K-1 and DA*200 2.8
1600 ISO, ƒ-stops from 2.8 to ƒ8, pushing the limits of exposure to keep from losing dynamic range. Times 1/15s to 1/160s click on the image and scroll down the page to see the exif for any given image.

According to Yahoo Answers

A Raven is black but depending on which way the light hits it they change to other colors like bluish, dark red, or greenish.

Raven is black that gives off a blue tint every time the light hits it.

According to Wilkepedia

In sunlight, the plumage can display a blue or purple sheen which is a result of iridescence

Shooting with the K-1 (as opposed to with the K-3 yesterday), incredible how much better the colour balance is and how much more tweak able. I was able to create a single preset to use with all images.

SO what it the real colour of a Raven? Blue Jays use the same iridescence so irridescence as opposed to real colour can be a thing.

He can be pretty black.




But depending on the angle of the light....


And from the right angle...they get quite colourful...


So what colour is a raven? Same bird, same camera, different angles, light to bird and photographer to light.


Inquiring minds want to know.




For all who think ƒ2.8 isn't useful for long lenses and wildlife.



ƒ4 isn't too shabby either.


White balance is done on the non iridescent feathers just around the neck, so the same part of the birds is used for white balance on every shot. it really is changing colour in the light.

[reh321]

K-1 and DA*200 2.8
1600 ISO, ƒ-stops from 2.8 to ƒ8, pushing the limits of exposure to keep from losing dynamic range. Times 1/15s to 1/160s click on the image and scroll down the page to see the exif for any given image.

According to Yahoo Answers

According to Wilkepedia

Shooting with the K-1 (as opposed to with the K-3 yesterday), incredible how much better the colour balance is and how much more tweak able. I was able to create a single preset to use with all images.

SO what it the real colour of a Raven? Blue Jays use the same iridescence so irridescence as opposed to real colour can be a thing.

He can be pretty black.

But depending on the angle of the light....

And from the right angle...they get quite colourful...

So what colour is a raven? Same bird, same camera, different angles, light to bird and photographer to light.

Inquiring minds want to know.

For all who think ƒ2.8 isn't useful for long lenses and wildlife.

ƒ4 isn't too shabby either.

White balance is done on the non iridescent feathers just around the neck, so the same part of the birds is used for white balance on every shot. it really is changing colour in the light.

These are interesting experiments - thank you for doing them.

I have color issues with my black cat also. If I get enough light on her to show hair detail, I tend to get varying colors also. I've always assumed that was a result of reflection - she keeps her hair very silky - but the mechanism could be quite different in these two cases.

[troika]

Blue Jays and Ravens are both corvids (genius corvus). I didn't know that last month, so no way was I not going to chime in with it now! Presumably the thing that makes Blue Jays blue is also present in the otherwise black feathers of Ravens, but they are black.

And, I'm really enjoying the photos, thank you for posting.

[normhead]

Blue Jays and Ravens are both corvids (genius corvus). I didn't know that last month, so no way was I not going to chime in with it now! Presumably the thing that makes Blue Jays blue is also present in the otherwise black feathers of Ravens, but they are black.

And, I'm really enjoying the photos, thank you for posting.

No problem, it's what we do here.

[SJM]

Wow Norm, I did not know how striking Ravens could be. Nice series

[normhead]

Wow Norm, I did not know how striking Ravens could be. Nice series

This is the first time I've ever been this close to one. It was a lot of fun. You go to the park 10-40 times a year for 40 years and one day, something new happens. Go figure.

But since we are on the topic of Ravens, this one seems to be getting some attention over on facebook.



Same bird heavily cropped.

[photoptimist]

The correct answer is UV.

Iridescent color in creatures is typically caused by layered nanoscopic structures in the material that are spaced to most strongly reflect a certain wavelength of light. At off-angles they will also reflect longer wavelengths of light at wavelengths proportional to 1/cosine(angle). This research (http://rcin.org.pl/Content/42429/WA058_59204_P257-T27_Acta-Ornith-Nr-2-3.pdf ) found that many corvids with iridescent black feather are highly reflective in the UV.

The purples and blues of the raven's feathers are the off-axis reflections but us poor humans don't get to see the true color. Beasties that can see UV would see corvids as brightly iridescent in the UV shifting down to purple, blue, etc.

[SSGGeezer]

The purples and blues of the raven's feathers are the off-axis reflections but us poor humans don't get to see the true color. Beasties that can see UV would see corvids as brightly iridescent in the UV shifting down to purple, blue, etc.

That would be very cool to see. I wonder if one of the folks who mod their cameras for IR could do it for UV also?

[Schraubstock]

SO what it the real colour of a Raven?

In the context of of this thread I feel I may be allowed to post one image and not run foul of the PF rules.

Norm, your images have just too much orange/red cast. Even the beak of the bird has a bit of that look. I find it hard to accept that mother nature produces such orange/red forest floors.

Cheers

[normhead]

In the context of of this thread I feel I may be allowed to post one image and not run foul of the PF rules.

Norm, your images have just too much orange/red cast. Even the beak of the bird has a bit of that look. I find it hard to accept that mother nature produces such orange/red forest floors.

Cheers

You've never been in a pine forest after rain fall I'm guessing. Interesting though, you see something you haven't seen, or paid attention to, and you assume it's something I've done. That seriously diminishes the perceptual value of the information of the image. I feel kind of sorry for you.

I found looking at the images that the feathers around the neck of the bird are not iridescent, and are black, so I used those for my white balance. No separate colour channel manipulation was done. There is a heavy red hue, light reflected from the red pine needles on the forest floor, there is a heavy green hue, light filtering through the green leaves of the canopy. There is a bit of blue light from the sky peaking through the leaves and there are spots of yellow sunlight. Were you wanting me to change what nature provided to suit your thoughts of what should be?

So this is an accurate capture. Sorry about your disability getting in the way of you enjoying the image. You seem to be implying I should only look for and capture the bland and try and not try and capture natures lighting effects in my images.

To me the image is a composition enhanced by the different colours of reflected light around the bird and how it plays off it's iridescent feathers.. Apparently to you what I find most interesting destroys the image. Do you want to see what I see, or do you want to see what you think I should see? It's a tough sell, when you weren't there, and it's possible your colour perception is enough different than mine, you wouldn't agree with my handling of this file even if you were.

I'll just say the forest after a rain or heavy mist is incredibly rich. Probably richer than you can portray with a camera.

So your response is disappointing, but hey, you can't please everyone.
You work for those who appreciate your work. Those who don't, I don't pay attention to them. Unless they continually get in my face about it.

I spent two hours walking around this bird looking for the most interesting light patterns, shooting whenever i saw something a little different. I took over 500 images. (The one you posted was my favourite.) Three sets of visitors came through while I was shooting, none stayed more than 10 minutes. . The other photographers there with me were at most there 20 minutes. Maybe you'd prefer one of their shots? I can tell you they don't have what I got. But maybe they'd be more to your liking. Flat, and washed out etc. The shot you linked to was taken with me lying on wet soil down the hill from the bird to get the angle I wanted, crawling forward and backwards with a prime lens to get the exact framing I wanted. I can tell you without question of a doubt, no one else there got that shot or anything like it. They didn't get close enough, the guys with the expensive long lenses shot from much further away. No one else shot from the angle I did. (They might have gotten dirty and it's not worth getting dirty to get a great image is it?)

We've been through this enough times now, you're getting close to my ignore list. I understand your point, I reject it. Are we clear? If I want your critical opinion I'll post in the critique thread. I post what makes me happy, not what would make you happy. There's probably no greater source of unhappiness in the world, than having to work to other peoples standards.

But at bare minimum, you should learn to distinguish between shots that took a lot of effort and the snapshots of the every day tourist and causal photographers. Shots like the one you posted don't happen by accident.

I spent so much time with this bird I was late home for dinner, (and I was supposed to cook). That in my world is a major crime.
By the end I felt like we were buddies. If I could have brought him home and fed him with the other birds who hang out in my back yard I would have.

You share once in lifetime material, and what do you get? 'It looks fake." That's photography. If you're a photographer, you learn to live with it.

[Schraubstock]

I feel kind of sorry for you.

Please don't feel sorry for me, I am doing alright.
I know you cannot accept a different point of view and there are better ways to express it without making yourself look superior.
I know you mean well, you just cant find the right words sometime.

No need to reply to this Norm, I won't read it.


Cheers

[normhead]

What a guy. Taking one of my images without my permission, altering it without permission, publishing it, probably illegally from a host that will be hearing form me soon, all to protest my artistic vision and claim his is somehow better even though it's an image for which he has no comparable images. He could have demonstrated his talent for understatement with one of his own images, but I suspect he has nothing comparable.This is exactly why more accomplished photographers don't post or hang out here.

The guy is trying to build some kind of reputation on the backs of others work. Absolutely despicable.But, you can only pass on knowledge, if you actually have some. Thanks for ruining my thread.

Then he sticks his fingers in his ears and runs off. Is that cowardly? I don't know but it could be, make up your own minds. All I know is if he ever posts in one of my threads again, action will be taken.

I post in "post your photos" for my enjoyment and the enjoyment and the enjoyment of others, if you don't enjoy my pictures, that doesn't give you carte blanche to hi-jack my thread. If you have a different artistic vision, fine, promote it in your own thread. Don't have the images to support your ideas? That's your problem. Don't steal mine.

I specifically do not post in the critique forum, because I am not interested in this kind of nonsense. It's sad, but some people just can't respect that.

[ToddK]

Norm, it is hard to follow that exchange, but all I have to say is that I really love your shots, and I only hope to get an opportunity like that to photograph such a terrific bird! Thanks for sharing them and your methods.

[normhead]

Norm, it is hard to follow that exchange, but all I have to say is that I really love your shots, and I only hope to get an opportunity like that to photograph such a terrific bird! Thanks for sharing them and your methods.

Thanks ToddK.

[Fcsnt54]

Nice images Norm. It really begs the questions with a good number of birds. I like how you brought up the jay. Over here in california we have the stellar jay, whom is gray. And with the refraction of light that appears to be a nice blue. The Common raven is black, unless talking about a young one where i think it is black with a brown underside. Just so happens that with some blacks, when the light hits it, it appears as though there is a slight hugh or color shift.