Long Eared Owls

FourRingCircus

FourRingCircus

Messages
1,949
Name
John
Edit My Images
Yes
Got a call at my desk this morning from client who told me to drop everything and bring a camera to his location. I ended up driving across fields and up a hillside to a location beside some trees. We ventured into the woods and there I found three fledgling Long Eared Owls - just out of the nest for the first time apparently. Very secretive birds and it's the first time I've ever laid eyes on one. Second shot is just for reference but I wonder about the framing on no.1? It's difficult when you are in the trees and so are they!

11222971_983857234967352_3600397161528664431_n.jpg


10420166_983861438300265_5252566394798904177_n.jpg
 
Great find John …….. lucky man

I really like the second image …… the composition is really good …… get rid of the upper LH corner branch

bright light seem to have stuffed you on exposure and focus …….. not sure if you use too much pp ……. but with a little basic help from LR/PS you should get more clarity, definition etc, in the owl
big crop?
 
Last edited:
Thanks Bill. The first shot is not a huge crop (2000x2000), but the bird is at the top of the tree with the sun coming in and I'm on the ground at 400mm+1.4x 1/350s @ F4, ISO100. I took the extender off for the second shot and made some adjustements. It's 400mm 1/1500s @ F5.6, ISO800. I tried to over expose a bit to bring out the dark faces in the shadows. Never an easy task in these conditions. I don't like the second shot because of the branch at the top (difficult to frame-out) and the twigs in the foreground. My PP is still in the basic league. I have purchased LR, but I just can't get on with it and don't find it intuitive at all. I need someone to sit over my shoulder and tell me how it's done but I'd still prefer to be out with the camera than sitting in front of a PC.
 
John - I am fairly new to photography but have found LR very useful in making ok images into acceptable images. We always try to get it right in camera but it is so difficult when we need to react quickly when wildlife appears then flys / runs across various light / dark backgrounds :)

As you say - it takes time and it is not easy to pick up and use.

I ended up just watching videos on Youtube - there are some good short tutorials about that deal with the basics to more advanced stuff.

Dave
 
FourRingCircus said:
Thanks Bill. The first shot is not a huge crop (2000x2000), but the bird is at the top of the tree with the sun coming in and I'm on the ground at 400mm+1.4x 1/350s @ F4, ISO100. I took the extender off for the second shot and made some adjustements. It's 400mm 1/1500s @ F5.6, ISO800. I tried to over expose a bit to bring out the dark faces in the shadows. Never an easy task in these conditions. I don't like the second shot because of the branch at the top (difficult to frame-out) and the twigs in the foreground. My PP is still in the basic league. I have purchased LR, but I just can't get on with it and don't find it intuitive at all. I need someone to sit over my shoulder and tell me how it's done but I'd still prefer to be out with the camera than sitting in front of a PC.
Click to expand...

John ………. I'm no expert and others can do much better …. but just using LR ……...a few basis adjustments - develop module - really all to do mainly with shadows and highlights
work down the sliders
Increase the exposure a little, maybe +0.55
Pull the highlights back all the way to -100
Pull the white back, say to -40
Adjust blacks to +25
Circle the owls face - Invert the Mask and push the shadows to the right by say, 60

then if you want you could
Add a little Clarity …. just a very little
a little vibrance +6
a little Saturation +6

and then maybe look at the Tone Curve
pull the lights back say to -50
and maybe the darks to -20


remembering my adjustment are to the jpeg and you may find that when you adjust the RAW things are slightly different - you should be able to be more accurate with your adjustments - hope this helps - as I said I am really only at an advanced basic level with LR and PS … but if I can help I will

Do you find this any better .. reduces the blown whites and adds a little more to the face?

EDIT

Owl_John.jpg




ORIGINAL as in your post #1

Owl_John_Org.jpg
 
Last edited:
Firstly Bill, thank-you sincerely for taking the time to show me this. I know everyone raves about LR etc, but maybe it's just me - I double click the icon and what then appears looks like I've just fired-up the space shuttle! The nearest thing to this I've experieced with software before was AutoCad. By contrast, I've even managed to master the Sage accountancy software without resorting to RTFM. For me, there's just a piece of jigsaw missing with LR, but if I find it, I know it will become a breeze.....

To answer your final question honestly, I must be somewhat obtuse. If this was your original photo and you displayed the PP version, I'd say it was great. The edited version really lets me see the bird and takes away the highlights. However (and here is the rub)..... I saw this bird with my own eyes and it was nothing at all like the processed image. I was on the forest floor, shaded from the sunlight and the birds were high in a tree with bright light and shade in equal measure all about them. I did the best I could with what was there. I don't have a dislike for the processed image, but I would (personally) feel a 'fraud' if I was to blindly post that without a full explaination of what had been done to it (as you have been good enough to do above). Perhaps I should just shut-up and keep taking the tablets!! ;)
 
FourRingCircus said:
Firstly Bill, thank-you sincerely for taking the time to show me this. I know everyone raves about LR etc, but maybe it's just me - I double click the icon and what then appears looks like I've just fired-up the space shuttle! The nearest thing to this I've experieced with software before was AutoCad. By contrast, I've even managed to master the Sage accountancy software without resorting to RTFM. For me, there's just a piece of jigsaw missing with LR, but if I find it, I know it will become a breeze.....

To answer your final question honestly, I must be somewhat obtuse. If this was your original photo and you displayed the PP version, I'd say it was great. The edited version really lets me see the bird and takes away the highlights. However (and here is the rub)..... I saw this bird with my own eyes and it was nothing at all like the processed image. I was on the forest floor, shaded from the sunlight and the birds were high in a tree with bright light and shade in equal measure all about them. I did the best I could with what was there. I don't have a dislike for the processed image, but I would (personally) feel a 'fraud' if I was to blindly post that without a full explaination of what had been done to it (as you have been good enough to do above). Perhaps I should just shut-up and keep taking the tablets!! ;)
Click to expand...

That's a valid point John and one which I wrestle with, especially with images taken in poor light - do we post as we (think we) see it or do we process the image to get the "best" out of it.
Just look at a high ISO image taken in poor light and see how the camera produces an image that we can hardly see naturally

I'm not even sure that the camera see's what we see anyway, or will ever ………. and if the image is taken with a 500mm or 600mm lens it is certainly not what we see with the human eye without the benefit of magnification.

I think that maybe the human eye can see more detail in highlights better than the camera sensor and the opposite is true with the current sensors being able to see more detail in the shadows, especially when you have extreme contrast in light - maybe an expert can advise

There is also the "in camera" processing set by the maker and the clipping of highlights etc., that can be part of the settings …… I'm not sure that with photography we ever get what we see

It is a debate that is worth having, (again)

It is all an illusion but on balance I would say use the tools that are available to "improve" your image …… in and out of camera

It is what your preferences are relative to the different (types of) images that you take ……… and I'm never happy with blown highlights
 
Last edited:
I was certainly seeing blown highlights with the naked eye.

Truth be told, I was just happy to see them and record the event. My original is closer to what I saw, but it has still been processed a bit to reveal more than I could see in the shaddows. Your edit has given it just a touch of HDR on my screen, but I'm still very happy that you played with it..... ooeerrrr missus! ;)
 
A bit embarrasing here, as I went back to see how the fledglings were doing at the weekend. Same place, different tree (about 10m from the nest) and here's what I found watching me:

11336995_987866024566473_1512423066323449296_o.jpg


Now, this is NOT a long eared owl, it's a Tawny.

I originally posted about the three LEO's, as the game-keeper who alerted me to them suggested that's what they were. However, looking at the original images against this one has me convinced that they were all Tawny's in the first place. The game-keeper told me that they had come from an old buzzard nest and this kind of nest-squatting was typical of LEO's. I would also doubt that the two species would be so close as to nest within a few trees of eachother. I'm not an owl expert, so would welcome input from those who might know better.

Anyone care to suggest what's what here?
 
I`d be very,very surprised if tawny and LEO were living so close to each other, both being primarily nocturnal hunters, it is a fair bet that each will have its own territory. I suspect, as you do, that the originals are young tawny.

Happy to be proved wrong of course.

Lovely shots either way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top