Took this image today,just testing my 400L lens,as I had not used it for a while,on the 50D at 1600th,iso 320,av 6.3.Some PP,mainly to darken the image,as was a little over exposed,maybe I could have used 1/2000th.
Comments and suggestions welcome you say, (well your getting game)
Chris it is actually a good quick capture, they can be quite tricky especially with the blue sky, and dark underbelly, anyway it is pretty crisp and clean, and I like it mate.
Thanks Leon and Jennifer,yes-I want to try and improve my photography-so any feed back is handy.
I took this photo as a test shot,I have been using Very high speed frame rate,for BIF,but have been a little disappointed with results.This time I switched it off,and use single shot only,as the bird flew over I panned him and slowly fired 6 or 7 shots.When I checked all in focus and not too bad,this had the best composition.
Previously,I had taken 30-40 shots of a Brown Falcon in flight-at high speed all turned out rubbish,I relied on the fact-'oh its 6 fps-I will get some keepers' instead of tried and true method-(most BIFFing I do birds are at distance).
But closer ones landing on water,High speed would be good,I have had the 50D a year now,its a fantastic camera,I am happy with it,but takes a while to learn to do somethings with it.
Hi Chris - nice effort given the difficulty in prevailing conditions
Did you run your raw through DPP? You said critique was welcome, so I took the liberty of running your low-resolution JPG through DPP as a JPG, and still think that the contrast gives a better view. I'd like to have had your high resolution raw - it would give lots of room to move. I also cropped the frame a little to make it look like the bird was "going" somewhere - i.e. into the empty frame to the left.
Got to get me one of those lenses one day... arghh...
I ran the RAW through CS5,I did some work in a layer and some exposure work and flattened and cropped.
I am reading Humayan's thoughts in other threads,and I think I might have had a few Pm's with him on the subject of PP.I think he uses DDP alot,rather than other stuff.I have used DDP before,I thought It gave good results,and was easier to use,So I think I'll go back to giving it ago again.
More than happy to email the RAW of this for you to play with Chris.Its a fine lens the 400 L.and even though this was just a basic test,it appears the image has appeal.
Thanks again-Pitty we do not live closer,I'd loan you my 70-200 F 2.8 L as I really do not use it a lot,but I will keep it,-oh the bokeh and sharpness is to die for!
Thanks for the offer to borrow the lens Chris I've used Humayun's before - and it really is a must for my camera bag one day. Lucky sods that have one! LOL
Yep - email it to me at chris at omaroo dot com. I'm keen to have a play and see what data you caught.
Cheers - and thanks again
Chris
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotspur
Great work.and thanks for feed back Chris.
I ran the RAW through CS5,I did some work in a layer and some exposure work and flattened and cropped.
I am reading Humayan's thoughts in other threads,and I think I might have had a few Pm's with him on the subject of PP.I think he uses DDP alot,rather than other stuff.I have used DDP before,I thought It gave good results,and was easier to use,So I think I'll go back to giving it ago again.
More than happy to email the RAW of this for you to play with Chris.Its a fine lens the 400 L.and even though this was just a basic test,it appears the image has appeal.
Thanks again-Pitty we do not live closer,I'd loan you my 70-200 F 2.8 L as I really do not use it a lot,but I will keep it,-oh the bokeh and sharpness is to die for!
That’s a nice photo Chris, although it is tough shot. The Sulphur Crested Cockatoo is a white bird and if you expose for the highlights to bring out the texture and detail in the feathers on the sunlit neck and the eye of the bird, the underbelly and wings will probably record as too dark. It might prove challenging to bring out any detail in the shadows whilst controlling the noise.
If you expose for the underbelly so that it falls into the mid tones range, where you could bring out some nice detail and texture in the feathers, then the sun lit neck is likely to blow out, recording as a featureless white glow with the sky becoming very light as the blue tones saturate.
The overall contrast between the detailed bird and the featureless sky can also be a problem – if you over process any element then you can easily end up with artefacts like a glow or halo around the bird.
In my experience, the tonal range of white bird underbellies, set against a bright sky with sun falling on other parts of the bird’s anatomy, is generally too great for the sensor to record in one hit, even when shooting RAW where you have more exposure latitude.
However, asking the bird to stay put, so you can expose for the highlights and then take a second shot for the darker tones, just isn’t an option in this case!
I’ve attached a photo I took of a Whistling Kite where I exposed for the feathers and as you can see, the rest of the image is blown out to a featureless white background. If I had followed the cameras recommended auto exposure for the scene, I would have got a nicely exposed sky and a black bird silhouette! Instead, I over exposed by around 1 ½ stops.
I've used Humayun's before - and it really is a must for my camera bag one day. Lucky sods that have one! LOL
