Simple Ducks

williaes

This shot or this crop? The photo appears to be out of focus until you look closely. The ducks are in focus.

williaes

williaes wrote: »

This shot or this crop? The photo appears to be out of focus until you look closely. The ducks are in focus.

Or this one

Harryb

Welcome to Dgrin . Cropped or uncut the ducks are a tad soft. I like the uncropped version better because it has the colorful water reflections. You should do something about not blowing out the highlights. The white duck has virtually no detail.

PGM

Welcome to the wildlife forum! Harry made this same comment to me a while ago when my great egret had no detail--it was 100% white. When you have white or very light subjects that take up only a small part of your frame, and the rest of the frame is darker, your camera's metering system will most likely average the exposure required for the whole frame. So, since there is more dark area, the camera will let in more light. The background, like in your photo, will look fine, but the small white or light birds will be too white, and you can't see any details of their feathers. So, you have to set your exposure compensation to underexpose the image so that the important ducks will be properly exposed. The background may then come out a bit dark, but you can correct that in photoshop or lightroom. Unfortunately, you can't really bring back detail in a white that is really overexposed. Of course, when Harry first told me this, I thought my white bird looked fine. Then he told me my black bear was too black. Picky, picky, but now I see he is right, and though I don't get every one just right, they sure look better when I do. Best, Pam

Dick on Aruba

Welcome to Dgrin!

I think Harry and Pam said it all. The reflexions in the first are great.

williaes

williaes wrote: »

Or this one

Thanks for the nice encouraging words. I know nothing about wildlife photography and really don't have the proper equipment for doing any. I didnt see that the white duck was blown out until you said so. The ducks are a little soft. I went back and looked at the full size and zoomed in 200%. The funny thing about this shot was I was just playing around with the camera and the only zoom lens I own. (Not a real good piece of glass). The photo was taken at 1/1500 SS and ISO of 200 at 80mm I dont know what the f/stop was but I am sure it was small also. It was the middle of the day with pretty harsh light. Thanks again for the nice and polite comments. I have been on another forum before where you just get blasted and dont want to come back. :D

Harryb

williaes wrote: »

Thanks for the nice encouraging words. I know nothing about wildlife photography and really don't have the proper equipment for doing any. I didnt see that the white duck was blown out until you said so. The ducks are a little soft. I went back and looked at the full size and zoomed in 200%. The funny thing about this shot was I was just playing around with the camera and the only zoom lens I own. (Not a real good piece of glass). The photo was taken at 1/1500 SS and ISO of 200 at 80mm I dont know what the f/stop was but I am sure it was small also. It was the middle of the day with pretty harsh light. Thanks again for the nice and polite comments. I have been on another forum before where you just get blasted and dont want to come back. :D

I usually find the midday light too harsh for wildlife shooting. That's why the cropped version didn't work because the cool reflections were washed out by the glare of the sun.

We don't "blast" people here. The idea is to share our knowledge and experience and to assist each at other at getting better at our hobby/obsession.

williaes

Thank you sir. This is not a piece of work that I am proud or would be offended if some one blasted me about. Part of why I used it to test the waters.