Challenge #5 Feathered Friends

jwear

Challenge #5 Feathered Friends

JAG

Jeff, I thought of you when I was putting up this challenge! I knew that you would come up with something spectacular as this is right up your ally. Very lovely capture. No critiques at all other than I like that this is sharp and that's a hard thing to get when shooting birds! At least in my experience. It takes loads of images of the same bird to get one good one. If you could give tips to those who will possibly be trying bird shooting for the first time, that would be awesome! What kind of lens do you use?

jwear

This shot was with a 600 mm and tri pod and how ??? Well you can help the luck that you need to shoot wildlife. Any lens will work (but the bigger the better rule in my option does apply] the 800 mm to me is a sit in one place lens .
First try to watch the behavior of what you plan to shoot .In that you can get an idea of how they act and what they MAY do.This shot was me walking and trying to get close enough to get a shot .This one as soon as it sees a camera is gone ,it sat in a tree for awhile and 6 people walked by any nothing. I walked out from behind my truck with the camera and tripod 200 to 300 feet away from the other folks and yep gone in a blink of my eye I even missed which way it went .Anyway I found it again stayed out of site (under trees with something to cover me and my shadow from its site) when I was close enough I pre focus made some exposure settings with the light I had . I stepped out and it was gone but It flew by me not away from me luck first shot with the tree out of focus this is #2 refocus and #3 not bad also but this wing position and the light = lots of pride for me:ivar . I yelled thank you and it took a poop I am sure it was just a coincidence.
Try shooting at 6.3 7 so you can get a better shutter speed .Try and stay still and let them trust you a bit and get closer so you can pre focus and be ready to blast away . Now lot of photo folks bast away push that button and machine gun ,I do that but 1 out of 100 times like this moment 3 shots.
I am not good at giving instruction so if you have a ?? I will give the answerer and I am sure Davev will jump in also I would say we have similar technics but are different and he is lots better at explaining.
Blue jays ,mocking birds ,sparrows and pigeons a lot easier to shoot they are not very afraid of people. I started shootin with a 70/200 and then I liked this way two much and now I am broke so please be careful . You can shoot birds with any lens --here is something

JAG

thanks for the write up Jeff! I have a 500mm and it can get in pretty close for me. Thing is its so heavy and I find that for the most part, tripods get in the way for how I shoot. I guess if the birds are in one place, or I was in one place and not moving, I could see using a tripod. I am not really a wildlife photographer, although I enjoy taking pictures of them when I am out and about. I am more of the "fly by" shooter who takes a lot of trips into situations that allow me to see wildlife. Like here in Alaska, we can just drive up the highway and see loads, and if I have my camera, I will roll the window down and shoot! Its nice to hear of the hunting techniques of a pro!

tinamarie52

Jeff, I thought of you, too, when Joyce posted this challenge. I do love your shot and the backstory. I rarely take a big lens out into the wild (unless a sports field counts). When I see something cool, like a bald eagle, I get too enthralled watching it to remember to shoot. So I appreciate your instructions here. The biggest lens I have is a 400 with a 1.4 TC. How close do I need to get to shoot with it? It is too heavy to just hand hold.

Chris

jwear

JAG wrote: »

thanks for the write up Jeff! I have a 500mm and it can get in pretty close for me. Thing is its so heavy and I find that for the most part, tripods get in the way for how I shoot. I guess if the birds are in one place, or I was in one place and not moving, I could see using a tripod. I am not really a wildlife photographer, although I enjoy taking pictures of them when I am out and about. I am more of the "fly by" shooter who takes a lot of trips into situations that allow me to see wildlife. Like here in Alaska, we can just drive up the highway and see loads, and if I have my camera, I will roll the window down and shoot! Its nice to hear of the hunting techniques of a pro!

Shooting from the car is a big thing ,lots do it . Look into those bags that go over the window a big help ! Tripod the thing is when you adj to it ,get use to walking with it [balance] you still will miss shots BUT you will also GET shots with one .I can not walk around all day with my 600 with out a pod just too much for old folks . The 500 is the lens I used for a long time and one day I said spend the $ on the lens before it is to late but that 600 is heavy and not easy to balance I shoot my 200/400mm 75 % of the time a great walk around lens ,when you miss a shot with it, it is your fault

jwear

tinamarie52 wrote: »

Jeff, I thought of you, too, when Joyce posted this challenge. I do love your shot and the backstory. I rarely take a big lens out into the wild (unless a sports field counts). When I see something cool, like a bald eagle, I get too enthralled watching it to remember to shoot. So I appreciate your instructions here. The biggest lens I have is a 400 with a 1.4 TC. How close do I need to get to shoot with it? It is too heavy to just hand hold.

Chris

Chris
You know what is easy and what is not that is the big thing. A pod is just an adjustment ,there are 4 ways to hold it and balance (more but basic 4) fold up the legs and tip the lens ,that is the way I walked with my 500 and it was like no weight the 600 I cannot get the lbs to go away ,if I am in an area that has shoots popping up I leave the legs out so I am ready faster. I still to this day cannot shoot with a monopod I shake more with it than I do handheld dunno

puzzledpaul

Well, based on this shot and others of yours I've seen over the yrs, there's nowt I can suggest about the technicals associated with taking a sharp, well exposed bif shot, as I'd not expect anything else from you - so I'll not bother trying

Re the first shot, I wonder what the original frame looks like - 'cos even tho' I know some Nikon gear allows user to take different aspect ratio pics, this doesn't seem like a std one. I'm asking, because it seems a bit tight in frame and I wonder if a little more breathing room would be worth considering?

I realise that this might be considered counter-productive if the aim is to show as much wing detail as possible - but, as I'm sure you know only too well, sometimes 'less is more'.

The wing angle is certainly good for showing detail and if that was in your mind re capturing said angle, then you should be doubly pleased - once for visualising, second for realising what was in your mind's eye - I rarely (if ever) achieve this.

The issue I have with this wing angle, together with the degree of wing overlap is the 'shape' of the silhouette it creates - especially when the extent of neck coverage is taken into account (iconic head almost lost in profile)
Taking an approach my wife used to adopt re checking 'visuals' for use / readability / recognition when teaching visually impaired kids ... she squinted at them (the visuals, not the kids:) )to get an overall 'feel' for the shape (also one reason why words were always printed in lower case, rather than all caps - the word's 'shape' is lost with latter)

Whilst I'm also not a great fan of plain blue bgs - as opposed to some sort of subtly textured bg, this 'pic shape thing' is my main comment - and I fully expect to be in a minority of one, here - with this pic.

pp

jwear

Puzzledpaul
First off thank you

You are going to be somewhat surprised - - - I agree with you the hawk needs more room in front, just too close to the edge .I did very little in editing the shot but I did re due it for donation to one of the wildlife centers for the calendar. Why do I like this wing position ?? never nailed this angle before with the head and eye . There is no way to shot the way I do and nail a wing position unless the hawk is flying around hunting low and doing circles. This wing angle is from the big pull to get it in the air and cruising you see it just took off and I never shoot like a machine gun I just click click .
I think it is too much on the fill the frame side I added more blue. This gave the shot more room for the hawk to fly into. If I was a PS pro like many then would add a background but I do my best to never mess with nature and capture what I see. I take pride in that and is a reason I do not sell photos.

Bottom line I agree with what you said or wrote would be a better way of saying it. I think if I change the angle of the hawk a bit it would help also only after thinking about your comments did that come to me just now .

puzzledpaul

Well, I can see why you're particularly pleased to get this angle and I'm sure the w/l centre is happy with your donation

I have similar thoughts re 'certain shots' (of the 'usual suspects') in the back of my mind too, when out with gear ... a sort of shot, rather than (exotic) species 'bucket list' (to use US parlance ) ... as opposed to one that requires travelling to far-flung places around the globe.

Apart from a couple of occasions when I got lucky, I also don't sell pics and try not to 'mess' with them too much ... even tho' the 2 stitched shots in my ooycz thread might indicate otherwise At times, I know the chances of getting a shot are higher if I use centre AF point, rather than one that'd give a better compositional result.
I justify the stitching - on such occasions - as giving me the shot I was after in the first place. Obviously I'd not do that in circumstances where it wasn't allowed - like a 'proper' comp.

You mentioned (in my thread) that the mallard shot has a similar wing position - which of course it has - but the angle and lighting differences produce a resulting shape that separates the 2 wings in both silhouette and colours - since both wings on your shot render as similar colours, they tend (to my eye) blend together.
(Am not saying one's better than t'other - just trying to unpick what I see)

pp