CT said:T I find swans in close up problematic in that you end up with that long neck sticking up from the bottom of the frame.
MyPix said:nice pix,,
btw , the first one is a ' signet ' meaning small or young swan ,derived from the latin ' signus ' meaning......swan
MP
MyPix said:ok, ok, spellin lesson over, lol,
teach me to try n be clever
MP
EosD said:its that Vauxhall you drive that got you confused buddy.
top bit of info though, should have posted in Steves trivia thread!
MyPix said:ok, now the truth is out, yes i drive a vauxhall, but what a vauxhall
a 2.2 dti 53 black signum , debadged , lowered with 17's and tints
MP:icon_cool
jewel said:Well I'm glad to see it's just not me who finds swans a problem. I have tried to take pictures of them and they all seem to come out looking yellow or greyish in colour. Can anyone tell me what I'm doing wrong? These are really great Dod. I like the last one in particular. Well done!
Jewel
CT said:Now that is superb and has real potential. Is it a crop?
CT said:Swans aren't always the snowy white creatures we like to think they are Jewel particularly around the head and neck where they're often quite yellow from rummaging around on the bottom underwater. Some of the best swan shots I've seen are in good old black and white which enhances the snowy white beauty oif them. You still have the usual problem with burned out highlights in strong light though.
This shot is strongly back lit and you can see the burned out highlights at the rear of the bird as a result. I also shot it as a jpeg not RAW which would have given me more processing control of the highlights, but hopefully it gives you the general idea of what I was after.
When swans are holding their wings aloft and fluffed out like that they're at their most beautiful, and preferably taken from a lower angle than I could manage here. One day I'll get this shot right. :annoyed: