Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
1 Like  #1
Sea Birds on the Wing
Lens: DA* 300 Camera: K-1 Photo Location: Surfside Beach, TX 
Posted By: Sailor, 04-24-2018, 06:00 PM

I'm anything but an avid wildlife photographer, but some weeks ago - purely by accident - I produced (and posted) a pretty good BIF photo of a seagull landing a few feet away from my lens on a wooden pier in a local park. Spurred by the spurious, this afternoon I took a few pictures of gulls and pelicans flying the waters off Surfside Beach, a barrier island about 50 or 60 miles south of Houston. These critters were rather far away (which makes it easier . . . I think), and none of the three significantly cropped photos have the polished panache of those produced by slowpez and others. But . . . hey . . . . I enjoyed shooting 'em so why not post 'em? Of the three, I'm planning to keep the last one, because . . . . . . . well. . . . . . . I just like it.

Jer






Views: 1,092
04-24-2018, 06:02 PM   #2
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
foxandcrow's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Colorado
Posts: 1,993
They are great but I like the first one.
04-24-2018, 06:28 PM   #3
maw
Pentaxian
maw's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Sassari (Italy)
Posts: 1,118
QuoteOriginally posted by Sailor Quote
Sea Birds on the Wing
Honestly you could have done better, the first two are well framed but a bit underexposed.

Can I ask you what kind of metering have you set up in your camera? I would have used spot. With the K1 you will need 150-450 or more,
while with an APS-C is sufficient 300 mm equivalent to 450 mm, therefore more performing.

Good luck for the next shoots.
04-24-2018, 08:28 PM   #4
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 556
Would it not be very difficult to use spot metering on something that small in the frame and moving? Would a positive exposure value along with center weighted average give more consistent results? I've had some good results with spot metering and some not so good.

04-24-2018, 08:32 PM   #5
Veteran Member
bertwert's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Golden, BC
Posts: 15,173
Good job! Birds aren't always the easiest thing to get

QuoteOriginally posted by maw Quote
Honestly you could have done better, the first two are well framed but a bit underexposed.
In my opinion the first one is perfectly exposed.
04-25-2018, 05:50 AM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sailor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Coastal Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 26,205
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by foxandcrow Quote
They are great but I like the first one.
Thanks much!

Jer

QuoteOriginally posted by maw Quote
Honestly you could have done better, the first two are well framed but a bit underexposed.

Can I ask you what kind of metering have you set up in your camera? I would have used spot. With the K1 you will need 150-450 or more,
while with an APS-C is sufficient 300 mm equivalent to 450 mm, therefore more performing.

Good luck for the next shoots.
Thanks for the thoughtful comments. The fact is I realized long ago that I lack both the skill set and the motivation to do serious wildlife photography. That's not say that I don't point my camera at the occasional critter, and I've been meaning to try the 300 with my K-3 for precisely the reason you suggest.

Jer

QuoteOriginally posted by bschriver11 Quote
Would it not be very difficult to use spot metering on something that small in the frame and moving? Would a positive exposure value along with center weighted average give more consistent results? I've had some good results with spot metering and some not so good.
I think it would've been pretty tough to spot meter these guys since they were so far away (these shots, as I mentioned, are seriously cropped). While I don't do much "birding", the birds I typically photograph are white (egrets, ibis); in such cases I either use a spot or stop down a bit to keep from blowing out the surface detail of the critters.

Jer

QuoteOriginally posted by bertwert Quote
Good job! Birds aren't always the easiest thing to get



In my opinion the first one is perfectly exposed.
Thanks very much. And I also think the exposure on the first one is about where it should be. The B&W one is dark because I processed it to be that way, but the pelican in the second one is dimmer than I intended.

Jer
04-25-2018, 11:43 AM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
dcmsox2004's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: rhode island
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,522
great captures jer... of course now i have nelly furtado's song in my head....

04-25-2018, 03:47 PM   #8
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sailor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Coastal Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 26,205
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dcmsox2004 Quote
great captures jer... of course now i have nelly furtado's song in my head....
Thanks much, buddy. I have to admit that I don't remember ever knowing about Nelly Furtado - I'll check her out on Youtube.

Jer
04-25-2018, 07:33 PM   #9
maw
Pentaxian
maw's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Sassari (Italy)
Posts: 1,118
QuoteOriginally posted by Sailor Quote
Thanks for the thoughtful comments. The fact is I realized long ago that I lack both the skill set and the motivation to do serious wildlife photography. That's not say that I don't point my camera at the occasional critter, and I've been meaning to try the 300 with my K-3 for precisely the reason you suggest.
Hello Sailor

I allowed myself to download two of your photos that you posted the other day, where I pointed out that you could have done better, "the first two are well framed but a bit 'underexposed. I decided to publish them anyway,

I am sure you will appreciate it, also because it can be improved, it only takes a while. With the original photos would have been easier, because being in sRGB and especially in Jpeg you lose a lot. However, take a look.



04-26-2018, 06:36 AM   #10
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sailor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Coastal Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 26,205
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by maw Quote
Hello Sailor

I allowed myself to download two of your photos that you posted the other day, where I pointed out that you could have done better, "the first two are well framed but a bit 'underexposed. I decided to publish them anyway,

I am sure you will appreciate it, also because it can be improved, it only takes a while. With the original photos would have been easier, because being in sRGB and especially in Jpeg you lose a lot. However, take a look.
I genuinely appreciate your taking time to fiddle with a couple of the pics in my post. Part of the value of the forum is exchanging photographic ideas and opinions, something of value to all of us.

I like what you did with the second shot of the pelican; you've brought out more of the bird's detail, which - to my eyes - makes your version work noticeably better than my original. Regarding the first picture of the gliding seagull, I have to say that I much prefer my original, in which the gull is delineated from the background, over your modification which again provides more detail in the gull's wings, but loses some of that dimensionality.

Again, thanks for taking the time to reprocess the shots to show me your vision of how these photos should look. We're all wired differently and thus see things differently; it's interesting to look at one's photos through the eyes of another.

Jer
04-26-2018, 07:17 AM   #11
Veteran Member
str8talk83's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Bluffton, SC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 674
First one is great and the second is just a little underexposed.

I tend to use fill light in my camera raw converter as well as photoshop. I'm also a Nik user and I like to use Viveza to bring out shadows in specific areas without removing the contrast from the overall image. Nik is free, so you might try using that.

I think that the most important part of wildlife photography is being close enough, followed by composition, and in good lighting. I see a lot of "good" images that would be "great" if the head was tilted differently, the bird was framed differently etc. The same goes for lighting. An amazingly detailed shot in bad lighting will only be ok. Take the same photo in morning or evening light or even overcast and it can be great. Don't even get me started on the "being close enough" part...

Last edited by str8talk83; 04-26-2018 at 07:24 AM.
04-26-2018, 10:57 AM   #12
maw
Pentaxian
maw's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Sassari (Italy)
Posts: 1,118
QuoteOriginally posted by Sailor Quote
Again, thanks for taking the time to reprocess the shots to show me your vision of how these photos should look. We're all wired differently and thus see things differently; it's interesting to look at one's photos through the eyes of another.
Hi Jer,

It's a useful exercise, and helps me to understand what can be improved and how, after all we are in the forum for this As I have had occasion to point out, only trying several times you understand where you want to get.

I said before that maybe the spot reading would be more correct, but it must be done beforehand to get the information we need later, in this case there is the sea that forces you to underexpose the body of the bird

(whatever it is). In that case, either perform the measurement before or overexpose the measurement because Pentax (not only) generally tends to underexpose in Center Weighted mode, or worse in Multi segment.

The alternative is EV compensation. I'll point out that I created the album to upload the photos, I had never done it, in many years.

Best wishes for your future shots.



QuoteOriginally posted by str8talk83 Quote
First one is great and the second is just a little underexposed.

I tend to use fill light in my camera raw converter as well as photoshop. I'm also a Nik user and I like to use Viveza to bring out shadows in specific areas without removing the contrast from the overall image. Nik is free, so you might try using that.
Hi str8talk83,

I remember why you wanted or were undecided about which lens to buy in the end I think you chose the Pentax 50-135 is so?

As you say, I understand that you use ACR and you do most of the work, then you finish the rest in PS. I must say that I installed the Nik Collection only once but I'm not very familiar with the filters,

I use mostly Levels, Curves, Layer Mask and calculation. Photoshop is already great so, of course there are many plug-ins and/or filters.

Anyway, I really thank you for your participation and I wish you also excellent shots and to improve them subsequently.
04-26-2018, 11:47 AM   #13
Veteran Member
str8talk83's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Bluffton, SC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 674
QuoteQuote:
Hi str8talk83,

I remember why you wanted or were undecided about which lens to buy in the end I think you chose the Pentax 50-135 is so?

As you say, I understand that you use ACR and you do most of the work, then you finish the rest in PS. I must say that I installed the Nik Collection only once but I'm not very familiar with the filters,

I use mostly Levels, Curves, Layer Mask and calculation. Photoshop is already great so, of course there are many plug-ins and/or filters.

Anyway, I really thank you for your participation and I wish you also excellent shots and to improve them subsequently.
Thanks. I did end up going with the 50-135. I haven't had much of a need for it, but my initial testing was very positive. It has a very good rendering for a zoom, so I'm happy. When it comes to editing, I think it's a very subjective thing. I think that in the end it only matters that we are content with the process we use.
04-27-2018, 06:38 AM - 1 Like   #14
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sailor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Coastal Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 26,205
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by str8talk83 Quote
First one is great and the second is just a little underexposed.

I tend to use fill light in my camera raw converter as well as photoshop. I'm also a Nik user and I like to use Viveza to bring out shadows in specific areas without removing the contrast from the overall image. Nik is free, so you might try using that.

I think that the most important part of wildlife photography is being close enough, followed by composition, and in good lighting. I see a lot of "good" images that would be "great" if the head was tilted differently, the bird was framed differently etc. The same goes for lighting. An amazingly detailed shot in bad lighting will only be ok. Take the same photo in morning or evening light or even overcast and it can be great. Don't even get me started on the "being close enough" part...
Thanks much. I convert my RAW files and do post processing on Apple Photo - I'll have to Google Nik and learn more about it.

Your comments about closeness to the subject, composition and lighting hold true for almost all photography - not just shooting critters. Good advice, indeed.

Jer
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, flickr, jerry, pelican, photo, sea birds
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best of 2016 White wing doves stihlmania Post Your Photos! 4 08-01-2018 05:27 AM
Nature Tattered wing gcbrd Post Your Photos! 2 07-31-2016 05:16 PM
Nature birds birds birds and a squirrel alltatts Post Your Photos! 8 03-18-2016 07:50 AM
Landscape Where the sky meets the sea and the sea meets the land newmikey Post Your Photos! 13 07-24-2011 11:04 PM
Birds, birds and more birds OrenMc Post Your Photos! 10 01-17-2009 07:47 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:17 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top