Greater Spotted Woodpecker

Joeturner11 said:
Nice close up of the bird but I'm afraid the image is out of focus, most likely due to movement and the 1/160 shutter speed you used...
Click to expand...

Hand held, Olympus E3 with Sigma 50-500. Quite heavy. Low light, raining in a woodland. The opportunity to use shutter speeds you demonstrate on your flickr stream such as 1/8000 aren't always possible..... I'd hope my 4 year old son could nail a shot at that speed. Just saying....
 
tim said:
Hand held, Olympus E3 with Sigma 50-500. Quite heavy. Low light, raining in a woodland. The opportunity to use shutter speeds you demonstrate on your flickr stream such as 1/8000 aren't always possible..... I'd hope my 4 year old son could nail a shot at that speed. Just saying....
Click to expand...

The ISO was on 800, you could have increased that to gain a higher shutter speed.

Regarding my ONE image at 1/8000 as you can see by the settings it was a very very strong lighting on that day as the ISO was on 400 so I had to shoot 1/8000 to keep the exposure locked spot on. I was using ISO auto between 400-1600 due to the light so when the owl landed right infront of me I could drop down to ISO 100 had to shoot it at 1/8000 of a second, I kept the aperture at f/5.6 to be able to obtain a nice OOF background.

I was offering advice on how to make your image better so don't try and turn this on me and my work comparing it to what a 4year old can do. Wont bother next time :)
 
Last edited:
tim said:
Hand held, Olympus E3 with Sigma 50-500. Quite heavy. Low light, raining in a woodland. The opportunity to use shutter speeds you demonstrate on your flickr stream such as 1/8000 aren't always possible..... I'd hope my 4 year old son could nail a shot at that speed. Just saying....
Click to expand...


Constructive criticism helps us learn. Facebook is a better place to put images if all you want is "Fantastic Shot!!!!!!" from everyone
 
Dave Semmens said:
Constructive criticism helps us learn. Facebook is a better place to put images if all you want is "Fantastic Shot!!!!!!" from everyone
Click to expand...
That's a fair comment, but its not as if the shot looks way out of focus, well certainly not when viewed on my iPad.
I'm not the only one who thought it was a good shot.
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
That's a fair comment, but its not as if the shot looks way out of focus, well certainly not when viewed on my iPad.
I'm not the only one who thought it was a good shot.
Click to expand...

This clearly has a large amount of motion blur on the image. You can tell by zooming in on flickr alot of sharpening has been added to try and bring it back. But as you say you can't polish a turd look nice putting it politely
 
Bobsyeruncle said:
That's a fair comment, but its not as if the shot looks way out of focus, well certainly not when viewed on my iPad.
I'm not the only one who thought it was a good shot.
Click to expand...

If Joe hadn't posted then I would have glanced at the image and thought it was ok. When I looked on Flickr I saw what he was referring to.

I have been down the road of reducing shutter speed to improve ISO - so understand where the original poster is coming from. Wildlife very rarely stays still though and I quickly learned that good ISO does not always fix the problem.

Joe's advice is solid :)

Dave.
 
tim said:
Hand held, Olympus E3 with Sigma 50-500. Quite heavy. Low light, raining in a woodland. The opportunity to use shutter speeds you demonstrate on your flickr stream such as 1/8000 aren't always possible..... I'd hope my 4 year old son could nail a shot at that speed. Just saying....
Click to expand...
... makes no difference Tim, the shot is poor as Joe has stated, he is right, no need to have a pop at him for being honest.
 
I'm all for constructive criticism but an understanding of the ability of other cameras in different situations goes a long way too.

Out of focus? Large amounts of blur aren't strictly true are they. When you start pixel peeping at images taken on a 10mp camera as opposed to 36+mp you're going to notice these things.

Some of us try and enjoy photography on a budget. If I had a 2.5k body I might be slightly more critical. But I don't.
 
tim said:
I'm all for constructive criticism
Click to expand...

Clearly not by your posts, which you try to hit back at me.

tim said:
Out of focus? Large amounts of blur aren't strictly true are they.
Click to expand...

The image is blurred.

tim said:
When you start pixel peeping at images taken on a 10mp camera as opposed to 36+mp you're going to notice these things.
Click to expand...

10mp camera or 36mp camera, doesn't matter if the image is out of focus then its out of focus.

tim said:
taken on a 10mp camera as opposed to 36+mp

Some of us try and enjoy photography on a budget. If I had a 2.5k body I might be slightly more critical. But I don't.
Click to expand...

Yet again trying to dig more at me and my work, What is your problem? Worth trying to get less defence over your images and accept the help and critique we have offered.
 
tim said:
I'm all for constructive criticism but an understanding of the ability of other cameras in different situations goes a long way too.

Out of focus? Large amounts of blur aren't strictly true are they. When you start pixel peeping at images taken on a 10mp camera as opposed to 36+mp you're going to notice these things.

Some of us try and enjoy photography on a budget. If I had a 2.5k body I might be slightly more critical. But I don't.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with you, but if people say that the shot is great, when it clearly isn`t, then how can you improve Tim?

I`m not having a pop at you, because we all started somewhere and had kit limitations. I know damned well that I had serious kit limitations, started with a d70 for gawds sake.....:)

But people praising shots without pointing out faults will not improve you as a photographer, you don`t need all the gear, you need patience more than anything else and learn from mistakes that we all have made and still do make. Bird photography is difficult and sometimes the light is that crap that it is better to just watch at times and learn habits of the subject.

The most important thing any of us must learn is too take constructive criticism well, we may not agree with it, but if people have the decency to take time and try to help, then just accept it bud.

Again, there is far too much praising of poor shots in this section and that does not help any of us learn.

No offence intended to you at all Tim.
 
You're getting defensive Joe, not me :)

Dave Semmens said:
If Joe hadn't posted then I would have glanced at the image and thought it was ok.
Dave.
Click to expand...

So Joe makes your decisions for you :rolleyes:

I'm guessing that Joe is obviously "the man" in this forum and I should simply be delighted that he has taken the time to comment on one of my pictures.

Thanks Joe, one day I want to be like you. Please continue to comment;)
 
tim said:
You're getting defensive Joe, not me :)



So Joe makes your decisions for you :rolleyes:

I'm guessing that Joe is obviously "the man" in this forum t
Click to expand...

No, @BRASH is the man Tim, Joe is still learning the ropes :D The image is slightly oof,and I would say the original be it Raw or Jpeg is unerexposed.Shooting at 1/60 is possible with a good technique,just a case of waiting for that precise moment to slowly press the shutter.If you can look at that image and agree that it is slightly oof then that is a good start in criticising your own work,something that you need to do to help improve along the way.Is this a location you can access easily again?If so then baiting the spot up with some crunchy peanut butter or squash some suet into the crevis of a tree tunk or two will soon have you a regular visitor.You then start to become in control of things a little,place the food in such a position that you know will have maximum light coming from behind you falling on the subject.
 
tim said:
You're getting defensive Joe, not me :)

So Joe makes your decisions for you :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

No - Joe went to the trouble of going over to Flickr and actually looked in detail at your picture - something I did not (and rarely) do. The only reason I commented at all was because of your reaction to sound criticism. All Joe said in his original post was that it was out of focus and then offered his thoughts on why. You then reacted by going on Joe's Flickr and looking for some reason to have a go at him.

I know all too well the excitement of capturing what you feel is a great image and then having someone say it could be improved - it is a bit of a kick in the teeth at first. I have posted out of focus images on here and have had it pointed out to me. I took that on board and decided to try and improve using the criticism provided to guide me.

Here is an example:
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/a-few-from-the-xmas-period.572691/
 
Last edited:
BRASH said:
Correct!!!!..........and it's Great Spotted not Greater. Keep upo_O
Click to expand...

I don't see any spots!

certainly not big ones

Dendrocopos major …….. mature bird, difficult to tell if a male or female

although I'm not keen for other reasons, give the bird a "break" it's not that unpleasant!
 
Last edited:
I don't think it is out of focus, I think it lacked any light on it, if you zoom in the shot on flikr you can see the artifacts all over and just around the bird which would suggest that it was under exposed then adjusted with software on the computer.

The eye looks in focus to me, I just see a touch of softness due to noise.

With a little more time editing the image I am sure it could look a little better.
 
Regardless of the image being slightly out of focus (something that happens to us all occasionally when photographing wildlife subjects) which has already been fully discussed, I would have preferred to see this image with a little more space to the right of the bird. This is usually described as providing space in an image for the subject to look into.

Try a 5 x 4 proportion crop.

But the typical stance of the species is well captured.
 
Last edited:
tim said:
You're getting defensive Joe, not me :)
Click to expand...

Thats funny after offering you critique on your image you came back defence moves saying your 4year old son could take the same images as I do :)

tim said:
Please continue to comment;)
Click to expand...

Ummm...thanks for the offer but I'd rather not bother next time :)

Dave Semmens said:
No - Joe went to the trouble of going over to Flickr and actually looked in detail at your picture - something I did not (and rarely) do. The only reason I commented at all was because of your reaction to sound criticism. All Joe said in his original post was that it was out of focus and then offered his thoughts on why. You then reacted by going on Joe's Flickr and looking for some reason to have a go at him.

I know all too well the excitement of capturing what you feel is a great image and then having someone say it could be improved - it is a bit of a kick in the teeth at first. I have posted out of focus images on here and have had it pointed out to me. I took that on board and decided to try and improve using the criticism provided to guide me.

Here is an example:
https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/a-few-from-the-xmas-period.572691/
Click to expand...

Spot on.
 
Last edited:
Note to self;

Blow up image massively before posting next time.

That's the main thing I have learnt from posting this image, thanks for all of the feedback.
 
Unfortunately we are back to our usual - ping pong comments

It is not generally useful you know to throw "harsh" comments around - it is just as easy to try to be a little more diplomatic so that the image can be discussed constructively in the spirt that we all care about nature and birds.
Everyone who posts in this section is putting their best images forward - if we all try to help by posting suggestions in a more diplomatic and appreciative way maybe we will all benefit
 
tim said:
Note to self;

Blow up image massively before posting next time.

That's the main thing I have learnt from posting this image, thanks for all of the feedback.
Click to expand...

You could actualy take the time to reply to those that have tried to give you some feedback Tim and discuss any points they have raised with regards to the image.Instead you post a comment such as this, do you honestly think people try and help for the fun of it?
 
BillN_33 said:
Unfortunately we are back to our usual - - if we all try to help by posting suggestions in a more diplomatic and appreciative way maybe we will all benefit
Click to expand...
That would be good Bill, unfortunately hardly anybody offers criticism any more, the section is awash with sub standard shots with glaring errors that are praised for being good/great/stunning. The standard of photography in this section is getting worse ,with the exception of some very good photographers of course.
 
fracster said:
That would be good Bill, unfortunately hardly anybody offers criticism any more, the section is awash with sub standard shots with glaring errors that are praised for being good/great/stunning. The standard of photography in this section is getting worse ,with the exception of some very good photographers of course.
Click to expand...
Got to agree with you Ade, and I regret saying that, its a sad reflection. I was on the point of offering constructive critique on this thread until I read the responses from others, I knew I was wasting my time then. There has been some sound advice and opinions that have been rejected here. Some people genuinely want help and accept it in the spirit that its meant, the hard part is trying to differentiate the members who want and accept help, from the "I want a nice shot comment and nothing else because I know I am right" brigade. Till I can suss that out, I'll move back over to the side lines again.
 
Trev4 said:
Got to agree with you Ade, and I regret saying that, its a sad reflection. I was on the point of offering constructive critique on this thread until I read the responses from others, I knew I was wasting my time then. There has been some sound advice and opinions that have been rejected here. Some people genuinely want help and accept it in the spirit that its meant, the hard part is trying to differentiate the members who want and accept help, from the "I want a nice shot comment and nothing else because I know I am right" brigade. Till I can suss that out, I'll move back over to the side lines again.
Click to expand...
Which is a crying shame, because I, for one, learned a hell of a lot by people like you offering crit Trevor. I went away and practiced ,I returned and got offered more crit and advice, slowly improving.

It is such a shame that that part of TP seems to have died a death.
 
I'm not diplomatic, never have been or never will be. :) I let the tone of the conversation be dictated by others and then follow.

I am genuinely learning from the feedback, but conditions dictated the settings I was using. The Oly system is notorious for noise and anything above ISO800 it gets very messy, that is why I always use a max of 800. The Sigma 50-500 is notoriously bad in low light situations.

The artefacts around the bird are from where I have attempted (badly when you do blow up the image) to blur the background to remove some of the noise that was there. I have done this using Corel Paintshop pro x6 by just adjusting the depth of field and merely drawing around the bird and tree stump. That's probably the wrong way of doing it but layers confuse me.

I have also shot in jpeg so is that a contributing factor to the artefacts?

Joeturner11 said:
very very strong lighting on that day as the ISO was on 400 so I had to shoot 1/8000 to keep the exposure locked spot on. I was using ISO auto between 400-1600 due to the light so when the owl landed right infront of me I could drop down to ISO 100 had to shoot it at 1/8000 of a second, I kept the aperture at f/5.6 to be able to obtain a nice OOF background.
Click to expand...

Joe, this is complete and utter jibberish to me, you may has well have written it in Swahili, On a technical level I understand absolutely none of what you have written here. Your knowledge is far superior to mine. (that's not a dig) Your manner in which you share your knowledge however is very patronising and blunt.

Yes, I probably shouldn't have been taking pictures on this particular day in the conditions but its a rare occasion when I do get out and as of yet I have not found the ability to order the right light.:D

Here are a few other images I consider to be good, I'm genuinely intrigued to now know why they aren't?


Chaffinch Female VP 08.02.2015 by Tim J Preston, on Flickr


Dunnock VP 08.02.2015 by Tim J Preston, on Flickr


Greenfinch VP 08.02.2015 by Tim J Preston, on Flickr

These were taken on a different day but in very similar conditions. Joe, I apologise for the manner in which I have responded and I would genuinely appreciate your thoughts.
 
Trev4 said:
Got to agree with you Ade, and I regret saying that, its a sad reflection. I was on the point of offering constructive critique on this thread until I read the responses from others, I knew I was wasting my time then. There has been some sound advice and opinions that have been rejected here. Some people genuinely want help and accept it in the spirit that its meant, the hard part is trying to differentiate the members who want and accept help, from the "I want a nice shot comment and nothing else because I know I am right" brigade. Till I can suss that out, I'll move back over to the side lines again.
Click to expand...

It's only a glaring error if you can see it, surely?

Not everyone is a genius behind the lens and in my experience so far (from this thread anyway) you've got to have extremely broad shoulders to post here. Maybe the people offering critique should maybe consider the way in which it is being delivered?
 
@tim

First off, congratulations for coming back and accepting that people are trying to help, well done.

I`m not going to offer any help on your processing for two reasons, I don`t know the software you are using and, quite frankly, there are a lot of people far better at processing than I am. Maybe @u8myufo can help you on that point.

I don`t know the oly system, but the following is a general guide for any system. In an ideal world we would all like iso 200 and a shutter speed of 1000 using a £10,000 lens, but lets be honest, not many can afford that and we live in a fairly grey country. So we have to make the best of what we have. Getting any light coming from behind you and onto the subject is important, Rich said before that putting food out in a regular place works, it does. The birds will find it and visit regularly. Position yourself or the food so that the birds are in available light and that you are between the light and the subject, check where the light is before setting anything up. As an example, if you go to a RSPB place with hides, choose the hide that offers the best light, as you improve, you will learn that you can shoot in differing light, but as a starter, shoot with the light behind you where you can.

If you are based anywhere near Lancashire, you can have a morning in one of my hides if you wish, that will show you what I mean far better than the written word.
 
Tim those images are dark, either under exposed or more likely lacking decent light on them.

Same rules apply to bird photography as most other photography ... you want the sun behind you, ideally with the light from it coming over your shoulder.

You could probably afford to give the bird a little more room in the frame, so be a little less zealous with your cropping.

If the light is poor use either spot or centre weighted metering, the important thing is to get the bird exposed accurately, when the weather improves switch to matrix metering (or whatever your manufacturer calls it)

Those images are in focus and crisp, which is a plus, however they are all too dark
 
On your three posted images above, the green finch is slightly too dark and it does brighten up well using the levels adjustment in pp software.

The dunnock is too large in the frame for my liking and is looking away from you, it is slightly dark as well. The guidelines are that there should be eye contact. But they are only guidelines and are there to be broken, but only when we have got the basics right.

The female chaffinch, again, I feel is too large in the frame and is dark.

Have you got a calibrated monitor to work with? I ask this as all three look dark to me, perhaps it is my monitor though as I have not calibrated it for a while.
 
Ok some may say "good shot" and similar

but if you disagree try to phrase your comments in a friendly and helpful way - they will then be received and appreciated maybe as you intended them ………….

we now have a "young pretender" who thinks that he gains something by emulating Brian/Ade et al

It is ironic as 8 pages were spent discussing it on the following thread;

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/threads/how-to-sort-the-problems-out-in-this-section.542261/

"good shots etc" - as the Mods often say, if you do not like what someone posts there is an "ignore" button - the button does work both ways

but we do have a few Leopards around
 
Last edited:
tim said:
I'm not diplomatic, never have been or never will be. :) I let the tone of the conversation be dictated by others and then follow.

I am genuinely learning from the feedback, but conditions dictated the settings I was using. The Oly system is notorious for noise and anything above ISO800 it gets very messy, that is why I always use a max of 800. The Sigma 50-500 is notoriously bad in low light situations.

The artefacts around the bird are from where I have attempted (badly when you do blow up the image) to blur the background to remove some of the noise that was there. I have done this using Corel Paintshop pro x6 by just adjusting the depth of field and merely drawing around the bird and tree stump. That's probably the wrong way of doing it but layers confuse me.

I have also shot in jpeg so is that a contributing factor to the artefacts?



Joe, this is complete and utter jibberish to me, you may has well have written it in Swahili, On a technical level I understand absolutely none of what you have written here. Your knowledge is far superior to mine. (that's not a dig) Your manner in which you share your knowledge however is very patronising and blunt.

Yes, I probably shouldn't have been taking pictures on this particular day in the conditions but its a rare occasion when I do get out and as of yet I have not found the ability to order the right light.:D

Here are a few other images I consider to be good, I'm genuinely intrigued to now know why they aren't?


Chaffinch Female VP 08.02.2015 by Tim J Preston, on Flickr


Dunnock VP 08.02.2015 by Tim J Preston, on Flickr


Greenfinch VP 08.02.2015 by Tim J Preston, on Flickr

These were taken on a different day but in very similar conditions. Joe, I apologise for the manner in which I have responded and I would genuinely appreciate your thoughts.
Click to expand...

Tim,these are ok.But the problem is not so much your kit but the conditions you seem to be shooting under.Basically low light,yeh everybody wants to show their pictures,but it is a good thing to see where it can be improved upon and act on that next time around.Again these are underexposed imo,so straight away you are losing much wanted detail,that is something that cannot be put back.Ok you can tart a picture up so far but that`s about it.Does your camera come with any software for editing RAW images?If so then that is something you need to try and get to grips with,it may be that it is too much for you to understand, but the manufacturers software is always a good intro into editing Raw images.Failing that if you are forced to shoot Jpeg then you need to make sure the image is exposed as good as it can be, being over exposed by a stop or two is far better.I would also suggest as others have,do not crop in so much,give the subject a bit of room,again this will have less of a detrimental effect on the quality of the final image.Here would be my take on the last shot,it may or may not appeal to you,but it gives you an indication as to what can be changed.Although working from the original is a far better option.Ran it through neat image to lose a bit of noise, cloned out couple of the distracting twigs in the BG,and then adjustments to levels and colours and contrast/brightness.Not a layer used,I only cropped in further just to put the subject more to the right side.

16288174177_4ac06d4874_o_zps41696ae2.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top