Canada Blue Jay
Posted 09/11/2009 - 23:58
Link
Very nice photo, JudithAnn. Its jus' like a postcard.
"All the technique in the world doesn’t compensate for the inability to notice." - Elliott Erwitt
http://paulyrichard.wordpress.com/
http://paulyrichard.wordpress.com/
Posted 10/11/2009 - 00:06
Link
Well worth the effort. Excellent shot.
.........all the gear, no idea!
Me super, MX, LX, K5,DA 18-55WR, DA 17-70, DA 55-300, DA40 Ltd, FA50 1.4, Samsung D-Xenon 12-24,Samsung 100mm macro M50 1.7(x3), M28 3.5, M35 2.8, M100macro f4, M135 3.5(+others)
Me super, MX, LX, K5,DA 18-55WR, DA 17-70, DA 55-300, DA40 Ltd, FA50 1.4, Samsung D-Xenon 12-24,Samsung 100mm macro M50 1.7(x3), M28 3.5, M35 2.8, M100macro f4, M135 3.5(+others)
Posted 10/11/2009 - 00:10
Link
The full size version you get by clicking on the photo is even better than the resized one the forum software imposes.
The detail in the body is excellent - very clear without being oversharpened.
The shallow DOF has led to the tail being a little blurred, but this just takes the eye to the terrific colour in the wing, and the great body detail.
To be picky, a slightly smaller aperture would have given you the DOF to get the head as sharp as the body, but this is very marginal.
My preference would be for less intrusive framing, possibly with less fancy lettering in a colour that contrasted less with the rest of the frame.
But the picture itself is great.
The detail in the body is excellent - very clear without being oversharpened.
The shallow DOF has led to the tail being a little blurred, but this just takes the eye to the terrific colour in the wing, and the great body detail.
To be picky, a slightly smaller aperture would have given you the DOF to get the head as sharp as the body, but this is very marginal.
My preference would be for less intrusive framing, possibly with less fancy lettering in a colour that contrasted less with the rest of the frame.
But the picture itself is great.
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Posted 10/11/2009 - 07:04
Link
This is very beautiful. What a lovely bird and those colours are stunning.
You have captured it really nicely here. I like it,
You have captured it really nicely here. I like it,
Amin Photo Gallery
Posted 10/11/2009 - 08:08
Link
I pretty much agree with everything ChrisA has to say but I wish everyone would leave the EXIF data intact and then we might have more informed conversations.
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
Posted 10/11/2009 - 10:39
Link
A really pretty bird, but seeing as noone else has mentioned them - I love the oof trees behind. And while Chris' advice about aperture is right for the bird, you might have lost some of the lovely quality of the b/g with a smaller aperture. Just a slight shame about the burnt out areas, though you get away with this with the focus on the bird.
Posted 11/11/2009 - 01:26
Link
Hello....
Thank you all for the comment and the advice.
Thanks a million.
Thank you all for the comment and the advice.
Quote:
To be picky, a slightly smaller aperture would have given you the DOF to get the head as sharp as the body, but this is very marginal.
A smaller aperture...would have given me a shaper picture from head to tail???To be picky, a slightly smaller aperture would have given you the DOF to get the head as sharp as the body, but this is very marginal.
Quote:
you might have lost some of the lovely quality of the b/g with a smaller aperture. Just a slight shame about the burnt out areas, though you get away with this with the focus on the bird.
Sorry Doc, not sure what b/g was....could it be explained a bit more about the aperture...how it works and how i control it when I am in a set up like this!you might have lost some of the lovely quality of the b/g with a smaller aperture. Just a slight shame about the burnt out areas, though you get away with this with the focus on the bird.
Thanks a million.
Posted 11/11/2009 - 02:29
Link
Quote:
My preference would be for less intrusive framing, possibly with less fancy lettering in a colour that contrasted less with the rest of the frame.
My preference would be for less intrusive framing, possibly with less fancy lettering in a colour that contrasted less with the rest of the frame.
A different framing attemped
Quote:
I pretty much agree with everything ChrisA has to say but I wish everyone would leave the EXIF data intact and then we might have more informed conversations.
Yes I forgot about that....you see when you paste your picture else where then you lose the ability to open properties....so I will now inclued it all by hand:I pretty much agree with everything ChrisA has to say but I wish everyone would leave the EXIF data intact and then we might have more informed conversations.
Pentak K-m
Focal L.....80.0mm
Exposure....011..1/90
Aperture....f/8.0
Meter Mode...Matrix
Posted 11/11/2009 - 04:32
Link
Judith Ann,
b/g is an abbreviation for background.
Re. aperture - the smaller the aperture the greater the amount of the picture will be (actually, appear to be) in focus. In technical terms this is decsribed as the depth of field (often refered to as DoF/DOF/dof...) - smaller aperture = greater DoF = more of your photo appears sharp. So if you want everything to appear as sharp as possible throughout, from foreground to b/g, you should opt for a small aperture (usually f16 or below). Conversely, if you wish to throw parts of the shot in front of, or behind, the main subject oof, you opt for a wide aperture - usually f5.6 or below. However, what impact this has on the shot will also depend on the focal length of the lens. Telephotos have a narrower DoF, wide angles much larger. And the distance between camera and focal point, but instead of going into that I'll recommend...
A very good (and accessible) introductory account to these and other issues can be found in Bryan Peterson's book, 'Understanding Exposure'. Perhaps you should ask someone to get it you for Xmas - I'm sure your photography would benefit.
BTW, I prefer your latest frame.
And I liked your entry for last week's Crystal comp. Actually this was a good example of the impact of aperture. If you'd used say f22 for this the faces behind the crystal would have appeared too clear for the type of photo you were taking - you wanted the crystal and the reflection in it clear and the faces behind oof. Presumably you used a wide aperture - though this effect was also probably determined by how close you were to the crystal.
b/g is an abbreviation for background.
Re. aperture - the smaller the aperture the greater the amount of the picture will be (actually, appear to be) in focus. In technical terms this is decsribed as the depth of field (often refered to as DoF/DOF/dof...) - smaller aperture = greater DoF = more of your photo appears sharp. So if you want everything to appear as sharp as possible throughout, from foreground to b/g, you should opt for a small aperture (usually f16 or below). Conversely, if you wish to throw parts of the shot in front of, or behind, the main subject oof, you opt for a wide aperture - usually f5.6 or below. However, what impact this has on the shot will also depend on the focal length of the lens. Telephotos have a narrower DoF, wide angles much larger. And the distance between camera and focal point, but instead of going into that I'll recommend...
A very good (and accessible) introductory account to these and other issues can be found in Bryan Peterson's book, 'Understanding Exposure'. Perhaps you should ask someone to get it you for Xmas - I'm sure your photography would benefit.
BTW, I prefer your latest frame.
And I liked your entry for last week's Crystal comp. Actually this was a good example of the impact of aperture. If you'd used say f22 for this the faces behind the crystal would have appeared too clear for the type of photo you were taking - you wanted the crystal and the reflection in it clear and the faces behind oof. Presumably you used a wide aperture - though this effect was also probably determined by how close you were to the crystal.
Posted 11/11/2009 - 06:41
Link
Excellent image Judith Ann, you should be proud of this one!!
Pentax K10D, *istDS
Pentax 18-55mm,50-200mm,Macro 100mm
Takumar-A 28-80mm, Sigma 170-500mm, Soligor Teleconverter x2
Finally!! Sigma 10-20mm
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.
https://pentaxphotogallery.com/maliskaoosthuizen
Pentax 18-55mm,50-200mm,Macro 100mm
Takumar-A 28-80mm, Sigma 170-500mm, Soligor Teleconverter x2
Finally!! Sigma 10-20mm
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.
https://pentaxphotogallery.com/maliskaoosthuizen
Posted 11/11/2009 - 08:20
Link
JudithAnn wrote:
Yes, I much prefer that lettering - much less intrusive. I think having it at the bottom rather than the top is better too.Quote:
My preference would be for less intrusive framing, possibly with less fancy lettering in a colour that contrasted less with the rest of the frame.
A different framing attempedMy preference would be for less intrusive framing, possibly with less fancy lettering in a colour that contrasted less with the rest of the frame.
Just to be really picky, something I wondered about after I commented the first time: was there any more at the bottom of the picture, or is what we see all there is? The crop is just a touch tight around the feet, is all.
Just being fussy, though - I'd be very pleased with that picture if I'd taken it.
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
736 posts
17 years
Canada;Alberta
I took this picture with the tripod , hiding in a tent, using a remote!!