally some do venture out alone in a hire car, and then it a matter of opening the drivers window, slapping a bean bag on the sill and shooting away.
There is nothing wrong with this approach to photography , as it obviously gives a lot of fulfilment to many photographers.
It just isn’t for me, I like to “work” for my images, and use my N.H. knowledge to get me into what I consider the best shooting position, using whatever techniques I can call upon to help me do this, which doesn’t have any adverse impact on my intended subject and the environment.
Bottom line, I don’t think there are many who are in the least bit interested in “extra” information as they don’t see any relevance to their own photography, so following this thought through to its natural conclusion, there isn’t any point in adding any “extra” information is there. Infact there is an argument for “less is best”.
If you supply the very bare bones information wise, if any at all, it is very illuminating as to what comments you receive, as such comments have to be about the image, as presented, and aren’t diverted onto some technique employed to capture the image in the first place.
By trade I’m a mechanical design engineer, and my profession has taught me over the years several things, for example, always try to think outside the box, never assume anything, and it is very rare, that there isn’t an answer to any problem, ignoring costs etc..
Never forget that you weren’t there when the image was taken, the author of the image was, so they have a lot more information concerning the image, than you ever will. So ask questions, what’s the worst that can happen ?? You get blanked, so you haven’t lost anything have you. There is no shame in not knowing, the shame lies in not asking.
By asking questions, you invariably get the author to re examine the image themselves, thus a win, win for all concerned. See anything in any of my images, which raises a question in your mind, just ask away.
Discussion
12 repliesTaken from car, 600mm f/4, 1/125 sec @ f11, tripod mounted, electrical cable release used.
Normal Photoshop procedure, whatever that is.
How do you mount a tripod in your car ?
Like the curious pose look.
There does seem to be a few oddities in the BG though as mentioned.
Major.
Regards
Danny
I don’t normally reply to comments made on my posts, but I do read them and take any suggestions on board.
But this thread has raised, for me at least, a few points.
First Steve, I think you are going to be a real pain, as it appears that you are one of the few who are prepared to ask questions.
As this thread will inevitably scroll down the page, I think the best way is for you to send me an e-mail, don’t mind if its “Hotmail” “Yahoo” etc. and I’ll endeavour to send you the info. by return. I know I have the images but they have been filed for safety, safely from me that is, will set the “dogs” loose.
There had been a large bloom of the water algae on the river, the previous two days and it all seemed to collect where this shot was taken, a small inlet off of the main river, two days before this area of water was clear. Perhaps the Crakes/Bittern were there because of the algae ??
Anyway, I suspect that the algae could be the cause of the strange B.G. and a contributory factor in the crit’s, even to the “blue” cast mentioned. The halo is on the original, so it might be an abnormality of the lighting. So it looks like I’m back to the original, together with some reference work on the Photoshop training CD’s I have.
Bottom line, it might well be a “PICNIC” problem.
Agree with the comp being a bit too central and not enough for the virtual legs.
Can you not post your bits here instead of private emails?
Firstly let me make one point, I am not what you might call a secret squirrel, but there are something’s which are best left unsaid. Use of certain baits & books, calls, etc., I will not discuss, come to that equipment is another, unless asked directly.
But to get back to your question, about my method(s).
There are a number of reasons, which immediately come to mind, why I personally don’t think it would be a good idea to add to this thread.
1. I would quite possibly exceed the amount of images, which any one thread is allowed.
2. Such a addition would highjack this thread, as has now happened.
3. The “technique” isn’t apparent in the title.
4. The thread will scroll down the page and will soon be lost off the bottom.
5. A topic covering such a subject, deserves its own thread, and then it should locked is a prominent position on the forum, together with similar topics, for future reference.
A few nights ago Vincent posted a thread along the lines of increasing the educational value/resources of the forum, but he deleted it for very sound reasons, but I did e-mail him about the thread, and in the e-mail I wrote the following:
1. For potential topics, there is shooting from a Car, how to scrim up a car, I can do it in under two minutes without leaving the car, making a hide, prop/perch supports, feeder mounting, flash gun mounting off camera, pool building, feeder locating re lighting, the list just goes on. Many of these I have images as to how I do it.
2. Bottom line, yes there is a wealth of information out there, and it is readily available, but no one asks, for whatever reason, and in some cases I suppose they don't know the questions to ask.
One last thing, I never advocate my methods as being the be all and end all, but just a starting point for others, but they suit my style of photography.
Graeme does this go someway to answering your question ??.
Right, must get back to the “PICNIC” research.
As far as I'm concerned the more elaborate the description on an image, the better it is for me to learn. It is usually only by questioning aspects of the image that this extra info comes out...and is shared.
This forum used to have a lot more technical discussions and the analysis of images were more common place and image processing a lot more widely shared than they are now.
I don't use elaborate techniques to get images, I don't bait (except feeders I suppose), my fieldcraft is rubbish so I perhaps don't see the dangers or concerns with publicly stating my setups and strategies as is probably shown in my very limited portfolio.
This is probably not the place for this conversation, so I will leave it here and appreciate your considered response to my question.
Regards, Graeme
When you say, that you are only too happy to discuss matters on the forum, then I think you are an exception.
Most comments that I read on this and similar forums, are all about how an image can be improved using Photoshop. Rarely, are there any suggestions as to how an image can be improved, prior to taking the image.
When it comes to envisaging an image and setting out to “construct” it, most have only a passing interest in how it is done.
For most, N.H. photography is going to a recognised hot spot, and that includes reserves and wetland trusts. If they do go abroad, it’s basically the same scenario, where their guide shows them where to put their tripod. Occasionally some do venture out alone in a hire car, and then it a matter of opening the drivers window, slapping a bean bag on the sill and shooting away.
There is nothing wrong with this approach to photography , as it obviously gives a lot of fulfilment to many photographers.
It just isn’t for me, I like to “work” for my images, and use my N.H. knowledge to get me into what I consider the best shooting position, using whatever techniques I can call upon to help me do this, which doesn’t have any adverse impact on my intended subject and the environment.
Bottom line, I don’t think there are many who are in the least bit interested in “extra” information as they don’t see any relevance to their own photography, so following this thought through to its natural conclusion, there isn’t any point in adding any “extra” information is there. Infact there is an argument for “less is best”.
If you supply the very bare bones information wise, if any at all, it is very illuminating as to what comments you receive, as such comments have to be about the image, as presented, and aren’t diverted onto some technique employed to capture the image in the first place.
By trade I’m a mechanical design engineer, and my profession has taught me over the years several things, for example, always try to think outside the box, never assume anything, and it is very rare, that there isn’t an answer to any problem, ignoring costs etc..
Never forget that you weren’t there when the image was taken, the author of the image was, so they have a lot more information concerning the image, than you ever will. So ask questions, what’s the worst that can happen ?? You get blanked, so you haven’t lost anything have you. There is no shame in not knowing, the shame lies in not asking.
By asking questions, you invariably get the author to re examine the image themselves, thus a win, win for all concerned. See anything in any of my images, which raises a question in your mind, just ask away.