Thanks again for honest feedback on duff over-cropped bee-eater photo yesterday. I agree with all comments and posted it to see how honest people were prepared to be...
Yet more honest feedback would be welcome on this offering - I'm not quite sure what I make of it myself. There's something I like about the symmetry and it seems peaceful, somehow. I'd be interested to hear what others think. No catch light in the eye - does this matter for this image?
Hi Ben. Although a very nice stance from the bird and a nice reflection too, I think it could do with brightening slightly. I think the head maybe slightly soft aswell which surprises me shooting at 1/4000sec. Catchlight always brings an image to life and I think the position of the sun could have been better. You have probably got the image in this sequence, but if the sandpiper had been standing side on facing right, the catchlight would have been present. Might be worth another visit as it looks as if you were getting pretty close.
Hi Ben, Very nicely composed image, its quite soft, and needs some contrast and saturation to lift the image, a little more sharpening perhaps. I cannot remember if i mentioned this before, but you will get far far better images/RAW quality if you can shoot at ISO 400 and below. given your techs above, ISO250 would have been fine and still given you a decent 1/1250 th of a second shutter speed. also agree with Ians comments above.
All of the above has merit, Ben but portrait from landscape is still a big crop imo and if you really wanted a portrait shot you should have turned the camera around. The fact that you didn't suggests that you know you are already trying to save a shot that wasn't what you were after. The position of the bird and its reflection should scream out loud that portrait was the correct choice. We all do it I know, but really having the camera the right way round is pretty fundamental to composition isn't it? I hope that doesn't read as being too harsh, it's not meant to be. I am still toiling along this road myself, but I find that my camera is the other way round at least half the time and it took ages to sink in but it improved my results no end.
I would agree with Ian and Mark as well, but how many of us have wood sandpiper images at all? One to keep on the hard drive until another & better opportunity steps forward imo. eric
Excellent points already made. For me, a lower angle might have softened the background a little more. I take Eric's point on board about camera position - I am sure we all do it, but it often means that we simply aren't as close as we would like to be to the subject. It has certainly taken me a very long time to fully appreciate that my cropped images lack the detail of the uncropped ones - but it holds true every time.
Thanks for comments so far. Without wishing to sound grumpy Eric, the only way to guarantee that portrait was 'the' orientation for this image would have been to shoot the bird and staple it to a branch! Wood sandpipers feeding move around incredibly fast! In any case, portrait or landscape I wouldn't have been any closer, so for the same image I'd still need to crop by the same amount so I'm afraid I really don't follow your point, Eric. It would have been preferable to have been closer, I agree, but that is often the case.
Points taken about softness (it isn't but I obviously haven't got this 'save for web' thing sorted properly yet. I'm always fearful of oversharpening). Ditto brightness, colours etc - it looks very different on this monitor to my uncalibrated work PC which I posted from.
Regarding ISO, Mark. With the 500mm + 1.4x TC on a sturdy tripod low down + gimbal mount I still find vibration an issue. Perhaps my long lens technique isn't up to much... The 7D is fine IMO at ISO 800, and any noise could anyway be removed with noise ninja/neat image. Surely a sharp image with noise removed is better than a soft image with no noise? Or am I missing something?
Good picture of a difficult bird. Love the posture and angle of the legs,beak with their reflection but think this gets lost a bit with the background visible. Still I would be pleased with it, spent all last Friday trying to get one and failed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 7D is fine IMO at ISO 800, and any noise could anyway be removed with noise ninja/neat image. Surely a sharp image with noise removed is better than a soft image with no noise? Or am I missing something?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the point though Ben is that a sharp image without noise (and noise reduction) is even better than either of those alternatives. ISO 800 on the 7D is pretty good but there's no doubt the image quality is not as good as at 100 or 200. As a rule of thumb, I don't go beyond 400 unless a sharp shot wouldn't be possible without a higher ISO. In the case of your shot, I think most would agree that a sharp shot should have been possible with a lower ISO.
Matt
Posted by David Sewell on May 20, 2010 at 10:08 AM
Ben,
I agree with the comments made, that the bird should be a little more to the left of the frame and that it is a little too soft. Like you, I am still getting used to a long lens in conjunction with a converter. It is a technique that is slowly coming to me, but I find that there is simply no substitute for plenty of practice. A friend once told me that if I wanted to improve, the first thing to do was to double my rate of failure. That was in the days of film, when such advice was expensive to follow. I appreciate that a feeding wood sandpiper is not an easy subject as it moves very fast, but at 1/4000th a posted shot does need to be sharper than this.
Discussion
9 repliesThanks again for honest feedback on duff over-cropped bee-eater photo yesterday. I agree with all comments and posted it to see how honest people were prepared to be...
Yet more honest feedback would be welcome on this offering - I'm not quite sure what I make of it myself. There's something I like about the symmetry and it seems peaceful, somehow. I'd be interested to hear what others think. No catch light in the eye - does this matter for this image?
Cropped from landscape original
1/4000 sec
f/5.6
ISO 800
500mm +1.4 TC
Canon 7D
Thanks for looking
Ben
hope that helps !!
Mark.G
I would agree with Ian and Mark as well, but how many of us have wood sandpiper images at all? One to keep on the hard drive until another & better opportunity steps forward imo.
Points taken about softness (it isn't but I obviously haven't got this 'save for web' thing sorted properly yet. I'm always fearful of oversharpening). Ditto brightness, colours etc - it looks very different on this monitor to my uncalibrated work PC which I posted from.
Regarding ISO, Mark. With the 500mm + 1.4x TC on a sturdy tripod low down + gimbal mount I still find vibration an issue. Perhaps my long lens technique isn't up to much... The 7D is fine IMO at ISO 800, and any noise could anyway be removed with noise ninja/neat image. Surely a sharp image with noise removed is better than a soft image with no noise? Or am I missing something?
Ben
I agree with most of the points above so will not repeat them
With regard the comments on it being soft, we can only comment on the posted image, which in this case is soft.
I look forward to seeing more from you
The 7D is fine IMO at ISO 800, and any noise could anyway be removed with noise ninja/neat image. Surely a sharp image with noise removed is better than a soft image with no noise? Or am I missing something?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the point though Ben is that a sharp image without noise (and noise reduction) is even better than either of those alternatives. ISO 800 on the 7D is pretty good but there's no doubt the image quality is not as good as at 100 or 200. As a rule of thumb, I don't go beyond 400 unless a sharp shot wouldn't be possible without a higher ISO. In the case of your shot, I think most would agree that a sharp shot should have been possible with a lower ISO.
Matt
I agree with the comments made, that the bird should be a little more to the left of the frame and that it is a little too soft. Like you, I am still getting used to a long lens in conjunction with a converter. It is a technique that is slowly coming to me, but I find that there is simply no substitute for plenty of practice. A friend once told me that if I wanted to improve, the first thing to do was to double my rate of failure. That was in the days of film, when such advice was expensive to follow. I appreciate that a feeding wood sandpiper is not an easy subject as it moves very fast, but at 1/4000th a posted shot does need to be sharper than this.
David