Bird pictures

I just uploaded a set of pictures that I culled and labeled for two reasons.
I use these as a screen saver to help me remember the names of birds I have
seen, and also they provide the memory of when and where they were taken. My
wife and I travel more than most people, with a couple of trips made just
for the purpose of seeing birds. The remainder of the pictures were taken
while fishing or sight-seeing. Several of these are severely cropped to make
up for a too short lens. A few are almost full frame, but resampled to a
maximum of 600 by 450 pixels for this presention.

My favorite is 054ospry & eagle. I was on a sight-seeing boat in the Gates
of the Mountains park in Montana. The eagle flew from the top of a lakeside
rock and flew above the boat opposite to our direction of travel. I followed
the bird with my Canon 10D hoping to get an in-focus shot of the bird
flying. Just as I finished pressing the shutter, I saw something near the
eagle. I didn't know what had happened until I reviewed the picture on the
LCD. I did not know the eagle had turned upside down until the review. The
cropped shot is only 985 by 739 pixels, too small for a good print.

http://s159.photobucket.com/albums/t146/barberlewie/ to view the bird
pictures.

http://lewbar.tripod.com/ to see some of the places we have visited, but not
updated since 2004, and only a little of that year is covered.

Comments would be appreciated.

Lew wrote:
I just uploaded a set of pictures that I culled and labeled for two reasons.
I use these as a screen saver to help me remember the names of birds I have
seen, and also they provide the memory of when and where they were taken. My
wife and I travel more than most people, with a couple of trips made just
for the purpose of seeing birds. The remainder of the pictures were taken
while fishing or sight-seeing. Several of these are severely cropped to make
up for a too short lens. A few are almost full frame, but resampled to a
maximum of 600 by 450 pixels for this presention.

My favorite is 054ospry & eagle. I was on a sight-seeing boat in the Gates
of the Mountains park in Montana. The eagle flew from the top of a lakeside
rock and flew above the boat opposite to our direction of travel. I followed
the bird with my Canon 10D hoping to get an in-focus shot of the bird
flying. Just as I finished pressing the shutter, I saw something near the
eagle. I didn't know what had happened until I reviewed the picture on the
LCD. I did not know the eagle had turned upside down until the review. The
cropped shot is only 985 by 739 pixels, too small for a good print.

http://s159.photobucket.com/albums/t146/barberlewie/ to view the bird
pictures.

http://lewbar.tripod.com/ to see some of the places we have visited, but not
updated since 2004, and only a little of that year is covered.

Comments would be appreciated.

Lew,
I do envy you being able to travel so much. I hope to increase
my travel when I retire too. You have a good start and some
obvious interest, and asked for comments, so I'll give you
some pointers that could help your bird photography. Your main
limitation is 1) lens sharpness, and 2) light. It seems to me
you've got some good basic compositions and are able to get
action shots, but the images seem limited in sharpness.
Your 10D is a good camera, but you would probably benefit from an
upgrade (I have a 10D too, and I need to upgrade it), I say
this mainly because it does have some issues with autofocus
tracking speed and accuracy. A 30D would respond much better.
(Note Canon may announce a replacement for the 30D next week at
the Las Vegas PMA show.)

Lens: what lens are you using? If you are using a zoom lens, you
could do much better by getting a fixed focal length L lens.
I recommend for beginning wildlife photographers, the
300 mm f/4 L IS lens. Add a 1.4x TC and you reach 420 mm at
f/5.6. Of course, a 500mm f/4 L IS lens is wonderful
if you can afford it ($5700) and the $1200 tripod+head to hold it,
and have the strength to lug it around.

Your images seem to indicate you do most of your shooting when
the sun is high. Light is much better when the sun is low.
Critical to impact in most wildlife images is seeing the eyes
and the eyes need to be in focus. That means good light
on the eyes. A good example of this is your
210red-belliedwoodpecker2 image where the bird's eye
is in complete shadow. The light needs to be coming
over your shoulder, not above and from in front of you.
For example, compare your 210red-belliedwoodpecker2
image to this one:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...1277c-700.html

Here are some examples of categories of images and the
issues with them:

too backlit:
310thrasher
175loon
049ospry
210red-belliedwoodpecker2

bird looking away (better, engages the viewer if looking toward you):
292goldfinch
255shrike
220flicker

Great shots, but light too high (e.g. get out earlier):
091NorthernGannet3
006greategret1 (background needs to be more out of focus).

nice, but cluttered:
045whitepelican
036nightheronimmature
019white-facedibis (also backlit)
003blueheron

nice but too high up looking down (crouch down so you your
camera is closer to the level of the subject):
011snowyegret2

nicest:
041brownpelican1

Good photography book resources (in my opinion):
all books by John Shaw
The Art of Bird Photography by Art Morris
(see also his website: www.birdsasart.com
(he also has a new version of the book on CD).

Final note: rec.photo.technique.nature is mostly a dead
newsgroup (as you can tell by so few posts). It used to be
great. rec.photo.digital is very active in contrast.

Roger
My bird photos (so you can beat me up if you want):
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird

Home page: other photos, digital photo info:
http://www.clarkvision.com

You have a great gallery. Such a vast coverage of birds.

We have traveled a lot since I retired, but not so much anymore. We have
been everywhere we can drive to that speaks English, and I don't like
flying. Most visits we make now are repeats, and are starting to let others
do the driving. Bus and ship tours I think for the future.

The lens I have for the Canon 10D is the 75-300 IS. Shots before late 2004
were with a Digital Rebel with a Tamron 28-200 lens, or with a film Rebel
with the same lens. I think the White Headed Woodpecker and the Thrasher are
the only film shots presented here. I now use a Panasonic FZ30 more than the
10D. It is just easier to handle, but is poor in low light. You commented
that most of my pictures have overhead light. That is true. Since I take
pictures to document what I see, that is likely to continue. I am only out
early when fishing. I see few birds when fishing before the sun is high.
Fishing takes precedence. Backlight is a problem. I use the "Level" control
in Photoshop Elements to increase the gamma to see enough detail in the
otherwise dark shot to identify a bird. The Flicker shot was totally black
before the gamma adjustment.

All of your comments are very true. I have not thought about getting low to
get eye-level bird shots. I will try that. I will have to get by with the
inferior lenses; no way to spend a few thousand on better. I do find the
Panasonic lens is sharper than the Canon 75-300 IS.

I take the bird pictures to document what bird I see. I have to look in a
book to identify all but the most common birds after I get home. I visited
Venice, Ding Darling, Corkscrew, and the Alligator Farm after reading in
this newsgroup about them, probably from you. They are fabulous places. I
was in Florida for a family reunion, so it was easy to extend that trip to
visit those places.

Your shots are so great it looks like you had the birds in a studio. Several
have such brilliant colors that they look painted. Do you increase the color
saturation, or contrast, or is that the way they come from the camera with
the proper light? The kissing great blue herons is just unreal.

Do you and Bill have more travel plans? Africa must be hard to top.

Lewie
"Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)" wrote in
message ...
Lew wrote:
I just uploaded a set of pictures that I culled and labeled for two
reasons. I use these as a screen saver to help me remember the names of
birds I have seen, and also they provide the memory of when and where
they were taken. My wife and I travel more than most people, with a
couple of trips made just for the purpose of seeing birds. The remainder
of the pictures were taken while fishing or sight-seeing. Several of
these are severely cropped to make up for a too short lens. A few are
almost full frame, but resampled to a maximum of 600 by 450 pixels for
this presention.

My favorite is 054ospry & eagle. I was on a sight-seeing boat in the
Gates of the Mountains park in Montana. The eagle flew from the top of a
lakeside rock and flew above the boat opposite to our direction of
travel. I followed the bird with my Canon 10D hoping to get an in-focus
shot of the bird flying. Just as I finished pressing the shutter, I saw
something near the eagle. I didn't know what had happened until I
reviewed the picture on the LCD. I did not know the eagle had turned
upside down until the review. The cropped shot is only 985 by 739 pixels,
too small for a good print.

http://s159.photobucket.com/albums/t146/barberlewie/ to view the bird
pictures.

http://lewbar.tripod.com/ to see some of the places we have visited, but
not updated since 2004, and only a little of that year is covered.

Comments would be appreciated.

Lew,
I do envy you being able to travel so much. I hope to increase
my travel when I retire too. You have a good start and some
obvious interest, and asked for comments, so I'll give you
some pointers that could help your bird photography. Your main
limitation is 1) lens sharpness, and 2) light. It seems to me
you've got some good basic compositions and are able to get
action shots, but the images seem limited in sharpness.
Your 10D is a good camera, but you would probably benefit from an
upgrade (I have a 10D too, and I need to upgrade it), I say
this mainly because it does have some issues with autofocus
tracking speed and accuracy. A 30D would respond much better.
(Note Canon may announce a replacement for the 30D next week at
the Las Vegas PMA show.)

Lens: what lens are you using? If you are using a zoom lens, you
could do much better by getting a fixed focal length L lens.
I recommend for beginning wildlife photographers, the
300 mm f/4 L IS lens. Add a 1.4x TC and you reach 420 mm at
f/5.6. Of course, a 500mm f/4 L IS lens is wonderful
if you can afford it ($5700) and the $1200 tripod+head to hold it,
and have the strength to lug it around.

Your images seem to indicate you do most of your shooting when
the sun is high. Light is much better when the sun is low.
Critical to impact in most wildlife images is seeing the eyes
and the eyes need to be in focus. That means good light
on the eyes. A good example of this is your
210red-belliedwoodpecker2 image where the bird's eye
is in complete shadow. The light needs to be coming
over your shoulder, not above and from in front of you.
For example, compare your 210red-belliedwoodpecker2
image to this one:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...1277c-700.html

Here are some examples of categories of images and the
issues with them:

too backlit:
310thrasher
175loon
049ospry
210red-belliedwoodpecker2

bird looking away (better, engages the viewer if looking toward you):
292goldfinch
255shrike
220flicker

Great shots, but light too high (e.g. get out earlier):
091NorthernGannet3
006greategret1 (background needs to be more out of focus).

nice, but cluttered:
045whitepelican
036nightheronimmature
019white-facedibis (also backlit)
003blueheron

nice but too high up looking down (crouch down so you your
camera is closer to the level of the subject):
011snowyegret2

nicest:
041brownpelican1

Good photography book resources (in my opinion):
all books by John Shaw
The Art of Bird Photography by Art Morris
(see also his website: www.birdsasart.com
(he also has a new version of the book on CD).

Final note: rec.photo.technique.nature is mostly a dead
newsgroup (as you can tell by so few posts). It used to be
great. rec.photo.digital is very active in contrast.

Roger
My bird photos (so you can beat me up if you want):
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird

Home page: other photos, digital photo info:
http://www.clarkvision.com

Lew wrote:

We have traveled a lot since I retired, but not so much anymore. We have
been everywhere we can drive to that speaks English, and I don't like
flying. Most visits we make now are repeats, and are starting to let others
do the driving. Bus and ship tours I think for the future.

The lens I have for the Canon 10D is the 75-300 IS. Shots before late 2004
were with a Digital Rebel with a Tamron 28-200 lens, or with a film Rebel
with the same lens. I think the White Headed Woodpecker and the Thrasher are
the only film shots presented here. I now use a Panasonic FZ30 more than the
10D. It is just easier to handle, but is poor in low light. You commented
that most of my pictures have overhead light. That is true. Since I take
pictures to document what I see, that is likely to continue. I am only out
early when fishing. I see few birds when fishing before the sun is high.
Fishing takes precedence. Backlight is a problem. I use the "Level" control
in Photoshop Elements to increase the gamma to see enough detail in the
otherwise dark shot to identify a bird. The Flicker shot was totally black
before the gamma adjustment.

All of your comments are very true. I have not thought about getting low to
get eye-level bird shots. I will try that. I will have to get by with the
inferior lenses; no way to spend a few thousand on better. I do find the
Panasonic lens is sharper than the Canon 75-300 IS.

I take the bird pictures to document what bird I see. I have to look in a
book to identify all but the most common birds after I get home. I visited
Venice, Ding Darling, Corkscrew, and the Alligator Farm after reading in
this newsgroup about them, probably from you. They are fabulous places. I
was in Florida for a family reunion, so it was easy to extend that trip to
visit those places.

Your shots are so great it looks like you had the birds in a studio. Several
have such brilliant colors that they look painted. Do you increase the color
saturation, or contrast, or is that the way they come from the camera with
the proper light? The kissing great blue herons is just unreal.

Do you and Bill have more travel plans? Africa must be hard to top.

Hi Lew,

Light is the key to a great photograph. Light is best when there is at
least some diffuse component to it. I generally avoid photographing
from 10am to 2pm because the light is harsh, landscapes look flat,
and eyes on animals are often hidden in darkness due to
shadows cast by the head. Here is a photo that does not have
great light because the sun is too high, but otherwise is interesting
(to me),:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...744.d-750.html

Images like this lilac-breasted roller:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries...1277c-700.html
were the result of persistence. On that trip we saw those birds in
many locations, usually in bad light. I have many images
that have poor color, too back lit, or simply bad light. But one late
afternoon, we came across the above bird and the light was superb
and we were able to get close.

Another key to animal photos is the eyes must be in focus, and clearly
visible in most cases.

In general, my digital processing is described he
http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo/digitalworkflow
One key in processing digital images is use of the curves tool.
Ron Bigelow has many excellent articles, e.g. his curves one:
http://www.ronbigelow.com/articles/c...1/curves-1.htm

The curves step is important for a couple of reasons. 1) digital
does not have a "toe" to its characteristic curve like film
and photographic paper do. 2) The human eye sees much higher dynamic
range than can be viewed on a screen or print, so you must compress
that range so it can be seen. But that compression reduces contrast.
The curves tool restores the contrast more like we perceive it
in real life. Film achieves this naturally, but output from
digital cameras does not.

So to summarize, the great light seen in photos is encountered
at the scene and not created. But digital processing, including
application an "s" curves with the curves tool is a necessary
step in the presentation of how the eye perceives contrast.
Getting the great light also has a great advantage: getting up
and out for sunrise avoids the crowds. When touring, few
people are out, then as the light gets high and harsh, go to
breakfast, and the restaurants are not crowded as people
are finishing eating and heading out to view the animals
in harsh light (and most animals sleep then too). In the afternoon,
reverse: eat dinner early before the crowd, then go out for
sunset and the animals while everyone else is eating dinner
in a crowded restaurant. It's the best of all worlds. I call
it the photographers schedule.

Regarding, future trips, Greece is next big one for me this year,
and I would love to go back to Africa; India next year.
My views of wildlife photography completely changed: Africa
was simply stunning, and seeing hundreds of thousands of
animals is beyond compare to anything in North America.

Roger

Sorry Lew didnt mean to spam you but I hit the wrong button.
I have a website as well with many bird photos as well as other types. I am
a photojournalist and have some before and after photos of hurricane Katrina
that struck my area in 05.

"Lew" wrote in message
...
I just uploaded a set of pictures that I culled and labeled for two
reasons. I use these as a screen saver to help me remember the names of
birds I have seen, and also they provide the memory of when and where they
were taken. My wife and I travel more than most people, with a couple of
trips made just for the purpose of seeing birds. The remainder of the
pictures were taken while fishing or sight-seeing. Several of these are
severely cropped to make up for a too short lens. A few are almost full
frame, but resampled to a maximum of 600 by 450 pixels for this presention.

My favorite is 054ospry & eagle. I was on a sight-seeing boat in the Gates
of the Mountains park in Montana. The eagle flew from the top of a
lakeside rock and flew above the boat opposite to our direction of travel.
I followed the bird with my Canon 10D hoping to get an in-focus shot of
the bird flying. Just as I finished pressing the shutter, I saw something
near the eagle. I didn't know what had happened until I reviewed the
picture on the LCD. I did not know the eagle had turned upside down until
the review. The cropped shot is only 985 by 739 pixels, too small for a
good print.

http://s159.photobucket.com/albums/t146/barberlewie/ to view the bird
pictures.

http://lewbar.tripod.com/ to see some of the places we have visited, but
not updated since 2004, and only a little of that year is covered.

Comments would be appreciated.