|
| Group |
Round |
C/R |
Comment |
Date |
Image |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Comment |
OK, the histogram is not bulging on the left, but I knew that because I did get detail in the feathers. It looks OK to me (sorry I don't know how to copy it here for you to see).
I did try the 16x9, which did not leave enough top and bottom space (it looked "narrow" to me), and the 8x10 gave too much top and bottom space. The 5x7 (with a teensy crop on the side) seemed to work out better. By choosing this size and sliding the bird down a bit, I was able to crop off the 2-toned background (the darker part of the background at the top was a distant bushy area, and I cropped it so just the lighter frag grass was showing).
When I sharpened the bird, even slightly, I kind of got a white outline around the upper part of its body, which I didn't like. I did this by choosing a subject mask. But I found I could get rid of the outline by creating a background mask and lightening the background enough until the outline disappeared.
This is what I ended up with. . . comments? (Geez, when I first joined here, I didn't even know what a mask was!!). |
Mar 17th |
 |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Reply |
The black birds shots were all grainy. I'm not sure why, either, maybe it was just too much dark? I'll look at the histogram data and see if everything is too much to the left.
So happy that it is recognizable as a bird :-)
Thanks for your suggestions and the nice words. Everything helps! |
Mar 17th |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Comment |
Thank you for all the kind compliments and suggestions. I was pleased that is wasn't just a black blob (I am so good at shooting to the extremes of the histogram. . .)
I do like the Z9, and paired with the 500 PF it's great! There is an eagle nest that I am watching, and that setup plus the 1.x allows me to reach it pretty well. Even the D850, as great as it is, wasn't able to produce a good enough focus that far away. Of course, it may not be the 850 at all, it could be that very unstable accessory called "the operator."
:-) |
Mar 14th |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Reply |
Thanks, Larry.
I hope to be on the giving end of helping others learn someday and thank all of you for being so helpful to me.
I'll take a look at the Group 36 photo Thanks! |
Mar 11th |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Comment |
Hmm. To be orange or not to be. . .that is the question.
To me (and I'm a newbie with no taste) it's like the photo elements are competing with each other. Both are beautiful and worthy of a photographer's attention but (again as a newbie) I'm not sure if this is a sunset photo or a landscape photo.
My problem, not yours. :-)
Larry's no-orange-at-all photo has a certain appeal.
I see the tip of another orangey cloud to the left of the image. Wondering if you were able to get the landscape at a different angle that would put more emphasis on the clouds and maybe less on the landscape. . .?
Or did I miss the point -- were you replicating the angle of the original by Ansel Adams?
I'm impressed with your HDR technique! (I have so much to learn) |
Mar 11th |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Comment |
What can I say?
Pure admiration!
|
Mar 11th |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Comment |
Love it!
I know what you mean about these guys hanging out close to the water, so to find one in a good view is really great. The light is good, and "look, ma, no blown-out whites!" (which seems to be my favorite error recently).
I wasn't distracted by the blue until Larry suggested it be removed. Even with it, though, it's a great image. That bird just pops! |
Mar 11th |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Comment |
I am in awe.
I read your description several times so I could remember the settings and the reasons you gave for them. Even with the precision of your formula of watching the storm and anticipating the lightning strikes, it took a lot of patience to get those 26 files. Amazing!
Do heed Bud's advice, especially when working in the flat lands of the Everglades. I am hoping to get there muyself sometime this year, but I think I will stick to the wildlife and leave the lightning strikes to the expert! |
Mar 11th |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Comment |
Amazing! It's almost as if the crowd of penguins in the foreground are watching what happens in the distance ;-)
At first I didn't see the red-trousered person, but once I did it stood out like the red dot on the sweater George Costanza bought (sorry, I'm a Seinfeld freak, and that was a funny episode).
Larry's suggestion perks up a lovely image just a bit to make it even lovelier. The landscape is breataking, and the penguins -- well, it's just a perfect photo! |
Mar 11th |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Comment |
That's a really great photo! I do like Larry's crop that lessens some of the left-sided space. But it's a great photo nonetheless!
When I was in Costa Rica we stumbled across the black-crowned antpitta with what looked like a worn in its mouth. It was dark, and of course it was standing in a wooded area that was fenced off -- lots of obstacles. The fence was really high (I am 4'10," which I call "armpit height" for obvious reasons) and there was no way I could get a photo. I ended up giving my camera to the guide and said "do what you can." So I have about 100 soft images of this unique bird. . . but I probably wouldn't have done much better. |
Mar 11th |
| 67 |
Mar 24 |
Comment |
Thanks, Michael! I was so pleased to get the variations of the black (I hope I can replicate that if the subject comes up again!)
I can do the 8x10 easy enough once IO find where I put the original. I thought computers were supposed to make our lives easier!
|
Mar 11th |
9 comments - 2 replies for Group 67
|
9 comments - 2 replies Total
|
