Got closer-if not better

fernface

fernface

Messages
1,507
Name
Brian
Edit My Images
No
Took the advice of some helpful guys on here, and am now 6ft away:D
Lovely not having to crop!!! Hope this is an improvement:) C&C welcome

 
6ft? Keep going :D

That's a cracking picture though, so much detail in the feathers :)
 
Thanks so much for the comments, really appreciated. Purpleclouds (phil)-waiting for a camo net to arrive to go over my oval brolly, will move in then:D
 
Nice detail and good to see you getting close but the finished shot looks too saturated and/or contrasty to me
 
Thats a good shot with lovely detail, and 6ft is real close to these shy birds, well done you (y)
 
Thanks again for the comments And thanks to those on a previous thread advising on filling the sensor with as much of the subject as possible:)
 
A good shot Brian, I am with Phil all the way as far as getting as close as possible with the subject. Have to agree with Donna though, the saturation does look overcooked a bit. I am assuming the bright light in the bg did not help much, either that is where the light was coming from or it is a reflection of light off of something. Trying to keep the main source of light behind you will benefit no end. Keep em coming though ;)
 
Cracking shot Brian, what's the secret to getting that close?
 
RobC said:
Cracking shot Brian, what's the secret to getting that close?
Click to expand...

I had an old oval fishing brolly, so i pegged that in a suitable position. At the moment it is wide open at the front, so to the birds its obvious i am there. In the next few days i should come into possession of a camo net, hopefully once they get used to it i will get more visitors. Hoping to get in even closer, now here is a question, would probably have to come down to 300-350mm, wonder if that has the potential to improve image quality? - Brian
 
u8myufo said:
A good shot Brian, I am with Phil all the way as far as getting as close as possible with the subject. Have to agree with Donna though, the saturation does look overcooked a bit. I am assuming the bright light in the bg did not help much, either that is where the light was coming from or it is a reflection of light off of something. Trying to keep the main source of light behind you will benefit no end. Keep em coming though ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks Rich. I take yours and Donnas point re saturation. I honestly think i tend to overdo it because of my 69yr old eyes!, had one cateract done, and colour in that eye is completely different than other!! Sometimes i think it looks okay next not. As for the light, my patch of garden is a nightmare, i am always shooting directly at a dark green, ivy covered area, this particular shot was taken mid aft, no direct sunlight and strong light breaking through hedge like flaming searchlights. Cant change things either!!! - Brian
 
would probably have to come down to 300-350mm, wonder if that has the potential to improve image quality?
Click to expand...
I presume you mean 300-350mm focal length rather than subject distance? If you're currently zooming to longer focal lengths, then yes it will improve quality as you should have less potential for camera shake and a bit better depth of focus. Zooms are also usually a bit better if they're not zoomed to their full extent.
 
Last edited:
:D
eccles said:
I presume you mean 300-350mm focal length rather than subject distance? If you're currently zooming to longer focal lengths, then yes it will improve quality as you should have less potential for camera shake and a bit better depth of focus. Zooms are also usually a bit better if they're not zoomed to their full extent.
Click to expand...

You presume correctly:) My thinking is that if i get closer, then my 80-400 will not focus at 400mm, so would have to use 300mm or 350ish in order to get subject in frame and focus. Take your point re camera shake and DOF, blimey i am learning all the time:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top