[photolady95]

I was using Flickr to upload photos but flickr makes these look a lot out of focus. So this is from photobucket and I can't tell if it resized it also making it look out of focus.

On my computer before upload this photo is in focus.


Here's another, the above photo has no PP, this one I used "enhance" on in Photoshop Elements.

[wallyb]

They may be in focus, it's hard to tell, because there is blur from the camera shaking in both photos. You need to bump up the ISO, or wait until there's more sunlight out. You should have a shutter speed of 1/500s or faster for your 300mm lens. Neither picture really works on compositional standpoint either. There are branches and leaves covering the subject in both pictures, and in the second one, the subject isn't in a very attractive pose. The colors are also very lifeless and a little dark.

The main problem though is the subject framing and the camera shake. Bump up the ISO (not recommended) or wait for more sun (recommended) before trying to shoot such small, far-away subjects again.

[photolady95]

The camera was on a tripod, sitting in my backyard. The birds were in our grapefruit tree about 75 feet from my camera and me. I don't know where the camera shake came from that you see.
Shutter speed was 1/350s on the second one. On the first it was 1/250s.

As for colors, this was set on Natural in K100D and that was one of my questions in my thread in the DSLR forum. Where they said natural setting is better than bright. And I didn't really do a lot of pp'ing. Perhaps I should have enhanced them more.

Yes, it's been cloudy here but when the birds show up, that's when you shoot. If I had to wait for a sunny day, they wouldn't have been here. The robins are flying through heading south, for the winter.

[wallyb]

Wind, or a tripod that's too light/small for the lens and camera combination being used can easily account for shake or movement. There is no doubt that your images are not sharp. That can be camera shake, missed focus, or poor lens resolution. Hazarding an educated guess, it looks like camera shake because certain parts of the image are more blurry than others. You must also take into account your subject's movement, as birds fidget a lot, and the constant movement of the tree.

1/180 is generally not fast enough for this type of shooting, and your images aren't sharp. The subjects are also hidden/distracted. You need to work on changing these things before more elaborate parts of the photo can be properly critiqued, as is usually the purpose of this section. Try using a different vantage point to get a clearer shot of the birds, perhaps with more light shining on them if possible.

[nulla]

The camera was on a tripod, sitting in my backyard. The birds were in our grapefruit tree about 75 feet from my camera and me. I don't know where the camera shake came from that you see

This might seem silly but was shake reduction on or off?

Cheers

Neil

[atupdate]

If you upload full size images to Photobucket, it will downsize the images for you and the results are not always pretty. I always downsize my own images before uploading to Photobucket.

Her is your posted image with a little bit of sharpening (USM with radius 1 @ 100) - I don't think your problem is camera shake.




Here is your image with a small Adjustment Curve applied to boost the contrast and saturation. It would look a lot better if I was working off the full size jpg image and not the Photobucket bmp.



If you don't want to post process your images, you might need to bump the contrast and saturation in your camera.

Tim

[photolady95]

Wally my tripod is a Bogen heavy duty, not your typical buy at walmart aluminum gig. And there was no wind.

I don't know why you keep insisting the bird behind the branches isn't a good composition, I've seen this same type posted here by others and seen members rave about them. Just because his body is behind a limb, his head and beak aren't.

Null camera shake was on.

And Tim. Thank you. I never load full size images to photobucket or flickr. I resize them before hand. The tweaks you did in the second one looks brighter, and this looks better.

How would I upload a full size image here?

[atupdate]

Null camera shake was on.

And Tim. Thank you. I never load full size images to photobucket or flickr. I resize them before hand. The tweaks you did in the second one looks brighter, and this looks better.

How would I upload a full size image here?

You can't and we really don't want anyone to load full size images, as it slows down download times.

I do believe that you need to shut off your shake reduction when using a tripod. My DS doesn't have SR but I've read that suggestion in many forum posts.

Tim

[wallyb]

Wally my tripod is a Bogen heavy duty, not your typical buy at walmart aluminum gig. And there was no wind.

I don't know why you keep insisting the bird behind the branches isn't a good composition, I've seen this same type posted here by others and seen members rave about them. Just because his body is behind a limb, his head and beak aren't.

I'm not sure what you mean. You haven't made any other posts in the "Photo Critique" section with birds as your subject. Perhaps in the "Post Your Photos" board, but the photo critique section is for actual critique, as opposed to many people saying "nice shot" over and over.

If you can't tell there's blur or camera shake or missed focus or poor resolution in your shots (I didn't take the picture so I can't say for sure), then I don't know what you're looking to gain from posting here, as it's a very basic thing to be able to recognize in your photos.

In fact, in all the threads you've posted in the "Photo Critique" section, there have been numerous posts about blur, improper flash usage, over/under exposure, poor colors, and poor composition. With just about all of your pictures. From "Purple Lily" to "flickr test" to "Blown shot". I'm not sure why you're insistent about the picture not being poorly composed, or not being soft/blurry, as it's clear they both are. Branches blocking the sight of a bird, without some kind of artistic context, are never considered good composition. You can also clearly see branches moving from motion blur in the first shot especially, and not much detail in the birds, from any of the aforementioned factors.

Again, I'm not sure what you can look to gain when you ignore simple advice in the critique section.

[Furansu]

...
Null camera shake was on.
...

Hi photolady,
Your SR should be Off when your K100 is on tripod : check your manual on pages 47-48-49.
Did the same errors when a friend lent me his tripod as I was starting with my DSLR...

[photolady95]

You're excused from critiquing any more of my photos wally. Telling me the photo is bad composition, isn't critiquing, it's attacking the fact that I chose this composition rather than a bird in full exposure. I wanted critiques on the color and blurriness, not why I shot it this way.

The others were attributed to lack of a good pair of glasses. I wasn't seeing correctly, thus the photos were blurry.

[wallyb]

You're excused from critiquing any more of my photos wally. Telling me the photo is bad composition, isn't critiquing, it's attacking the fact that I chose this composition rather than a bird in full exposure. I wanted critiques on the color and blurriness, not why I shot it this way.

The others were attributed to lack of a good pair of glasses. I wasn't seeing correctly, thus the photos were blurry.

Again, being ignorant of commentary is not the purpose of posting in this section. If you chose to shoot the pictures underexposed, blurry, and poorly-framed, why did you post them in the critique section? Obviously they meet all your criteria for a perfect photo already. Also, improper flash usage and overexposure can't be chalked up to 'wrong glasses' or wrong dioptre setting -- and poor composition/framing absolutely is critique. Again, that would be your unfamiliarity with this section, to say such a thing.

There's no point in arguing, it's just that your pictures won't get any better. That's your choice, and I'm fine with it.

[photolady95]

But my photos will get better and have been in the past. I have photos hanging galleries, photos hanging in State Parks, and I've sold photos to people across this United States. Just because a few have been bad doesn't mean I can't improve them with the positive critiques I get from others. However, I noticed also you said nothing about the one that even to me is out of focus. The one not covered in branches.

Enough said.

Furansu Thanks I'll try that next time.

[wallyb]

improve them with the positive critiques

With what? What in the world is a positive critique? "I love the image but you should make it look worse next time, it's too excellent"? There's no such thing as a positive critique. Unless you just mean critique that isn't an "attack" (reusing a word you used) -- but that would also be a silly thing to say as nothing that's been said about your photos by anyone in this thread was an attack. You can't say someone's attacking you and for them to go away just because you don't like what they say or the amount of praise they did/didn't give you...

However, I noticed also you said nothing about the one that even to me is out of focus. The one not covered in branches.

Enough said.

There is no doubt that your images are not sharp.

"images" is plural. Since you only posted two photos, it obviously refers to the both of them. Please read more carefully, and not falsly create sentences and situations to try to suit your own purposes...

[Ash]

OK, to try and bury this bone of contention I'll suggest both photolady and wallyb take a deep breath and relax.

Photolady, you've had the courage to post your images on the Critique forum. Good stuff. You do so with the expectation that they will be scutinised and have the negative aspects according to the people critiquing pointed out to you. This isn't and should not be taken as an attack on you.

Your posted work here seems to be reasonably well critiqued by wallyb initially (and I would have said the very same things, and added that your 300mm lens's capabilities are highly limited in attaining an adequately good quality image). It seems you became defensive when critique was made about the composition of the images, which again I can't see as being out of the question. wallyb's comment about the tripod's limitations also seems reasonably fair and I too would reiterate it. Please consider going through the basics of submission in the forum:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photo-critique/14010-about-photo-critique-section.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/everything-else/85793-accepting-criticism.html

wallyb, your honest critique may not have been gratefully received so it may be best to leave it at that. If photoloday insists composition is fine in these images and that she is getting better with her results, that is her prerogative whether or not it is true.

Let's move on now and keep critiquing constructively (not necessarily positively/negatively)...