My BOD Heron came back
With the 300L lens with extender to 420. Sure is clearer than my other one. I Had not seen a bird at this place since I got the lens. I was tired of the Shem Creek ones as they don't have the water for the reflections. g
Harry, I had my camera vertical, so when he took off to fly, I couldn't get it horizontal fast enough. Then I kept thinking he was going to fly again, so I would put it horizontal.............etc. Never did get one. Do you just watch and get ready for the flight?
Harry, I had my camera vertical, so when he took off to fly, I couldn't get it horizontal fast enough. Then I kept thinking he was going to fly again, so I would put it horizontal.............etc. Never did get one. Do you just watch and get ready for the flight?
After all is said and done, it is the sweet tea.
0
Comments
These are really good shots. I like the lighting and the reflection of the first one, I think you are showing alot of progress.
Thanks for sharing.
Speak with sweet words, for you never know when you may have to eat them....
Moderator of: Location, Location, Location , Mind Your Own Business & Other Cool Shots
Ginger, these are great! Between you and Harry, my bird shots (when I ever can get one to pose for me) won't be worth showing
Was the light that good, or did Scott Kelby's Photoshop CS for digital photographers book help you out?
I borrowed the book from our library, and am learning lots of new tricks! Some don't always work. I'm still fighting with the black and white point, never mind the gray point in curves!
I'm trying the "noise" reduction tip using the LAB mode too.
You exposure looks "right on" too!
http://www.twitter.com/deegolden
Dee, if he doesn't fly away immediately, a Great Blue Heron basically stands there, plays dumb and is an easy photograph, if you don't spook him. I have yet to get a flying shot. That 300mm L lens, it is stupendous. My birds have eyes now.
An extender is something you buy for about 300.00 dollars, put it on your lens and it effectively makes it longer by 1.4 times, or 2 times. I have the 1.4, so my 300 lens there had the extender on, that made it the same as a 420 lens.
I was amazed that I still had that quality.
Dee, I over exposed all the shots, some were not retrievable, some were. I did put it at about -2/3, but I should have shot at a whole -1. I thought since it was a grey bird and not an egret, I couldn't blow highlights, but I did.
I shot in RAW. So up upped the shadow slider until I thought my exposure was better. I did not pay any attention to the histogram, I needed the bird not to be blown, but I couldn't darken the photo totally. There were almost always some highlights still blown, but I did up the shadow part a bunch.
Then I always, if I remember, raise the luminosity by 5, and I raise the noise thing to 35, just in case.
I have all the books, including Kelby's. I used that today on the thing I did for Challenge 33, but I didn't use it for anything else in the last week or so. I do not do a lot of post unless I have to. This afternoon, I used it because I had a lot of noise from an extremely cropped photo, but I did not use it on the birds.
I used levels. My main concern were the blown highlights. So I went to selective color and darkened the white a bit. Then I did the other stuff I do, I intensified the grey a bit, same with the black a tiny bit. I intensified the yellow, I like to do that for the beak.
Then I used saturation, intensified the yellow more, I really like yellow, upped the sat a tad. Everything was eyeballed. Then I usually forgot the contrast, which does not hurt something like this as long as the highlights are under control, but I forgot it for all except one shot, I think, and I went to USM and jpg.
That is how I did it. Those are things I use all the time, I can eyeball them, play with them, do something, step backwards. I started all over with one bird. Oh, I clone to clean up something like a piece of trash in the water. It doesn't take long.
Now layers, I have the book on my lap most of the time and follow the recipe. I consider myself much improved if I can get all the way through a layers instruction.
I can't do curves worth a darn. Sometimes I try. I have a book I need to read on that. I do it with the books in my lap. As long as I can muddle through. And I am learning a bit here and there. I print out all the tutorials that they give here, Now I have so many of those, I can't find most of them, they are in files and things, but not in order.
Anyway, that is how I did it.
ginger (no curves were used in the process of doing any photos today or yesterday):D
Love the colorful background and reflections
Yep, it's hard to get "flight" shots. Between having to shoot "one-shot" and AI Servo and portrait to landscape orientation, it can be tough. But, the more you shoot these birds, the more you will get to know their motions/movements. You'll be able to tell if they are moving their necks to spear a fish, or if they are getting ready to takeoff (and they will almost always fly directly away from you
Anywho, nice work and I like them both. Plus, it looks like you and that 300mm are bonding nicely
Steve
Very nice shots. I really like the second one. You got the exposure nailed, good feather details and some neat reflections. I would have cropped the first one closer and tried to eliminate the top as its a bit distracting.
Catching herons in flight is like playing poker you ahve to look for their tell. Herons will usally sort of brace themselves before they take off. When I see them brace I try to get in position to get the flight shots. I try to move laterally because they are going to go away from me and I don't want to end up with a butt shot.
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"