A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

My thanks to Davoud!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old July 28th 17, 02:23 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default My thanks to Davoud!

On 7/27/2017 4:30 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 7:28 PM, Davoud wrote:
David B.
The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the
quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion, anyway).


PeterN:
OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your opinion
would be appreciated.


Enough on this. I try to make my photos in conformity with my aesthetic
sensibilities. Love 'em or leave 'em. I suspect that PeterN does the
same. PeterN and I are not opponents in a competition.


OK - I have no wish to 'fight' with anyone here.


I have had many discussions here that have not degraded into fights. I
truly enjoy a discussion, in which we can express differing opinions,
without insulting the other person.
Just as one example, there is one person where here, and in another
group we are politically as far apart as is possible. Yet we have met in
person, on several occasions, and consider each other friends. Despite
years of disputes in the other group, neither of us has ever resorted to
insults, and we both respect our differing beliefs. We also discovered
that we had more in common than either of us realized.


P.S.
Here's one more y'all might like
https://www.flickr.com/photos/primeval/34885963754.


The detail in that image is truly amazing! Thanks for sharing. :-)

Yup!

--
PeterN
  #42  
Old July 28th 17, 02:36 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default My thanks to Davoud!

On 7/27/2017 5:42 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 27, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/27/2017 1:41 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 3:13 PM, Savageduck wrote:


Snip
Try this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/thwydbv8ozw10gi/dsc0067C.jpg

Wow! What a fantastic capture.

Thanks for sharing with everyone here, 'Duck. :-)


Using the word "fantastic" is quite an overstatement. It's a well
focused image. The shadows are blocked, and although the bird's
expression clearly says "don't even think to taking my fish, the
composition is ruined by the static composition. Nice, yes, fantastic, no.


I guess I got a bit complacent with regard to that Osprey. He was a daily
regular on my drive to work. Needless to say the lighting and sky changed
day-to-day, as did the fish, but the bird and pole remained the same.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/suq7xxiwbx5v2ip/dsc_0079C.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/k7td5jbhf98zhy7/dsc_0081C.jpg

This guy is a much better image, though I would have liked to see him a
little less centered.


I shudder to think what sort of crop you might have inflicted on this shot to
extract the Osprey.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/b5jo0s333n3wcyt/dsc0062c.jpg


Not sure I would even try. Are your other crops from that original?

Obviously not an Osprey
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gxvo9r4pfv4g4es/Vegetarian%20Woodpecker.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ao4wqtcalfsrlma/Thanksgiving%20escapee.jpg?dl=0


--
PeterN
  #43  
Old July 28th 17, 02:46 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default My thanks to Davoud!

On 7/27/2017 9:13 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 21:10:45 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/27/2017 4:34 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 8:22 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 7/27/2017 1:41 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 3:13 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 27, 2017, David B. wrote
(in article ):

On 26-Jul-17 9:08 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 26, 2017, Savageduck wrote
(in iganews.com):

On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote:
On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote:
On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote:
I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have
never
seen
finer, EVER!

Other folk may view them he-
http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html

I've made a note to explore David's work further when I
return home to
my iMac!

Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D

--
Regards,
David B.

Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the
wild and
not spooking them.

Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens..
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...son%20birds%20

oy
s
ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...%20with%20fish

.j
p
g?dl=0


The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the
quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion,
anyway).

OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your
opinion
would be appreciated.

I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my
opinion, and
observations regarding those three shots.

Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was
your old
Oyster
catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was
recently
captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that
seems to
be
a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor
focusing on
this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of
the IQ
capability of the D500, I am disappointed.

The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an
image not
much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I
certainly
have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70.

The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your
cropping, and
sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the
image just
as
it did when you first shared it.

BTW: here is a D70 shot of Osprey with snack from 2004.
https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Shared/Demo/dsc0067C.jpg

Your comments say exactly what *I* had thought - thank you.

Your link doesn't 'work' for me. :-(

Try this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/thwydbv8ozw10gi/dsc0067C.jpg

Wow! What a fantastic capture.

Thanks for sharing with everyone here, 'Duck. :-)


Using the word "fantastic" is quite an overstatement. It's a well
focused image. The shadows are blocked, and although the bird's
expression clearly says "don't even think to taking my fish, the
composition is ruined by the static composition. Nice, yes, fantastic,
no.

As you recently said to me .....

...... everyone is entitled to their own opinion. ;-)


I certainly don't intend to force my opinion on anyone. I should have
made it clear that comment was just my opinion.


You shouldn't have to. It should already be clear that everything on
usenet is opinion.


Agreed.

--
PeterN
  #44  
Old July 28th 17, 03:03 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Davoud
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 639
Default My thanks to Davoud!

Davoud:
P.S.
Here's one more y'all might like
https://www.flickr.com/photos/primeval/34885963754.


PeterN:
Very well done. did you use focus stacking?


Indeed, in Photoshop CC 2017. The key to making such photos and showing
details is big, soft light, I have found. That's a 500 watt-second
studio flash in a softbox with a white foamcore reflector. Sam Droege
of the USGS Bee Inventory and Monitoring Lab, just down the road from
me in Beltsville, MD, uses an analogous technique, though he makes many
more such photos than I do and his setup is geared for mass production.
See the BIML Flickr page here https://www.flickr.com/photos/usgsbiml/
and read about his technique in this PDF
ftp://ftpext.usgs.gov/pub/er/md/laur...Take%20MacroPh
otographs%20of%20Insects%20BIML%20Lab2.pdf.

I tried the BIML technique a few years ago, when I was just starting in
photographing small arthropods and flowers, and I found it to be
unsuitable my purposes, in part because my "laboratory" is a kitchen
counter. But BIML's top-quality photos show that it works for Droege
and his crew.

For my setup, please see this photo of a blue mud dauber wasp,
Chalybion californicum,
https://www.flickr.com/photos/primeval/7749871750 and my "laboratory"
setup for that photo at
https://www.flickr.com/photos/primeval/18783033861.

--
I agree with almost everything that you have said and almost everything that
you will say in your entire life.

usenet *at* davidillig dawt cawm
  #45  
Old July 28th 17, 03:55 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default My thanks to Davoud!

On Jul 27, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/27/2017 5:42 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 27, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/27/2017 1:41 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 3:13 PM, Savageduck wrote:


Snip
Try this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/thwydbv8ozw10gi/dsc0067C.jpg

Wow! What a fantastic capture.

Thanks for sharing with everyone here, 'Duck. :-)

Using the word "fantastic" is quite an overstatement. It's a well
focused image. The shadows are blocked, and although the bird's
expression clearly says "don't even think to taking my fish, the
composition is ruined by the static composition. Nice, yes, fantastic, no.


I guess I got a bit complacent with regard to that Osprey. He was a daily
regular on my drive to work. Needless to say the lighting and sky changed
day-to-day, as did the fish, but the bird and pole remained the same.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/suq7xxiwbx5v2ip/dsc_0079C.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/k7td5jbhf98zhy7/dsc_0081C.jpg

This guy is a much better image, though I would have liked to see him a
little less centered.


This is what the uncropped version looked like. Shot with D70 + 80-400mm
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7j1kdtp652jj8yl/dsc_0081Oc.jpg


I shudder to think what sort of crop you might have inflicted on this shot
to extract the Osprey.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/b5jo0s333n3wcyt/dsc0062c.jpg


Not sure I would even try. Are your other crops from that original?


Nope!
Depending on glass I got in a little closer. The unfortunate thing was being
restricted by all the limitations of the D70.

This shot is only resized from the NEF.
No other post, no crop, no adjustments, no sharpening, etc. This was the D70
+ 70-300mm.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/tv9hpke0xw2w89y/dsc_0032B.jpg

Obviously not an Osprey
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gxvo9r4pfv4g4es/Vegetarian%20Woodpecker.jpg?dl=0


That would be a Red-bellied Woodpecker, Melanerpes carolinus.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ao4wqtcalfsrlma/Thanksgiving%20escapee.jpg?dl=0


--

Regards,
Savageduck

  #46  
Old July 28th 17, 05:01 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Ron C
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 415
Default My thanks to Davoud!

On 7/27/2017 9:13 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 21:10:45 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/27/2017 4:34 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 8:22 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 7/27/2017 1:41 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 3:13 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 27, 2017, David B. wrote
(in article ):

On 26-Jul-17 9:08 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 26, 2017, Savageduck wrote
(in iganews.com):

On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote:
On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote:
On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote:
I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have
never
seen
finer, EVER!

Other folk may view them he-
http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html

I've made a note to explore David's work further when I
return home to
my iMac!

Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D

--
Regards,
David B.

Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the
wild and
not spooking them.

Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens..
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...son%20birds%20

oy
s
ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...%20with%20fish

.j
p
g?dl=0


The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the
quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion,
anyway).

OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your
opinion
would be appreciated.

I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my
opinion, and
observations regarding those three shots.

Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was
your old
Oyster
catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was
recently
captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that
seems to
be
a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor
focusing on
this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of
the IQ
capability of the D500, I am disappointed.

The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an
image not
much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I
certainly
have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70.

The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your
cropping, and
sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the
image just
as
it did when you first shared it.

BTW: here is a D70 shot of Osprey with snack from 2004.
https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Shared/Demo/dsc0067C.jpg

Your comments say exactly what *I* had thought - thank you.

Your link doesn't 'work' for me. :-(

Try this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/thwydbv8ozw10gi/dsc0067C.jpg

Wow! What a fantastic capture.

Thanks for sharing with everyone here, 'Duck. :-)


Using the word "fantastic" is quite an overstatement. It's a well
focused image. The shadows are blocked, and although the bird's
expression clearly says "don't even think to taking my fish, the
composition is ruined by the static composition. Nice, yes, fantastic,
no.

As you recently said to me .....

...... everyone is entitled to their own opinion. ;-)


I certainly don't intend to force my opinion on anyone. I should have
made it clear that comment was just my opinion.


You shouldn't have to. It should already be clear that everything on
usenet is opinion.

I'm surprised "nospam" hasn't disagreed yet. ;-)
--
==
Later...
Ron C cynic-in-training
--


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

  #47  
Old July 28th 17, 05:39 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Bill W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,692
Default My thanks to Davoud!

On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 00:01:19 -0400, Ron C wrote:

On 7/27/2017 9:13 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 21:10:45 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/27/2017 4:34 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 8:22 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 7/27/2017 1:41 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 3:13 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 27, 2017, David B. wrote
(in article ):

On 26-Jul-17 9:08 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 26, 2017, Savageduck wrote
(in iganews.com):

On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote:
On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote:
On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote:
I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have
never
seen
finer, EVER!

Other folk may view them he-
http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html

I've made a note to explore David's work further when I
return home to
my iMac!

Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D

--
Regards,
David B.

Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the
wild and
not spooking them.

Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens..
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...son%20birds%20

oy
s
ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...%20with%20fish

.j
p
g?dl=0


The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the
quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion,
anyway).

OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your
opinion
would be appreciated.

I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my
opinion, and
observations regarding those three shots.

Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was
your old
Oyster
catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was
recently
captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that
seems to
be
a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor
focusing on
this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of
the IQ
capability of the D500, I am disappointed.

The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an
image not
much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I
certainly
have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70.

The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your
cropping, and
sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the
image just
as
it did when you first shared it.

BTW: here is a D70 shot of Osprey with snack from 2004.
https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Shared/Demo/dsc0067C.jpg

Your comments say exactly what *I* had thought - thank you.

Your link doesn't 'work' for me. :-(

Try this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/thwydbv8ozw10gi/dsc0067C.jpg

Wow! What a fantastic capture.

Thanks for sharing with everyone here, 'Duck. :-)


Using the word "fantastic" is quite an overstatement. It's a well
focused image. The shadows are blocked, and although the bird's
expression clearly says "don't even think to taking my fish, the
composition is ruined by the static composition. Nice, yes, fantastic,
no.

As you recently said to me .....

...... everyone is entitled to their own opinion. ;-)


I certainly don't intend to force my opinion on anyone. I should have
made it clear that comment was just my opinion.


You shouldn't have to. It should already be clear that everything on
usenet is opinion.

I'm surprised "nospam" hasn't disagreed yet. ;-)


Well, I assume he agrees. But I'd bet he also knows that I don't mean
literally everything...
  #48  
Old July 28th 17, 10:17 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Eric Stevens
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13,611
Default My thanks to Davoud!

On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 21:39:17 -0700, Bill W
wrote:

On Fri, 28 Jul 2017 00:01:19 -0400, Ron C wrote:

On 7/27/2017 9:13 PM, Bill W wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jul 2017 21:10:45 -0400, PeterN
wrote:

On 7/27/2017 4:34 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 8:22 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 7/27/2017 1:41 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 3:13 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 27, 2017, David B. wrote
(in article ):

On 26-Jul-17 9:08 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 26, 2017, Savageduck wrote
(in iganews.com):

On Jul 26, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/26/2017 10:47 AM, David B. wrote:
On 26-Jul-17 3:35 PM, PeterN wrote:
On 7/26/2017 2:24 AM, RichA wrote:
On Tuesday, 18 July 2017 04:45:54 UTC-4, David B. wrote:
I've just viewed the most fantastic images of birds - I have
never
seen
finer, EVER!

Other folk may view them he-
http://www.primordial-light.com/aves.html

I've made a note to explore David's work further when I
return home to
my iMac!

Thank you for providing the route to find you, Davoud! :-D

--
Regards,
David B.

Difficult, getting that close to a bird like those in the
wild and
not spooking them.

Unless they are acclimated to people, or you use a long lens..
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rqsbscqwac...son%20birds%20

oy
s
ter%20cathcers%20terns_4192%20crop.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/9fjzuep8syetz60/my%20dinner.jpg?dl=0

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ycftpxc2x5...%20with%20fish

.j
p
g?dl=0


The images at the links you posted, Peter, are not a patch on the
quality of those photographs taken by Davoud (in MY opinion,
anyway).

OK. You certainly are entitled to your opinion. Reasons for your
opinion
would be appreciated.

I can’t speak for David and his opinion, but I have my
opinion, and
observations regarding those three shots.

Starting with the Oyster catcher. At first I thought this was
your old
Oyster
catcher shot from a few years back, then I saw that this was
recently
captured with the D500. The image quality (IQ) is awful, and that
seems to
be
a result of several things, including your usual crop, and poor
focusing on
this particular part of your frame. If this is a demonstration of
the IQ
capability of the D500, I am disappointed.

The hawk shot is just a ridiculously severe crop resulting in an
image not
much better than a thumbnail. It hardly seemed worth posting. I
certainly
have managed to wring out better quality images with my D70.

The Osprey is a great capture, but again suffers from your
cropping, and
sharpening techniques in post. The edge halo detracts from the
image just
as
it did when you first shared it.

BTW: here is a D70 shot of Osprey with snack from 2004.
https://www.dropbox.com/preview/Shared/Demo/dsc0067C.jpg

Your comments say exactly what *I* had thought - thank you.

Your link doesn't 'work' for me. :-(

Try this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/thwydbv8ozw10gi/dsc0067C.jpg

Wow! What a fantastic capture.

Thanks for sharing with everyone here, 'Duck. :-)


Using the word "fantastic" is quite an overstatement. It's a well
focused image. The shadows are blocked, and although the bird's
expression clearly says "don't even think to taking my fish, the
composition is ruined by the static composition. Nice, yes, fantastic,
no.

As you recently said to me .....

...... everyone is entitled to their own opinion. ;-)


I certainly don't intend to force my opinion on anyone. I should have
made it clear that comment was just my opinion.

You shouldn't have to. It should already be clear that everything on
usenet is opinion.

I'm surprised "nospam" hasn't disagreed yet. ;-)


Well, I assume he agrees. But I'd bet he also knows that I don't mean
literally everything...


Every thing except the edge cases.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens
  #49  
Old July 29th 17, 05:26 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,254
Default My thanks to Davoud!

On 7/27/2017 10:55 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 27, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/27/2017 5:42 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 27, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/27/2017 1:41 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 3:13 PM, Savageduck wrote:

Snip
Try this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/thwydbv8ozw10gi/dsc0067C.jpg

Wow! What a fantastic capture.

Thanks for sharing with everyone here, 'Duck. :-)

Using the word "fantastic" is quite an overstatement. It's a well
focused image. The shadows are blocked, and although the bird's
expression clearly says "don't even think to taking my fish, the
composition is ruined by the static composition. Nice, yes, fantastic, no.

I guess I got a bit complacent with regard to that Osprey. He was a daily
regular on my drive to work. Needless to say the lighting and sky changed
day-to-day, as did the fish, but the bird and pole remained the same.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/suq7xxiwbx5v2ip/dsc_0079C.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/k7td5jbhf98zhy7/dsc_0081C.jpg

This guy is a much better image, though I would have liked to see him a
little less centered.


This is what the uncropped version looked like. Shot with D70 + 80-400mm
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7j1kdtp652jj8yl/dsc_0081Oc.jpg


I shudder to think what sort of crop you might have inflicted on this shot
to extract the Osprey.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/b5jo0s333n3wcyt/dsc0062c.jpg


Not sure I would even try. Are your other crops from that original?


Nope!
Depending on glass I got in a little closer. The unfortunate thing was being
restricted by all the limitations of the D70.

This shot is only resized from the NEF.
No other post, no crop, no adjustments, no sharpening, etc. This was the D70
+ 70-300mm.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/tv9hpke0xw2w89y/dsc_0032B.jpg


The D70 is not a bad camera. When I switched to digital, I went for the
D200, because the D70 had issues with my AI lenses. My daughter made
some nice money with her D70, and she prefers it to my old D200. though
she has not had time to take many pictures after her promotion to Senior
VP. She has no time.



Obviously not an Osprey
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gxvo9r4pfv4g4es/Vegetarian%20Woodpecker.jpg?dl=0


That would be a Red-bellied Woodpecker, Melanerpes carolinus.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ao4wqtcalfsrlma/Thanksgiving%20escapee.jpg?dl=0


You haven't identified that bird.

--
PeterN
  #50  
Old July 29th 17, 05:40 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default My thanks to Davoud!

On Jul 28, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/27/2017 10:55 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 27, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/27/2017 5:42 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Jul 27, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ):

On 7/27/2017 1:41 PM, David B. wrote:
On 27-Jul-17 3:13 PM, Savageduck wrote:

Snip
Try this:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/thwydbv8ozw10gi/dsc0067C.jpg

Wow! What a fantastic capture.

Thanks for sharing with everyone here, 'Duck. :-)

Using the word "fantastic" is quite an overstatement. It's a well
focused image. The shadows are blocked, and although the bird's
expression clearly says "don't even think to taking my fish, the
composition is ruined by the static composition. Nice, yes, fantastic,
no.

I guess I got a bit complacent with regard to that Osprey. He was a daily
regular on my drive to work. Needless to say the lighting and sky changed
day-to-day, as did the fish, but the bird and pole remained the same.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/suq7xxiwbx5v2ip/dsc_0079C.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/k7td5jbhf98zhy7/dsc_0081C.jpg
This guy is a much better image, though I would have liked to see him a
little less centered.


This is what the uncropped version looked like. Shot with D70 + 80-400mm
https://www.dropbox.com/s/7j1kdtp652jj8yl/dsc_0081Oc.jpg


I shudder to think what sort of crop you might have inflicted on this shot
to extract the Osprey.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/b5jo0s333n3wcyt/dsc0062c.jpg

Not sure I would even try. Are your other crops from that original?


Nope!
Depending on glass I got in a little closer. The unfortunate thing was being
restricted by all the limitations of the D70.

This shot is only resized from the NEF.
No other post, no crop, no adjustments, no sharpening, etc. This was the D70
+ 70-300mm.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/tv9hpke0xw2w89y/dsc_0032B.jpg


The D70 is not a bad camera. When I switched to digital, I went for the
D200, because the D70 had issues with my AI lenses. My daughter made
some nice money with her D70, and she prefers it to my old D200. though
she has not had time to take many pictures after her promotion to Senior
VP. She has no time.


Obviously not an Osprey
https://www.dropbox.com/s/gxvo9r4pfv...ecker.jpg?dl=0


That would be a Red-bellied Woodpecker, Melanerpes carolinus.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/ao4wqtcalfsrlma/Thanksgiving%20escapee.jpg?dl=0

You haven't identified that bird.


That was Arthur the escapee.

--

Regards,
Savageduck

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.